DOI: 10.3303/CET2290126 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Paper Received: 30 November 2021; Revised: 20 March 2022; Accepted: 4 May 2022 
Please cite this article as: Brumarová L., Černá L., Brumar J., 2022, Simulations and their use in verification of preparedness, Chemical 
Engineering Transactions, 90, 751-756  DOI:10.3303/CET2290126 
  

 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS  
 

VOL. 90, 2022 

A publication of 

 
The Italian Association 

of Chemical Engineering 
Online at www.cetjournal.it 

Guest Editors: Aleš Bernatík, Bruno Fabiano 
Copyright © 2022, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l. 
ISBN 978-88-95608-88-4; ISSN 2283-9216 

Simulations and their Use in Verification of Preparedness 
Lenka Brumarová, Lenka Černá, Jakub Brumar 
VŠB-Technical University of Ostrava, 17. listopadu, 708 00 Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic 
lenka.brumarova@vsb.cz 

Preparedness hold a key role in mitigating the negative effects not only of events with impacts on human health 
and life, as well as all other protecting interests in the Czech Republic. The primary objective of preparedness 
is to reduce the humanitarian, social, economic and environmental impacts of emergencies on affected 
populations and to help them recover and resume ordinary life as quickly and effectively as possible. The 
preparedness of a territorial unit is an important and necessary part of the sustainable development of society. 
The development of human society creates opportunities to prevent specific types of danger. Many tools can 
be used to ensure and verify preparedness in the area for negative consequences, such as tactical or screening 
exercises. The new trend for verifying preparedness is the use of simulations. The article points out the results 
of the SWOT analysis on the use of simulation as a suitable tool for verifying the preparedness of the territory. 
The SWOT analysis includes a financial analysis of the costs and benefits of simulation in the verification of 
preparedness at VSB-Technical University of Ostrava, Faculty of Safety Engineering, Centre of Simulation 
Technologies. 

1. Introduction 
Safety and its associated engineering approaches are inflected in almost every human activity today. To ensure 
the environment, it is important to monitor and maintain a safe pace with the development of not only new 
technologies but also approaches. It is a well - known fact that safety is no longer just a matter of technical 
fields, but its range of solutions has expanded to the socio - political level. Today we can find the concept of 
safety in relation to the military, economics, ecology, sociology, political science, etc. The concept of 
preparedness has come to the subconscious in connection with safety in the last 20 years. Preparedness can 
be connected by several scientific disciplines, but for the purposes of the work it will be prepared related to 
specific state administration authorities and territorial self-governing units. 
The preparedness of the territorial unit to deal with extraordinary events (hereinafter EE) or crisis situations 
(hereinafter CS) consists of a whole range of partial elements of the safety components of the territorial unit. 
Each element needs to be evaluated in terms of emergency preparedness separately and then compiled in the 
overall preparedness of the area. Preparedness is defined as a set of measures designed to mitigate the 
consequences of an emergency, resp. crisis situations. The measures serve to monitor the occurrence of EE 
and subsequently to warn the population, to ensure the resilience of the rescue system, to stabilize the situation 
in the area and to create preconditions for the restoration of basic functions in the area. The current legislation 
in the Czech Republic does not address the specific concept of preparedness or how to determine the level of 
preparedness and how to verify it. (SIMPROKIM, 2015) 
The article describes possible ways of verifying the level of preparedness of a territorial unit for an emergency. 
Part of the article is to point out a suitable tool for verifying the level of preparedness, simulation. The possibility 
of a suitable simulation tool in verification of preparedness is evidenced by SWOT analysis and financial analysis 
of costs and benefits of simulation in verification of preparedness. The simulations are used in the preparation 
of exercises for persons included in crisis staffs, which takes place in the premises of the branch of the Center 
for Simulation Technologies at the Faculty of Safety Engineering, VŠB-TUO. 

751



1.1 Methods for verifying the level of preparedness 

An analysis of the current approaches to determining the approaches to determining the level of preparedness 
of the territorial system in the Czech Republic has shown that this issue is not comprehensively addressed. 
Currently, the following methods can be used: 

- Monitoring development trends in EE statistics, 
- Inspection activity,  
- Verification exercises, 
- Checklist, 
- Stress tests, 
- Mathematical modeling, 
- Simulation. 

