Energy efficiency (i.e., the ratio of output of performance to input of energy) in office buildings can reduce energy costs and CO2 emissions, but there are barriers to widespread adoption of energy efficient solutions in offices because they are often perceived as a potential threat to perceived comfort, well-being, and performance of office users. However, the links between offices' energy efficiency and users' performance and well-being through their moderators are neither necessary nor empirically confirmed.

Co-benefits rarely enter quantitative decision-support frameworks, often because the methodologies for their integration are lacking or not known. This review fills in this gap by providing comprehensive methodological guidance on the quantification of co-impacts and their integration into climate-related decision making based on the literature. The article first clarifies the confusion in the literature about related terms and makes a proposal for a more consistent terminological framework, then emphasizes the importance of working in a multiple-objective–multiple-impact framework.

Cooperation between public and private sector has achieved a remarkable widespread, in the Italian context, over the last two decades. Nevertheless, the increasing difficulty in accessing the capital market and the rising cost of funding sources, both noticeable over the past few years, led to a slowdown of Public–Private Partnership (PPP) initiatives. Meanwhile, the community is expressing new needs to be satisfied, such as the conversion of brownfields, the recovery of housing stock dating back to former times, as well as the refurbishment of public offices or schools.