## 4 Discussion
### Swot  
The SWOT method was applied to define the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of this paper. A summary of these results is reflected in Table 7.  
Firstly, one of the strengths of this paper is the adaptation of the ISO 25010 framework to software quality evaluation by integrating standardised procedures. The majority of other papers analyse software tools using different aspects, so that integrity and comprehensiveness are lost. Moreover, the objective experiments were conducted by one person, helping to reduce variables such as diverse operating systems and device properties. This paper analyses five different software tools, showing the process and different outputs using the same project.  
The weaknesses of the paper include the level of individualisation and specific context. Firstly, software tools are used for a specific project without consideration of wider applicability to different climate adaptation projects. Moreover, the results, especially learnability and performance efficiency, are highly influenced by the capabilities of an individual person. Nonetheless, the objective experiments in this research were performed without any software knowledge of the tested tools. However, some tools were not included in the research due to low public accessibility.  
This paper informs software developers of the demand for climate adaptation needs and issues within current software tools, and creates the potential for improvement. The revision of the limitation of climate adaptation planning tools can lead to an improved planning process and informed decisions by planners and clients.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Helpful**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Harmful**} \\ \hline \multirow{7}{*}{**Internal origin**} & Strengths & Weaknesses \\ \cline{2-3}  & Implementation of the ISO framework to the & Software tools were evaluated based on the \\  & research helped to standardise software evaluation & findings of one project; \\  & process; & The research excludes the considerations on wider \\  & Objective experiments were conductedby one & software applicability; \\  & person on the same device, reducing the level of & The research findings are partly influenced bythe \\  & variables; & individual capabilities; \\  & The most suitable tools for climate adaptation & Some software tools could not be tested due to low \\  & projects were tested by comparing the output of & public accessibility. \\  & different tools and processes. & \\ \hline \multirow{7}{*}{**External origin**} & Opportunities & Threats \\ \cline{2-3}  & The development of software tools can meet & Different understanding of climate adaptation; \\ \cline{1-1}  & climate adaptation planning needs; & A low number of planners pursuing climate \\ \cline{1-1}  & Software tools can improve the planning process & adaptation projects; \\ \cline{1-1}  & for planners based on informed decisions. & Low integration of software tools in climate \\ \cline{1-1}  & adaptation planning process. & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 7: SWOT analysis (source: authors).  
One of the main threats to the implementation of climate adaptation projects on a larger scale is a different understanding of climate adaptation concepts, measures and impact. Moreover, low awareness about software tools and the need for the digitalisation of climate adaptation planning lead to low integration of software tools.