Monitoring trends is often used to obtain information on the situation in territorial systems. The system is based 
on the registration of selected indicators related to EE in the area and their monitoring of the multi-year trend. 
Depending on long-term trends, the level of preparedness of the area in the monitored area can then be derived. 
The basic data that are monitored is the total number of EE of the species (naturogenic, anthropogenic), the 
number of people killed and injured, animals (eg pigs, poultry, cattle), direct damage to property and the 
environment. Monitoring of indirect damages, eg production outages, the time of treatment of the injured is 
rather an exception. Simple mathematical procedures are used to determine the trend. In practice, this means 
that assessments of the level of preparedness of the territorial system of the presented approach have a limited 
informative capacity, ie. If the occurrence of EE and their losses is on the rise, it can be assumed that there is 
something wrong with preparedness. (Adamec, 2008) 
According to the Crisis Management Act (Law 240/2000 Coll.), the Regional Fire and Rescue Brigades carry 
out inspection activities. In practice, this is more of a methodological aid, where in a controlled checklist the 
inspection body finds out at municipality, municipality with extended authority, the regional office and legal and 
entrepreneurial persons fulfilling their obligations engaged in the performance of their duties. By training any 
subject, we reach a certain level of preparedness. The result of the preparedness check is linked to the 
administrative evaluation of the statistics. The quality of inspection results often depends on the auditor's ability. 
It can therefore be stated that this method of verification of preparedness has limited possibilities. (Adamec, 
2008) 
The verification exercise is an operational-technical tool for verifying preparedness. Verification of 
preparedness is based on the implementation of a practical check and its evaluation. There is a similar exercise 
procedure in verifying crisis preparedness. (Law 239/2000 Coll.). The operation of one or more management 
levels (tactical, operational, strategic) or the operation of one or more components of the integrated rescue 
system may be subject to verification. All this can be examined at one or more levels of governance. During the 
preparation of the exercise, goals and tasks are set, which will be verified. The fulfillment of the exercise 
objectives, the method of implementation of the exercise topic, the functioning of individual components of the 
integrated rescue system, time information about its course, etc. are assessed. The verification exercise as a 
tool for verification of preparedness cannot be used for comprehensive verification. (Adamec, 2008) 
The checklist method can be used to determine the level of preparedness of both the functional model and 
the process model. For the application of the checklist, there is a proposal of areas of interest that are applied 
to verify the level of preparedness of the territorial system. The checklist for the application of the functional 
model focuses on specific areas - human factor, material resources, services, finance, information, infrastructure 
and territory. By creating questions for each of the areas, it can offer a comprehensive overview of the 
preparedness of the territorial system. To use the process model in determining the level of preparedness, a set 
of indicators was chosen to assess the territorial system's ability to recognize the possibility of EE, prevent 
preventive measures and their occurrence, mitigate the impact of EE by strengthening the territory, maintain the 
ability of human, material and other resources and conditions for the restoration of the affected area. The 
proposal to use the checklist was an attempt to make the assessment of preparedness available up to the level 
of municipalities. Municipalities sometimes lack enough experts and this is a possible means of determining the 
level of preparedness. (Adamec, 2008) 
The performance of stress tests is currently becoming a frequent testing procedure in various areas of safety 
- safety of nuclear power plants, cyber safety, safety of the banking sector. It is therefore a question of how such 
a mechanism can be implemented within the process of verification and evaluation of the crisis preparedness 
of territorial units, resp. their component. An audit can be considered as one of the methods for implementing a 
stress test. It is a procedure that investigates whether the processes, requirements and guidelines in the 
organization/system meet the required standards. Such an investigative process often takes place within quality 
management. Audits are performed for these needs by specially trained auditors. (Adamec et al., 2017) 

