The subject of the ‘third mission’ has been on the minds of universities for some time, albeit with differences in orientation at the international level, concerning the interpretation of the mission and the calibration of the commitment devoted to it, compared with what is already required by research and teaching. In Italy, the initial focus was on university- enterprise links, then shifted to continuing education. Recently, there has been a further shift of focus towards the territorial dimension. The concept of ‘territory’ has been the subject of a strong theoretical resurgence of attention in recent years. Alberto Magnaghi launched an important international movement (‘territorialism’) that led UNESCO to review the concept of cultural heritage in 2012. Renzo Piano has intervened several times to support the centrality of the actions of ‘mending’ devastated and degraded urban territories, towards new forms of coexistence. Richard Sennett has dedicated his latest reflections to the relationship between the built territory and the ‘dwelling’ (‘ville’ and ‘cité’), a fundamental relationship on a social but also ethical level. This turning point coincided with the full affirmation of the network society, which has significantly transformed territories over the last twenty years. The reasons for this transformation lie in the change in the mode of production, the virtualisation of culture, and the restructuring of identities: while physical places become ‘trans- locations’ and network nodes, in work and daily life the inhabitants are exposed to often violent glocal dynamics. On the other hand, the growing interest in the territorial dimension (development trends, transformation processes, decay) has been matched by a policy focus on the creation of territorial networks promoting the efficient use of development levers (public and private investment, citizen participation, improving skills, etc.). This applies to the most backward areas, to find ways of connecting them to the infrastructures and dynamics of the network society; but it also applies to more advanced urban areas subject to degradation, to ensure governability, care and involvement of stakeholders and citizens. Universities are potentially decisive players in the transfer of innovation, the training of skills, but also the definition of policies themselves. In this sense, the development of third mission initiatives can be better addressed. In particular, three sectors of activity should be considered, in which promising opportunities and experiences are visible: 1) the enhancement of territories as networks (tangible and intangible heritage); 2) the continuous training of human resources in stable and organised territorial networks involving educational institutions, enterprises and other stakeholders (from ITS to ContaminationLabs), with which to co-design the offer; 3) the development of the Third sector, as interlocutor, recipient and at the same time partner of the initiatives aimed at social welfare. But to what extent can these dynamics be favoured by the current ANVUR evaluation system?