Background
The built and natural environment and health are inextricably linked. However, there is considerable debate surrounding the strength and quality of the evidence base underpinning principles of good practice for built and natural environment design in promoting health. This umbrella review aimed to assess relationships between the built and natural environment and health, concentrating on five topic areas: neighbourhood design, housing, food environment, natural and sustainable environment, and transport.

The assessment literature on climate change solutions to date has emphasized technologies and options based on cost-effectiveness analysis. However, many solutions to climate change mitigation misalign with such analytical frameworks. Here, we examine demand-side solutions, a crucial class of mitigation options that go beyond technological specification and cost-benefit analysis. To do so, we synthesize demand-side mitigation options in the urban, building, transport, and agricultural sectors. We also highlight the specific nature of demand-side solutions in the context of development.

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.