752



 
Mathematical modeling tools can be used to assess preparedness, ie. simplification of reality from a certain 
point of view (Straškraba, 1985). The model hides positive features, and thus simplifies reality. A good model 
selects important aspects of reality and covers the insignificant ones, thus helping to think better about reality. 
The usefulness of the model lies in naming its clear purpose. In practice, a number of types of mental, physical, 
mathematical and computational models are presented. A suitable mathematical model (descriptive, dynamic) 
seems to be suitable for measuring preparedness. The static model can be used in the mindset of the data 
given (eg scheduled cars to deal with the event is some number, however, the real number could be different), 
the dynamic model addresses the use of the static model, when the dependence on variables over time is 
implemented (eg changing the number of cars in context over time). (Pánek, 2011) 
From the point of view of the perception of safety verification in the area, it is possible to use simulation to 
determine the preparedness of the strategic level. The aim of the simulation is primarily to imitate and pretend. 
In today's modern computer age, simulations are still evolving and increasingly diverse. Manufacturers are now 
able to very effectively present a virtual environment based on visual similarities to the real world. The term 
describe means the division of the examined object into basic aspects, which we can program and impose 
certain parameters - rules. Simulated, nowadays the concept of virtual can be perceived, reality is based on a 
simplified description of the real world. Thanks to its simplicity, we can say a more perfect world. When 
interpreting the results, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the modeled world, object or other 
researched element is ideal rather than real. The simulation creates a connection between education, socio-
psychological training and experiential pedagogy. Based on this, new knowledge about the researched object 
can be gained by experimenting with the object model. The main practical advantage of modeling is the 
possibility to try and solve problems that do not have an analytical solution, or to verify the properties of 
expensive equipment before their physical implementation (eg complex integrated circuits, aircraft or atomic 
bombs). Simulation models are also used as part of simulators or computer games. The simulation output is 
directly dependent on the input parameters of the specifically created model of the investigated object. The 
simulation procedure is a repeated run of the created model, setting of input parameters and evaluation of output 
data. The simulation must be repeated several times to obtain values from which we are able to obtain 
authoritative results about the behavior of the object under study. (Hrubý, 2018): 
Simulation types can be divided (Hrubý, 2018): 
 

- according to the model description used (continuous / discrete / combined, qualitative / quantitative, 
stochastic (Monte Carlo) / deterministic, 

- according to the simulator (on analog / digital computer, physical, real-time simulation, parallel and 
distributed simulation), 

- other (nested simulation (simulation in simulation), reality in the loop, interactive simulation, virtual 
reality, static/dynamic, educational. 

 
Simulations in the creation of scenarios for persons included in crisis staffs can be used to the verification of the 
territory preparedness for EE. The premises of a special workplace - the Center for Simulation Technologies 
(CESIT) at the Faculty of Safety Engineering, VŠB-TUO are used for simulations. 

1.2 Use of simulations in the preparation of exercises 

CESIT offers facilities for training of persons included in crisis staffs at the level of a municipality with extended 
authorities or regions, or for training of student crisis staffs. The mathematical model and simulations can be 
verified according to a pre-prepared scenario used in the crisis staff exercise, or by a permanent working group. 
The exercise scenario serves the exercise leader as a guide for the implementation of the exercise, for the 
course and for the evaluation of the exercise. The scenario can contain a timed list of events (eg using a simple 
tool - Excel), instructions for possible reactions of trainees, a list of activities of the subject in the exercise 
environment (can be called the surrounding world), an overview of checkpoints for evaluation (course of 
exercises, activities of individual trainees) and methodological notes for the exercise leader. The results of the 
simulation lead to a confrontation of the mathematical model with the results of the observations, and this leads 
to an improvement of the scenario and thus to a verification of preparedness. CESIT can also be used for 
teaching professional subjects of the department and for the annual international exercises of student crisis 
staffs FBI / VŠB-TU Ostrava and Instytut Bezpieczeństwa i Zarządzania / Akademia Pomorska Slupsk. 
In the past and now, the verification of the set simulation processes and scenarios for solving possible EE takes 
place in the form of conducting pilot practical exercises for commercial purposes. Among the basic scenarios, 
real situations such as the Natural Flood in Bohumín, the Flash Flood in Nový Jičín were used (Kavan et al., 
2021), or created for the purposes of screening exercises - a traffic accident with a leak of dangerous substances 
in Kravaře in the Opava region (Pokorný et al., 2016) 

753



2. SWOT analysis for the use of simulation for preparedness verification 
SWOT analysis was used to determine the use of the simulation for verification. This is a display using a matrix 
that shows the basic links between the various elements (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) on the 
basis of which potential identification strategies for further development can be directly generated if the 
simulation is used to verify the area's crisis preparedness. The SWOT analysis assesses external and internal 
influences in relation to the pros and cons. Based on the results, it is possible to adjust and gradually specify 
strategic decisions, ie. formulate specific goals and tasks for fulfillment using simulations. The described 
procedure for the implementation of each step of the SWOT analysis is only indicative and is based on proven 
practical experience in the implementation of exercises of persons included in crisis staffs and then empirical 
experience from professional practice. Due to the fact that the method does not have a solid methodological 
framework, it is possible to adjust the proposed procedure of use according to needs. To use the summary of 
individual values in the area, the same weights were used in their evaluation. (Brumar et al. 2018) 
The individual areas and their points are marked in Table 1. 
 
