 In 2015, UNISDR released the Global Assessment Report which states that the risks are generated inside development and until development itself is transformed, risk will continue to increase. SAI took on this challenge and developed the initiative known as Transforming Development and Disaster Risk. TDDR seeks to transform the way traditional DRRs being undertaken, which is largely focused on emergency and humanitarian interventions to one that addresses the root cause of disasters. TDDR seeks also to maximize the opportunities of development. TDDR works at various scales at the local, regional, national, community and village levels. For example, TDDR is now testing out approaches on how to integrate the Sendai framework with the sustainable development goals. So, trade-off is a situation in a decision-making process where there's two desired goals which conflict. And examples of this are very common in planning and development processes. There's a multiple goals that need to be fulfilled. For example, there's economic growth, there's disaster risk reduction, as well as public health. And often there's conflicts between these goals which actually don't come out in the decision-making processes. And by looking at trade-offs, we're hoping to expose these conflicts in order to transform the relationship between development and disaster risk reduction. Based on our literature review, we developed a trade-off framework with five dimensions. The first one is aggregation, which looks at the gains and losses in the decision-making processes. Equity, the dimension of equity looks at how those gains and losses are distributed. Risk looks at how risks are prioritized in the decision-making processes. Temporal or time looks at how short and long-term impacts, short versus long-term impacts. And participation looks at who is involved in the decision-making processes and how power is distributed. So increasingly we find that resilience is used as a framing concept for both development and disaster risk reduction. And actually it's used to try and link those two fields of development policy and practice. But at the same time, resilience has been criticized for some time for its failure to engage with issues of equity and social justice. This is really where our work comes in. So we've undertaken an extensive review of the existing literature and new fieldwork to explore the concept of equitable resilience. And our notion of equitable resilience is a form of resilience practice that drives towards more equitable outcomes for the communities affected by those interventions. So we've developed a definition of equitable resilience, which is a form of resilience practice that takes account of issues of social vulnerability and different access to power, knowledge and resources that different groups or communities or individuals may have. But critically requires starting from people's own perception of their position within any human and environmental system and accounts for their own realities and potentially for their need for fundamental change in their circumstances if issues of power are to be addressed both now and into the future. These three approaches explore opportunities for transforming the relationship between development and disaster risk. The first approach is around trade-offs, so that focuses on decision makers, for example urban planners, and makes visible the potential risks that planning decisions can cause for certain individuals or groups of individuals now or in the future. The second approach is around equity and social justice and is aimed at resilience-building interventions that are conducted by community-based organizations or social movements that support resilience-building interventions in communities at risk. And the third one focuses on the role of adaptive governance in enabling more meaningful participation, accountability and transparency in decision-making and also innovations in institutions and policy processes. So all three of these approaches together provide a range of opportunities for different actors working in different sectors and at different scales to transform this relationship in order to create more equitable and sustainable and resilient communities. TDR is currently testing these frameworks across Asia through case studies. One case study in Taicloban Philippines is looking at the recovery process following Typhoon Haiyan which occurred in 2013. Our analysis of the city's recovery plan has revealed key trade-offs in the planning process in terms of equity, participation and gains and losses. We've also explored the degree to which resilience-building efforts have been equitable following the Typhoon. In particular we're looking at the city's plan to relocate 40% of the population to the north of the city and what impacts this may have on people's access to livelihoods, water and other basic services. We will continue to test and refine the TDR frameworks going forward in order to support decision-makers and communities in transforming the relationship between development and disaster risk across the region.