Today, buildings still account for almost half of the global energy consumption and carbon emission. This highlights the necessity to increase energy efficiency requirements worldwide in a common effort to reduce the construction sector's impacts on the environment. The current energy policies are driving toward a design that relies on airtight and highly insulated envelopes. As a consequence, energy efficient houses are found to have insufficient indoor air change rates, impacting on the indoor air quality and resulting in higher latent loads.

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.

To address challenges associated with climate resilience, health and well-being in urban areas, current policy platforms are shifting their focus from ecosystem-based to nature-based solutions (NBS), broadly defined as solutions to societal challenges that are inspired and supported by nature. NBS result in the provision of co-benefits, such as the improvement of place attractiveness, of health and quality of life, and creation of green jobs.