Table 1: SWOT analysis for used simulate 

 Strengths (13) Weaknesses (- 6) 

In
te

rn
al

 e
nv

iro
nm

en
t 

• Use of the CESIT workplace (non-payment 
of rent) 

• Possibility to choose real situations to 
measure (floods, Blackout) 

• Possibility to change of the exercise 
• Ability to create psychological pressure on 

the trainee 
• Possibility to involve more participants 
• Possibility of international exercises 
• Involvement of participants with minimal 

knowledge and experts from practice. 
• Possibility to stop and step the simulation 

process, repeat selected situations 
• Changing the roles of exercise participants 
• Setting multiple possible goals 
• Smaller time allowance for exercise 

preparation 
• Smaller time allowance for the 

implementation of exercises 
• Variability in the number of participants 

• The need for initial investment to create and 
maintain technical equipment 

• The need to collect detailed information 
about events and their solutions  

• The need for an IT specialist and an 
external consultant for start-up and 
simulation  

• Time-consuming scenario building  
• Demanding time for simulation  
• Entry staff requirements  

 Opportunities (6) Threaths (- 4) 

E
xt

er
na

l e
nv

iro
nm

en
t 

 

• High variability of real events 
• Experts from practice involved in creating 

the simulation scenario 
• Use of case studies of real significant events 
• Demand for exercises using simulation 
• Increasing the possibility of available IT 

software tools 
• Multiple use of the same simulation 

scenarios for different trainees, users and 
territories 

• Reluctance from practice to cooperate on 
simulation scenarios 

• Non-existent procedure for creating 
simulations for the work of crisis staffs 

• Insufficient data connection. 
• Reluctance of trainees to work with new 

technologies for simulations  

 
Table 1 shows that the S-O strategy was identified, ie the use of strengths in the creation of exercises using 
simulation and connection with opportunities that are offered from the external environment (external entities, 
practice). 

3. Cost Benefit analysis for the use of simulation for preparedness verification 
For financial evaluation, the use of the simulation method as a verification of the preparedness of the territorial 
unit appears to be the optimal method of Cost Benefit Analysis (hereinafter CBA). CBA is different from purely 
financial analysis. Its advantage is the effort to include in the final calculation also the social value of impacts, 
for which their monetary value is not directly obvious or is difficult to determine. In order to be able to financially 
express all potential costs and benefits, it is necessary to carefully define all beneficiaries who will be affected 
by the preparedness verification, to varying degrees. For the CBA, we therefore define the target population, 
i.e. the entities that are targeted by the territorial preparedness verification, and the affected population, i.e. the 

754



entities that will be affected by the territorial preparedness verification, both on the cost and benefit side. In our 
case, the preparedness of the territorial unit is verified by the simulation method, and therefore the costs and 
benefits will be related to it. (Renda et al., 2014) 
The basic beneficiaries of the target population include (Renda et al., 2014): 

- Direct participants in the exercise, i.e. representatives of state and local government, companies, 
- Faculty of Safety Engineering, resp. Centre of Simulation Technologies, 
- Simulation creators, experts involved in creating scenarios, IT experts 

Beneficiaries from the level of the affected population include (Renda et al., 2014): 
- Management of the territorial self-governing unit, companies whose employees participated in the 

preparedness verification simulation, 
- Citizens of the territory, company employees, business entities operating in the territory. 

Within the CBA, we monitor the impacts of the preparedness of the territorial unit assessed through the 
simulation method, i.e. costs and benefits for individual groups of beneficiaries. In this particular case, it is the 
impact on the health and quality of life of the population, on the earnings of the population, on the environment, 
on the business environment, on the level of education of the population, on civil society, on safety. 
Ideally, all impacts are monetized so that we can easily compare them. (Renda et al., 2014) 
The following costs and benefits can be defined for the case of evaluating the use of simulation as a verification 
of the preparedness of the area: 
Costs 

- associated with the operation of the CESIT, 
- investment in technical equipment, including its renewal, 
- personal - experts for creating scenarios, IT, administration, 
- associated with the collection of data on emergencies, 
- participants in the exercise (travel costs, travel allowances). 

Benefits 
- higher efficiency than the classic form of training in the form of lectures and presentations, 
- one scenario can be variably used for more groups of trainers, for different types of territories, different 

companies, 
- with a small variation, the scenarios can be used even after a longer period, i.e. the costs are not 

constant in the individual years examined, 
- the costs are lower when processing the scenario according to the real EE, 
- an assessment of the very preparedness of the area, which will be reflected in increased security, 
- To show the final overall impact, the CBA results are expressed in two ways: 
- Net Present Value, i.e. the difference between the total monetized costs and the total monetized 

benefits of the measure, discounted to the present value. 
- Benefits to Costs Ratio, i.e. the ratio of total benefits to total costs. 

