There are indications that energy-retrofitted buildings can create risks for indoor environmental quality (IEQ) and therefore for health and comfort of occupants. A review was conducted to identify and verify those risks, within three themes: building envelope, heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC)-systems, and occupants. Publications from the last five years in major peer-reviewed journals from different fields (energy, buildings, indoor air, social sciences) were found by using a variety of keywords (health effects, occupant behaviours, energy-efficient retrofitting, etc.).

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.