An INTEGRATED SYSTEMATIC APPROACH to the planning and design of aquaculture facilities establishes effective communication between the many professional and non-professional individuals who can be involved, such as:
(i) planners, administrators, and developers, who are concerned with investments which are economic and profitable in the use of all resources,(ii) engineers and design specialists, who are concerned with the interpretation of biological and technical data into workable and reliable production systems, and
(iii) biologists and technicians, who are concerned with technological and environmental concepts and their constraints for the welfare of the captive aquatic animals and plants.
The systematic approach streamlines the planning and design process. It reduces the period of time between conceptualizing and commissioning of the completed facility, and invariably saves capital investment and effort. Often it makes the difference between economic success or failure of a project, irrespective of its purpose.
The systematic approach to project planning and design does not impose a set of rules which must be applied rigidly, regardless of relevance. Its purpose is to provide a framework within which:
(i) the important factors of the proposed project can be identified,(ii) critical decisions can be identified and made, and
(iii) full account of the proposed operations can be agreed and communicated between participants.
The framework establishes an orderly progression of activities which will result in a clearly expressed and attainable objective, a functional design, and a well-managed and executed project.
At times the use of an organized systematic approach, with its associated costs in money and effort, may appear unnecessary and wasteful. - particularly if the facilities to be constructed are modest. However, the evidence is that the long-term benefits for any project are substantial, and are ultimately reflected in increased production, reduced operating costs, and overall efficiency. Well-documented and detailed planning and design guarantees that the original purpose of the project is:
(i) properly established and understood,(ii) continuously carried out in the event of changes in the design or operating personnel, and
(iii) readily re-established even after a lengthy postponement.
The quality of the planning document desired, and the quantity and accuracy of the specified technical criteria, also benefit future projects. They provide continuity and set standards for the sector. Such aspects are of particular importance fox governments and organizations which finance aquaculture facilities in developing countries (such as the investment banks, multilateral and bilateral assistance agencies), as well as private investors.
One of the most difficult jobs in the planning and design process for an aquaculture facility is to quantify the biological criteria accurately. These data are necessary to convey to the design engineers the size, function, and integration of each individual component of the operation. Without all the necessary and accurate criteria (such as water quality requirements, flow rate, quantities of fish to be produced, feeding requirements, etc.), the tasks of identifying and evaluating potential design solutions are difficult.
At the present time, aquaculture development continues to be based on inexact science and technology. This has been one of the main reasons for many poorly designed facilities, and the high frequency of over-runs on project costs. However, there is considerable information about the behaviour and environmental requirements of captive aquatic animals and therefore ignorance of function cannot be part of the design process. This information has to be used to best advantage and will, in turn, identify uncertainties and risks. Given the availability of accurate data, appropriate planning and design range from simple mechanical solutions to sophisticated and complex technology, but, in the final analysis, it is function and economics which must dictate the choice.
**********
All aquaculture projects originate with a concept, however imprecisely formed, and a set of simple objectives. For example, the concept may be the desire of an individual entrepreneur to invest in a hatchery and farm with an annual production of 500 tonnes of medium-size shrimp for export, or to develop 1000 hectares of low-lying land, or alternatively an international assistance agency may wish to finance a national aquaculture centre to accommodate 100 trainees. The planning and design process begins at this point and follows, step by step, well-established stages of development.
The process is based on:
(i) a clear statement of the concept and quantified objectives,
(ii) research of the biological criteria, and
(iii) a programme for carrying out exactly the operations required to achieve the objectives,
For most production facilities the main objective is a well-quantified production target of adults for market, or juveniles. Each biological-programme is therefore unique to each facility. While there may be common characteristics among a number of facilities, for example, in hatcheries for the production of post-larvae of many varieties of shrimp, every one is different in terms of its location, the species, the numbers to be produced, etc., as well as the individual manpower, company policies, and objectives governing its operation.
The planning and design process is divided into two principal phases. These consist of:
- Phase I. BIOPROGRAMMING,
- Phase II. DESIGN
A third phase, which occurs after the first two are complete and which is immediately necessary if the facility is to be constructed, is included for completeness but is not dealt with in this document in any detail.
- Phase III. IMPLEMENTATION.
The relationship of these three phases is illustrated in Figure 1, and they are described in detail on the following pages.
Figure 1 Aquaculture Facility Development
|
Phase I Project Goals and Concepts Phase II Preliminary Design Phase III Bid Assistance |
BIOPROGRAMMING identifies and assembles the main technical and biological criteria which are used to define the physical design of the facility. The output of this phase is the Bioprogramme, a document which contains statements of the concept and objectives, the design criteria, a biological and operational plan, and relevant schedules. It can also contain illustrations which enhance or clarify statements.
