Systematic review identifies drivers and pathways for decarbonizing existing buildings, suggesting effective retrofit strategies.
As a major source of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, the low-carbon retrofitting of existing buildings can help to alleviate climate pressures and increase environmental resilience, and it is an effective and feasible way to achieve the goal of sustainable development. However, the majority of existing urban renewal research focuses on analyzing influencing factors, carbon reduction potential, carbon reduction measures, and the cost-effectiveness of carbon reduction. There is a lack of systematic review and synthesis of theoretical and technological research in carbon reduction and retrofitting. Using the systematic literature review method following the PRISMA protocol, we screened 244 peer-reviewed articles at the title/abstract level and conducted an in-depth analysis of 77 studies that met the PICOS-based inclusion criteria. This review summarizes the evolution of low-carbon retrofit technologies for existing buildings over the past five decades, and identifies climate change pressures, policies and regulations, stakeholder demand, and technological innovation as the primary drivers for decarbonizing existing buildings. These drivers, which are also influenced by technological capabilities, retrofit markets, and inherent building characteristics, drive both building decarbonization and broader SDGs such as climate mitigation. Focusing on the drivers of decarbonization, technological development, and retrofit benefits in retrofitting existing buildings, this review presents an inventory-based technical pathway framework. We identified key issues in the decarbonization and retrofitting of buildings and developed this framework to guide decarbonization and retrofitting practices. The framework can provide tech-driven retrofit guidance for researchers, policymakers, and administrators.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ma et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: