The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development-including 17 interconnected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 Targets-is a global plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. SDG7 calls for action to ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. Here we characterise synergies and trade-offs between efforts to achieve SDG7, and delivery of the 2030 Agenda as a whole. We identify 113 Targets requiring actions to change energy systems, and published evidence of relationships between 143 Targets and efforts to achieve SDG7. Synergies and trade-offs exist in three key domains, where decisions about SDG7 affect humanity's ability to: (1) realise aspirations of greater welfare and wellbeing; (2) build physical and social infrastructures for sustainable development; and (3) achieve sustainable management of the natural environment. There is an urgent need to better organise, connect and extend this evidence, to help all actors work together to achieve sustainable development.

Debate around increasing demand for natural resources is often framed in terms of a "nexus" and perhaps at risk of becoming a buzz word. A nexus between what, at what scales, and what would be the consequences? This article analyses why readers should care about the nexus concept towards the SDGs. We discuss a five-nodes definition and propose perspectives that may lead to a reload of climate policy with buy-in from supply chain managers and resourcerich developing countries. Our research perspectives address modelling approaches and scenarios at the interface of bio-physical inputs with the human dimensions of security and governance.

This paper reviews the discrepancy between predicted and measured energy use in non-domestic buildings in a UK context with outlook to global studies. It explains differences between energy performance quantification and classifies this energy performance gap as a difference between compliance and performance modeling with measured energy use. Literary sources are reviewed in order to signify the magnitude between predicted and measured energy use, which is found to deviate by +34% with a SD of 55% based on 62 buildings. It proceeds in describing the underlying causes for the performance gap, existent in all stages of the building life cycle, and identifies the dominant factors to be related to specification uncertainty in modeling, occupant behavior, and poor operational practices having an estimated effect of 20-60, 10-80, and 15-80% on energy use, respectively. Other factors that have a high impact are related to establishing the energy performance target, such as early design decisions, heuristic uncertainty in modeling, and occupant behavior. Finally, action measures and feedback processes in order to reduce the performance gap are discussed, indicating the need for energy in-use legislation, insight into design stage models, accessible energy data, and expansion of research efforts toward building performance in-use in relation to predicted performance. Keywords: energy performance gap, energy use in buildings, predictions, measurements, feedback, postoccupancy evaluation HiGHLiGHTS 1. Classifies the performance gap and analyses its magnitude and underlying causes. 2. The regulatory energy gap is found to deviate by +34% with a SD of 55% based on 62 case study buildings. 3. Specification uncertainty, occupant behavior, and poor practice are dominant underlying causes with an estimated effect of 20-60, 10-80, and 15-80% on energy use, respectively. 4. Action measures to reduce the energy performance gap in contrast to the building life cycle are discussed. 5. There is a need to develop techniques to mitigate the magnitude and underlying causes of the performance gap.