## 5 Discussion
### Implications and Recommendations
The relationship between surface water runoff and flood risk vulnerability in different land use patterns should be expanded in further studies based on integrated rainfall runoff analysis and hydrometeorological and hydraulic modeling, focusing on high-risk areas. The combined usage of AHP-GIS and remote sensing techniques should be further employed. The spatial variability in the runoff coefficient should be further explored to better understand the complex interactions among the rainfall, land use, soil, and slope of the study area. Index-based methods should be adopted using various parameters based on digital elevation models (DEMs) derived from watershed geomorphological characteristics, land use, infrastructure, urban information, and demographics. A study conducted by [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2014) suggests that research should be conducted to measure the runoff coefficient (i.e., the ratio between runoff and rainfall) as the crucial criteria for establishing a more realistic hazard map. However, it should be noted that the application of hydrological models for assessing flood risk in conditions of limited data at the administrative level is a challenging task. Developing an operational framework for flood risk assessment under the social resilience concept:  
There is an urgent need to develop an integrated conceptual framework for flood risk assessment in different phases of the disaster timeline through the social resilience concept [72]. The \"5S model\", consisting of social structure, social capital, social mechanisms, social equity and diversity, and the social beliefs/culture, developed by [PERSON] et al. [73] and the \"6R resilience properties\", consisting of robustness, redundancy, resourcefulness, rapidity, risk-sensitivity, and regeneration, proposed by [PERSON] et al. [72] could serve as the bases for a holistic approach to disaster risk management while also encouraging disaster-risk-reducing behavior in local citizens. In Thailand, the study by [PERSON] [74] classified disaster resilience factors into the following dimensions: infrastructure, psychological, socio-economic, social capability and social capital, cultural, managerial, and organizational. In this manner, a holistic disaster risk assessment also needs to account for several dimensions of vulnerability (i.e., socio-economic, environmental, cultural, institutional, and the degree of social fragility) [75]. Provision of safe water and sanitation services and ensuring the continued delivery of essential services: All local governments, non-government organizations, and the private sector must allocate capacity and concentrate their efforts on enhancing the efficiency of water supply systems and sanitation services in the event of future floods. Moreover, local governments and provincial disaster prevention and mitigation agencies must pay serious attention to the need for consistent delivery of emergency services, especially medical and healthcare services for vulnerable communities in flood-prone areas. A reliable communication network and rapid emergency response services for minimizing the health risks associated with flooding must be a top priority in all four phases of the disaster risk management plan (i.e., prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery).