**3. Results**

### *3.1. Factors of SWOT Analysis*

SWOT analysis was used to perform the actual assessment. In order to make the organization of the factors into individual segments of the analysis easier to read, we provide Table 2 of preparedness for water-related critical situations listed in crisis documentation and focusing on type plans. The table is divided into four quadrants: the left side contains factors that have a positive impact on the topic while the right side contains negative effects and undesirable factors. The upper part maps internal factors, while the lower part presents external influences. Individual factors of the analysis were processed based on

multi-criteria analysis by a group of experts in the area of crisis management, planning and risk analysis.

**Table 2.** SWOT analysis of preparedness for water-related crises listed in the planning documentation, with a focus on type plans.


Source: own research.

### *3.2. Calculation of SWOT Analysis*

After listing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, each item was assessed individually. Based on the carried-out interpretation, a corresponding significance and value was assigned to the investigated area, leading to the creation of a comprehensive image. For strengths and opportunities, we used the positive scale of 1 to 5, where 5 represented highest satisfaction and 1 lowest satisfaction. For weaknesses and threats, a negative scale of −1 (representing the smallest dissatisfaction) to −5 (representing the greatest dissatisfaction) was used instead. The assessment was performed on the basis of a multicriteria decision that is based on the selection or classification of values of one variation of the specified criteria. For the assessment of the individual characteristics of the SWOT analysis, the criteria of the social impact, impact on the health and lives of the population, economic regression, impact on the environment and restriction of transportation were specified. The multicriteria assessment was performed by a group of experts from the Regional Council of the South Bohemian Region—Crisis Management Department, Fire Rescue Service of the Czech Republic—Civil Protection Department, Police of the Czech Republic, Emergency Medical Services of the South Bohemian Region, Army of the Czech Republic, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, Povodí Vltavy and VSB—Technical University of Ostrava.

The pair comparison method was used to determine the relative importance of the parameters of the strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats. A weight factor was calculated for each item, and this captured the importance of individual items in the given category. The greater the weight, the greater the importance of the item within its category, and vice-versa. The sum of the weights in each category was always 1. The weight coefficients were obtained by comparing the individual criteria to each other. From each pair, the more important criterion with respect to the given problem was selected. The Fuller Triangle method was used to make the comparisons. The scores and weights were then multiplied with each other. The results in each category are summed up, after which the internal components (strengths and weaknesses) are summed up, while the external components (opportunities and threats) are summed up separately. These two results are then deducted from each other, resulting in the final value of the SWOT analysis [35,36]. The aforementioned calculation for the SWOT analysis of preparedness for water-related crises in the planning documentation focusing on type plans is presented in Tables 3 and 4.



**External environment**

 component

### **Strengths Weight Factor Score Criterion Strength Opportunities** O.1 Use of experience from previous crises in the Czech Republic—notably floods 0.27 4 1.07 O.2 The specified resources intended for handling catastrophes in crisis plans are gradually purchased under the auspices of the State Material Reserve Management 0.07 1 0.07 O.3 Implementation of training with a focus on the correct handling of and communication during water-related crises on the government, regional and municipal levels 0.20 3 0.60 O.4 Timely preparation and implementation of preventive anti-flood measures and measures for emergency supply of drinking water 0.33 5 1.67 O.5 Increase the international exchange of experience in the area of catastrophe managemen<sup>t</sup> for water-related crises, opportunities for cross-border and internal collaboration 0.13 3 0.40 Sum for this component 3.80 **Threats** T.1 Incorrect generalization of approaches within crisis managemen<sup>t</sup> and difficulty of forecasting the occurrence of a large-scale water-related crisis sufficiently in advance 0.13 −3 −0.40 T.2 Lack of experience of crisis managemen<sup>t</sup> and the population in general with extensive interruptions of drinking water supply 0.27 −4 −1.07 T.3 Difficulty of coordinating a large number of different entities participating in the crisis and its managemen<sup>t</sup> 0.07 −1 −0.07 T.4 Water-related crises may lead to secondary societal impacts (interruption of power supply, traffic restrictions, disruptions of internal security, disruption of water treatment plants, epidemiological complications etc.) 0.33 −5 −1.67 T.5 Lack of focus on water-related crisis managemen<sup>t</sup> at the expense of other catastrophes (COVID-19, migration) 0.20 −2 −0.40 Sumforthis−3.60
