Based on the GAMS code, it looks like ciam computes incremental protection heights between adaptation periods by assuming that the previous adaptation period had the same protection level as the current one.
E.g. when computing height H10 for the protection level corresponding to 10-year flood values, it will assume that the previous adaptation period also selected the H10 option, regardless of what was actually chosen.
E.g. H10_increment = (H10[t] - H10[t-1]).
This could be a problem in cases where the decision in the previous adaptation period was to choose a different level of protection, or no protection at all --- it cancels out any stock effects. For now, I've implemented this as it was described in the GAMS code, but I'd like to discuss changing it.
Based on the GAMS code, it looks like ciam computes incremental protection heights between adaptation periods by assuming that the previous adaptation period had the same protection level as the current one.
E.g. when computing height H10 for the protection level corresponding to 10-year flood values, it will assume that the previous adaptation period also selected the H10 option, regardless of what was actually chosen. E.g. H10_increment = (H10[t] - H10[t-1]).
This could be a problem in cases where the decision in the previous adaptation period was to choose a different level of protection, or no protection at all --- it cancels out any stock effects. For now, I've implemented this as it was described in the GAMS code, but I'd like to discuss changing it.