Over half of the population of the world live in
urban areas. This means that efforts to meet human
development goals and sustain economic growth
must be concentrated in cities. However, the pursuit
of more prosperous, inclusive and sustainable urban
development is complicated by climate change, which
multiplies existing environmental risks, undermines the
effectiveness of existing infrastructure, and creates new
resource constraints.
In this paper, we conclusively demonstrate that there

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.