DESIGN defines and develops all structures, based on established criteria. The output of the design phase may be in two parts, namely:
(i) Preliminary design drawings, which (as they infer) can be reviewed and changed as necessary, and(ii) Final design drawings and Construction documents, which cannot be changed (without considerable added cost) and on which are based the subsequent construction contracts.
IMPLEMENTATION organizes the optional services required during construction of the facilities and commissioning. The outputs of this phase are many, but are not dealt with in this document. For example, typical engineering outputs include a series of time and work plans, an administrative schedule controlling the quantity and delivery of materials, payment for work, testing and acceptance of completed works, a programme for commissioning, operational manuals, etc. There is often the requirement for biological outputs, including technical assistance, staffing, staff training. Operational manuals, etc.
Although the stages comprising each phase are sequential, they are not carried out in isolation. If new information becomes available during the design process, earlier stages may have to be reviewed to reflect it properly in the final design- By systematic planning, it is relatively simple to make such adjustments.
One important advantage of the phased progression is the refinement of the cost of construction. Design and cost data are more accurate as planning progresses (see Table 1), and therefore economic viability can be estimated and decisions evaluated if necessary before construction contracts are awarded. However, the cost of the planning and design process itself, while small by comparison with construction costs, is highest at this point. It is therefore important that any major changes are made as early as possible in the process, and each phase is appraised fully before continuing to the next.
Table 1 Approximation of Accuracy of Costs with Design Level
|
Level of Definition |
Sizes/Specification |
Cost |
|
Preliminary Design | ||
|
· Outline design ('rules of thumb' approximations) |
± 50% |
± 90% |
|
· Further definition (define layouts, major components) |
± 30% |
± 60% |
|
· Clarifying design (target on critical areas) |
±15% |
± 30% |
|
Final Design (every aspect designed) |
± 5% |
±10% |
The planning and design team should be made up of individuals well-informed and familiar with the many aquatic systems which exist. For the most part these are experienced biologists, engineers, and architects. Ideally, the owners and principal operators are also involved. Although a professional understanding of all disciplines is not required of each participant, the detail of the planning will be dictated by the level of experience available. The presence of local and national specialists in the team is important. Their participation will encourage a design well suited to the local environment, building materials, and construction techniques, as well as operating characteristics.
The actual composition of a team, and the individual relationships and responsibilities with the project, vary according to circumstances. Some typical Terms of Reference for the engineer, architect, biologist, (and possibly an economist) who may be used in the team are described in Appendix I.
Figure 2 illustrates typical levels of involvement of the team members, depending on the type of project.
At the simplest level, the process may be carried out by the owner or developer directly, but more commonly a small group is assembled made up of individuals with the major background disciplines. In some projects the experienced 'generalist', with an appreciation of the overall issues and their inter-relationships, can be used as a coordinator and might even handle some small projects alone. Such coordination is not necessarily a full-time activity. However, major decisions regarding evaluation and continuation should not be made by the coordinator alone.
The relationships between the different individuals involved in project planning and design depend on the way the process is to be managed. Figure 2 illustrates diagrammatically typical relationships, and some projects may be managed by a combination of more than one style. The importance is to ensure that the lines of communication and responsibility are defined.
Figure 2 Typical Composition of a Planning Team for Types of Projects
|
Level |
Type of Project | ||||
|
|
Technically advanced development project |
National development or rural aquaculture project |
Biologically complex or ecologically critical project |
Public access eg. aquarium or visitors centre |
Educational/research and training project |
|
Primary |
Owner/Developer | ||||
|
Secondary |
Biologist and Engineer | ||||
|
Accountant/Financial advisor | |||||
|
Tertiary |
engineering specialists |
Planner, economist and development specialists |
Biological and ecological specialists |
Architect and engineering specialists |
Architect, research and training specialists |
It is difficult to provide a precise guide for the cost of the planning and design process as a percentage of construction cost. The developers should be prepared to pay from 5-15% of the capital cost of the facility for the services of planning and design. In general terms, the cost of planning and design will be in the upper range if:
- the project is technically complex,
- there are 'unknowns' in the criteria, which require compensation,
- the facility has several different functions,
- the project is unique and cannot use standard components and materials,
- there are administrative difficulties, and standards and codes to meet.
The proportionate cost can be increased beyond 15% by any number of implementation services, particularly construction supervision, and then technical supervision and training may be required which can be very costly.