However, in the event that we are unable to monetize all impacts, the CBA also includes a verbal commentary, 
which deals with the assessment of non-monetized impacts. In a situation where we are dealing with safety 
measures, the CBA result may not always be clearly financially advantageous for recommending its 
implementation. Territorial safety and preparedness, territorial prevention are typical examples where measures 
can be implemented, even if the Net Present Value and Benefits to Costs Ratio are negative. (Renda et al., 
2014) 

4. Conclusions 
Preparedness for dealing with emergencies and crisis situations is an important act in the field of civil protection 
and crisis management. Part of the preparedness for dealing with emergencies and crisis situations is the 
assessment of risks in the area. The basis of activities to increase preparedness is to answer questions about 
what types of emergencies and crisis situations need to be prepared, what types of dangers exist in a given 
area and how great the risk is. In this context, risk assessment is a starting point and a basic and very important 
input into the process of emergency planning and crisis management, which aims to ensure emergency 
preparedness and sustainable development of the territory. 
The article describes possible ways of verifying the level of preparedness of a territorial unit for an emergency. 
These are possible tools that are characterized by their simplicity or complexity of use. The importance of using 
an appropriate tool is declared by the aim of using the tool to verify the preparedness of the area for 
emergencies. Part of the article is to point out a suitable tool for verifying the level of preparedness, simulation 
and its division. The results of the use of simulation in the verification of preparedness are documented by 
SWOT analysis and financial analysis of the costs and benefits of simulation in the verification of preparedness. 
The simulations are used in the preparation of exercises for persons assigned to crisis staffs, which takes place 
in the premises of the Center for Simulation Technologies at the Faculty of Safety Engineering, VŠB-TUO or 
outdoors in the case of a use commercial scenario for real crisis staff of a municipality or region. 
 

755



Acknowledgments 

The article arose from the output of an internship abroad, funded by the Visegrad Fund and Department of Civil 
Protection, Faculty of Safety Engineering, VSB-TUO. 

References 

Adamec, V.,Study of possibilities of determining the level of civil emergency preparedness of territorial units, 
VSB-TUO, Faculty of Safety Engineering, Ostrava 2008, 103 s. 

Adamec, V., Maléřová. Stress tests. In: Conference Uherské Hradiště [online]. 2017 [cit. 2019-10-11]. 
Brumar J.,Malerova, L., Pokorny, J.. Teaching methods focusing on simulation. 18th International 

Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference: SGEM 2018 [online]. 2018, s. 8, [cit. 2018-06-27]. 
Hrubý, M., Modeling and simulation [online]. In: Brno: Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Information 

Technology s. 332 [cit. 2018-06-27]. Available from: 
http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/study/courses/IMS/public/prednasky/IMS.pdf 

Kavan, Š., Kročová, Š., Pokorný, J. Assessment of the Readiness and Resilience of Czech Society against 
Water-Related Crises. Hydrology. 2021, roč. 8, č. 1, s. 14. doi: 10.3390/hydrology8010014. ISSN 2306-
5338. 

Pokorný, J., Gondek, H. Comparison of theoretical method of the gas flow in corridors with experimental 
measurement in real scale. (2016) Acta Montanistica Slovaca, 21 (2), Košice: Technical University of 
Košicích. p. 146-153. ISSN 1335-1788.  

Renda, A., Schrefler, L., Luchetta, G., & Zavatta, R.: Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Regulation  Published 
by Centre for European Policy Studies. 2014 

Crisis management process simulator. SIMPROKIM [online]. 2018 [cit. 2018-05-10]. Available from: 
http://simprokim.vsb.cz/  

Law 239/2000 Coll. on the integrated rescue system and on the amendment of certain regulations, as amended 
Law 240/2000 Coll. on Crisis Management and on the Amendment of Certain Acts, as amended 
Pánek, R., Modeling and simulation of complex systems. How to better understand the world. Masaryk 

University Brno. 2011  
Straškraba, M., System theory and system analysis for environmental protection, Charles University in Prague, 

Faculty of Science, State Pedagogical Publishing House, Prag, 174s, 1985 
Shannon, R. E. Introduction to the Art and Science of Simulation. Winter Simulation Conference. In MEDEIROS, 

D. J., Watson, E. F., Carson, J. S. 92 & Manivannan, M. S., eds.: Proceedings of the 1998 Winter Simulation 
 

756

http://simprokim.vsb.cz/

	lp-2022-abstract-131.pdf
	Simulations and their Use in Verification of Preparedness