## 5 Discussion
### Flood Resilience Assessment  
In practical terms, it should be noted that the results obtained by employing the modified UNDRR flood resilience assessment are consistent with the findings of [PERSON] and [PERSON] [41], who reveal that disaster risk reduction planning regimes (i.e., local disaster planning on disaster hazards) and social protection (i.e., community access to basic social services) are considered to be the most important criteria, with high scores in AHP analysis for building a disaster-resilient community. In terms of social resilience, [PERSON] et al. [55] include social solidarity (i.e., readiness of local citizens toward disaster evacuation, retaining citizenship relations before and after a flood disaster, strengthening public morale, public trust, face-to-face interactions, and quality of family interaction) in urban flood resilience assessment. In Thailand, a recent study by [PERSON] et al. [56] in 2018 reveals that since the 2011 flood, local authorities in Thailand have made moderate progress in flood risk management and flood resilience building. The progress made in flood resilience building, tasks of applying and enforcing a realistic risk of flooding, risk-compliant building regulations, and land use planning principles exhibit the lowest scores, whereas investing in and maintaining flood infrastructure (i.e., flood drainage, levees, and floodwalls) has the highest score for flood resilience building. Interestingly, the findings of this study reveal a positive correlation between the disaster resilience leadership and the flood resilience index. In other words, local authorities whose leaders possess a higher level of disaster resilience leadership tend to make more progress in disaster risk reduction and resilience building for their cities. The ability of the local government to effectively communicate, engage all stakeholders, and provide disaster risk reduction education and training programs in schools and local communities is essential for driving the core strategies of disaster resilience and risk reduction at the city scale.  
Moreover, from an environmental and natural resource management perspective, practices that minimize disaster risks and promote the understanding of ecosystem functions are essential to disaster-resilient communities. Interestingly, several previous studies highlight that emergency response and medical care capacity (i.e., hygienic infrastructures, hygiene-related resources, rehabilitation services, and physical and mental health of local citizens) make a significant contribution to community disaster resilience [57; 58; 55]. In contrast, these results indicate that designated critical asset service days (i.e., services to emergency medical services and hospitals) at risk of loss of water and sanitation during periods of flood appear to receive the least priority in the implementation of disaster management and risk reduction strategies at the local level. The impacts of flooding on water supply systems and quality of water sources need to be more critically considered in the formulation of flood management policies: disruption of access to safe and clean water, overloading of and damage to water pumping stations, destruction of water river intake due to changes in water flow during a flood, sediment deposition and erosion, and severe water contamination [46; 59]. These findings are similar to the survey results in this study and emphasize that water and sanitation service provision should be urgently addressed.