The built environment accounts for approximately 37% of anthropogenic emissions, making abatement of this sector a key step in achieving a low carbon future. Marginal Abatement Cost Curves (MACCs) are tools that communicate the cost-effectiveness and abatement potential for a portfolio of decarbonization interventions to help guide policy and investment decisions. MACCs have been developed across various sectors; however, no prior studies have systematically reviewed their use in the built environment. As such, we conducted a bibliometric and methodological analysis to examine recent trends, methodologies, and the strengths and limitations of MACC application in this field. A targeted Google Scholar search identified 40 peer-reviewed journal papers published since 2010. The reviewed studies can be categorized into three general scales of assessment: MACCs constructed for material supply chains, building typologies, and building stocks. While a building stock approach likely gives the most comprehensive view of emission reduction in the built environment, these types of studies are the least common. Multiple bottom-up and top-down methodologies exist to construct MACCs. Most studies in the built environment employ a bottom-up expert-based approach – a higher proportion when compared to broader MACC literature. While this method allows for clear communication of emission reduction potential for individual interventions, the expert-based approach suffers from several theoretical and practical issues that may ultimately dampen the robustness of resulting MACCs. MACCs in the built environment have largely examined operational emission reductions; however, a growing body of work in the last decade has begun to incorporate embodied emissions – reflecting the increasing importance of embodied emissions in building life cycles. This critical analysis highlights key trends and considerations for MACC implementation in the built environment and helps guide future studies in using MACCs to support sectoral decarbonization.