Development and disaster risk are deeply linked. Disasters reverse development gains; development initiatives influence the risk, vulnerability, and exposure of people, assets, and environments to disasters. Hence, knowledge of key dimensions of the potential trade-offs between development and disaster risk reduction (DRR) may inform decision-making processes, goals, and initiatives in ways that have potential to address unsustainable development practices that are commonplace in countries of all economic levels. This paper presents, explores, and tests a conceptual framework for analysing the trade-offs that underpin this relationship as evidenced through policy goals, initiatives, and decision-making processes. We categorise key dimensions of relevant trade-offs into five specific dimensions: (i) The aggregation of development and DRR gains and losses, (ii) risk prioritisation when seeking to reduce multiple risks, (iii) the equity of decision-making processes and outcomes, (iv) the balancing of near- and long-term goals, and (v) the distribution of power and participation. By framing key questions related to each trade-off dimension, we test the framework in the context of a major disaster recovery process in Tacloban, the Philippines, following Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda) in November 2013. We consider how decision-making trade-offs can be made more visible and useful in the pursuit of transformative change in development and DRR.

Introduction and Purpose/Objectives: Every time a disaster happens, people faces unexpected situations which need highly flexible and collaborative actions by all players and resources working together. Nevertheless, emergency collaboration is difficult and often works far unexpectedly especially in case that such collaboration is agreed as a special case for emergency.Objective: The ACECC TC21 team investigated the cases of Ormoc and Tacloban in Leyte Island, the Philippines and identified its difficulty and confusion during and after disasters.Methods: Key informants interview were conducted in the different levels of local governance in the two cities. Village leaders and city-level bureaucrats and key personnel of national government agencies participated in the qualitative study.Results and Discussion: The common bottlenecks found on TDA were such as difficulties of coordination between central and local governments; lack of participation of residents; lack of personnel continuity in responsible public offices; lack of knowledge and information flows; difficulty of intragovernmental collaboration at emergency; lack of trusted local leaders; lack of community members’ mutual support network (social capital); lack of local S&T experts etc. Among them, intra-governmental coordination is central in alleviating all forms of suffering of disasters. Extreme events cross administrative and political boundaries. It requires pooling of financial and technical resources as well as expertise in an organized manner. Hence, collaboration is more critical and difficult under urgency, so that it should be developed, institutionalized and operated in normal time.