How do we prioritize when making decisions about development and disaster risk?

This briefing from the Stockholm Environment Institute introduces a typology framework designed to analyze trade-offs in decision-making regarding development and disaster risk reduction (DRR). It argues that while development is necessary to reduce vulnerability, poorly planned decisions can increase risk, creating a cycle where disasters destroy development investments. The document outlines five dimensions of trade-offs—aggregation, participation, equity, time, and risk—and demonstrates their application to the 'Build Back Better' concept to identify opportunities for transformative change in disaster recovery.

• The relationship between development and disaster risk reduction (DRR) is often paradoxical: development is necessary to reduce vulnerability, but poorly planned development can increase risks, and disasters can destroy development investments.
• The Stockholm Environment Institute developed a typology framework consisting of five dimensions to systematically analyze trade-offs in development and DRR decision-making: aggregation, participation, equity, time, and risk.
• The aggregation dimension examines how gains and losses are weighed, noting that economic growth goals often conflict with DRR or compete for the same resources, particularly in low and middle-income countries where external funding may drive priorities over actual needs.
• The participation dimension focuses on power dynamics and inclusion in decision-making. While inclusive, bottom-up processes can lead to long-term resilience, they may be less efficient and face resistance from those benefiting from the status quo.
• The equity dimension addresses the uneven distribution of benefits and risks. In low and middle-income countries, disasters disproportionately impact marginalized groups, such as those in informal settlements, who have limited capacity to reduce their own risks.
• The time dimension highlights the tension between short-term gains and long-term costs. Decision-makers often favor immediate benefits over future risks due to uncertainty and the nature of political and planning cycles.
• The risk dimension involves prioritizing among multiple interrelated risks. A critical challenge is the misalignment between expert risk assessments and the risks prioritized by citizens based on their own values and social norms.
• When applied to 'Build Back Better' post-disaster recovery, the framework shows that top-down reconstruction often yields poorer results than inclusive processes and that frontloading preparation work can alleviate time pressures during the response phase.

APA

Tuhkanen, H., & Han, G. (2018). How do we prioritize when making decisions about development and disaster risk? Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/tddr-dimensions-of-trade-offs-db-1812x--final.pdf

Chicago

Tuhkanen, Heidi, and Guoyi Han. How do we prioritize when making decisions about development and disaster risk? Stockholm Environment Institute, 2018. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/tddr-dimensions-of-trade-offs-db-1812x--final.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Tuhkanen |first1=Heidi |last2=Han |first2=Guoyi |title=How do we prioritize when making decisions about development and disaster risk? |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=December 2018 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/tddr-dimensions-of-trade-offs-db-1812x--final.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{tuhkanen2018how, author = {Tuhkanen, Heidi and Han, Guoyi}, title = {{How do we prioritize when making decisions about development and disaster risk?}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2018}, month = dec, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/tddr-dimensions-of-trade-offs-db-1812x--final.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }