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.

Around the world, engineers, architects and policymakers have been exploring ways to deliver highly efficient buildings whose reduced energy demand is satisfied by clean, renewable energy. Building off of the broader concept of a green or sustainable building, the concept of the “net zero building” focuses on the energy dynamics and performance of the building. And as policymakers and leaders align toward the net zero concept, the focus on achieving deep energy efficiency has centered on integrated technologies as well as ways to connect buildings to the natural environment.

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.