Table 6.

Chi-square test results relating to disaster management units on the degree of awareness of local self-government representatives.

Variable	Sig. (2-Tailed)	df	X 2
Decision on formation of the headquarters passed	0.50 *	2	5.99
Rules of procedure adopted	0.96	2	0.61
Annual work report adopted	0.191	2	3.31
Annual work plan adopted	0.102	2	4.56
Decision on formation and operation of civil protection made	0.500	2	0.77
Decision on setting up a civil protection unit passed	0.134	2	4.02
Conclusion made on the appointment of the civil protection commissioner	0.672	2	0.79
Duties assigned to members of disaster management headquarters	0.028 *	2	7.14
Risk assessment team formed	3.38	2	2.17
Risk assessment adopted	0.277	2	2.56
Protection and rescue scheme adopted	0.066	2	5.43
Flood defense scheme adopted	0.770	2	0.523
Legislation in power in the domain of disaster management assessed	0.022 *	2	7.63
Budget financing	0.050 *	2	5.99
Having insight into international funds intended for improving readiness	0.272	2	2.60
Steps taken to improve quality of Town planning schemes	0.050 *	2	6.01
Support in developing schemes	0.118	2	4.27
Having insight into the competencies of disaster headquarters	0.530	2	1.27
Disaster management team established	0.050 *	2	5.91
Assessment of readiness of disaster management headquarters	0.050 *	4	9.13
Assessment of established communication	0.001 **	2	9.59
Assessment of cooperation with other municipalities	0.282	4	5.05
Cooperation with other municipalities in the domain of disaster prevention	0.647	4	2.48
Assessment of cooperation with cross-border municipalities	0.551	2	1.19
Assessment of the need for cross-border cooperation	0.668	6	4.06
Cooperation with governmental institutions	0.043 *	2	6.28
Involving citizens in disaster prevention framework	0.075	2	5.18

* p ≤ 0.05; ** p ≤ 0.01.