Ethics Module 5 - Engineering Ethics and Environment PDF

Preview

Summary

Ethics Module 5 - Engineering Ethics and Environment...

Description

Co-op course academic component Module 5 - Ethics Module 5: Engineering Ethics and the Environment Objectives 1. Understand the engineers‟ relation and professional obligations to the environment. 2. Determine the concerns for the environment and its limitations in the engineering professional code of ethics. 3. Realize the moral standing of the environment 4. Balance the professional and environmental obligations

    

Background Engineering projects are considered a threat to the environment, and many environmental problems have been associated with engineering endeavors. The truth of the matter is that engineering projects have been inadvertently responsible for some environmental issues, but not to the degree presented in the media. At the same time, engineers are always sought to provide solutions to environmental problems, whether it is caused by engineers or not. Therefore, the relation between engineers and the environment is a complex one that has many dimensions. Engineers have an obligation towards the environment that stems from two reasons. The first reason is that all private citizens have an obligation to the environment and engineers are private citizens. The second reason is professional, as the majority of professional engineering codes of ethics emphasize the engineer‟s responsibility towards the environment. In a very detailed and elaborate fashion, the American Society for Civil Engineers (ASCE) code of ethics refers to the environment as follows: “Cannon 1: Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public and shall strive to comply with the principles of sustainable development in the performance of their professional duties.” This is one of the most explicit references to environment in an engineering code of ethics. Other professional organizations also share this reference to environment and sustainability. The first cannon of the ASCE code of ethics, described above, includes a requirement that engineers: Comply with sustainable development. Inform clients about consequences of violating sustainable development. Inform authorities about violators of sustainable development. The same cannon also includes recommendations that engineers: Actively work for sustainable development. Commit and adhere to sustainable development

Module 5 – Engineering Ethics and the Environment - Barakat

Page 1 of 4

Sustainable Development: Sustainable development, as shown in Figure 1, is a process of change in which human development activities meet present needs and aspiration without endangering the capacity of natural systems to absorb their effects and without compromising Meet today’s needs Sustainable future generations‟ ability to meet Development their needs and aspirations. Human development activities Preserve resources include things like: investment, technology, resource allocation, functioning of institutions, etc. Leave for the future Engineers play a critical role in sustainable development Figure 1: Components of Sustainable Development characterized by the development of technology that conserves natural resources and protects the environment. However, engineers are not capable of doing that alone. Many factors are involved in engineering projects including political, social, and moral, which are beyond just environmentally-friendly technology. Knowing that engineers do not function alone, or in vacuum, it becomes obvious that there are other people and entities which need to work with engineers to achieve sustainable development. Nevertheless, the influences of an engineer continues to be significant in any engineering project. Moral standing of the environment: One of the major problems related to engineering relative to the environment is based on the lack of consensus over the moral standing of the environment. In other words, is the value of the environment appreciated in itself, apart from human use, or is it a value insofar as it is used or appreciated by human beings? The answer to this question continues to differ and that reflects on engineering applications and projects trying to incorporate sustainable development. Depending on how the value of environment is seen and considered, in relation to humans, engineering projects will face different levels of challenges in protecting and preserving the environment. In general, western ethical thinking has been anthropocentric; which means that only humans have moral standing. It also means that plants, animals, environment, and any nonhuman objects, have a standing depending on how useful they are to humans. However, nonwestern ethical thinking includes some thoughts on elements surrounding humans as having intrinsic value regardless of their usefulness to humans. Add to that the emergence of the environmental movement, a new attitude towards the value of nature evolved, which sees nature as not just a commodity, but a community to which we belong. Because of this controversy, most engineering codes of ethics implicitly commit engineers to health-related (public welfare) environmental concerns. The commitment to non-health-related concerns and intrinsic value of Module 5 – Engineering Ethics and the Environment - Barakat

Page 2 of 4

the environment is vague and arguable. The implicit commitment to non-health-related concerns can be extrapolated, if these concerns are related to human welfare. Due to an engineer‟s inability to operate alone, one must consider public attitude, politics, and businesses housing engineers, as well as technological feasibility. Therefore, the codes of ethics are not specific regarding a strict commitment to environment. Take for example the differences in business attitudes towards the environment to understand the controversy. Businesses are divided into three categories, based on their respective attitude towards the environment: 1. Crisis-oriented environmental management, where:  As few resources devoted to environmental matters as possible  Environmental regulations are being fought against  The attitude is that it is cheaper to pay the fines and lobby  The focus is on making money. 2. Cost-oriented environmental management, where:  Government regulations are accepted as a cost of doing business  No enthusiasm or commitment is provided. 3. Enlightened environmental management, where:  There is full support of responsiveness to environmental concerns  Full and state of the art resources for environmental issues are installed  Good relationships with governmental regulators are maintained. Businesses belonging to the third category gain the benefits of being „Good Neighbors‟ in the community, fulfilling the implied contract with the larger society, and acting as responsible citizens for being a profitable business enterprise. They also fulfill self-interest including preventing lawsuits and generating good will. The number of industries in the third category continues to increase with time. An example of this is when an entire industry group like the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA) established an obligatory program to its member firms to protect the environment in cooperation with the government. However, not all businesses and leaders are sympathetic with environmental concerns. Professional Engineers and the environment Professional engineers‟ obligation towards the environment is guided by two arguments: 1) Should be extended beyond health-related factors because: a) People are morally responsible for their actions. In the case of engineers, they influence the environment by projects and, therefore, engineers are responsible for protecting the environment. b) The engineering profession can positively influence the attitude and actions with respect to the environment. By refusing projects that are destructive to the environment, they will ultimately force modification. Module 5 – Engineering Ethics and the Environment - Barakat

Page 3 of 4

2) Should NOT be assigned for non-health related factors because: a) Engineers violate professional responsibility by speaking outside their area of expertise, when judging influences on environment, as it is outside the engineering body of knowledge. b) It increases divisiveness and weakness of societies and codes as engineers still disagree on non-health related environmental issues. Moreover, management support for societies might weaken. From another angle, extending the code into controversial areas makes it sound radical and politically biased and results in ignoring them. c) Associated conscience problems emerge. Engineers have individual beliefs on environmental issues, which might require a position contrary to personal beliefs, and that is not desirable if not needed. Both of these arguments have merits. Therefore, it is not advisable to oblige engineers to protect the environment when human health is not at stake. However, it is advisable that the code should protect the engineer‟s right to engage in public efforts to protect the environment and to refuse employers‟ projects that are environmentally destructive. The minimum measure should be to abide by governmental laws and regulations related to the environment. Conclusion The code of ethics from many professional societies explicitly references an engineer‟s obligation to protect the environment. Environmental provisions in engineering codes are controversial because: 1) Many managers are not sympathetic to environmental concerns. 2) It is difficult to provide an acceptable criterion for “clean” environment. 3) The law suggests that an acceptable criterion is to balance cost and technical feasibility, and human health protection. The difference between the ethical thinking bases of different civilizations and cultures can explain some of the uneasiness in deciding the moral value of the environment. For example, non-health related concerns arise from a combination of non-western ethical thoughts and the environmental movement. As a result, protecting the environment for its own sake can be justified by its necessity to human welfare. Codes of ethics might shy away from obliging engineers to protect the environment but they should protect the engineer‟s right to save the environment and refuse employers‟ projects that are environmentally destructive.

Module 5 – Engineering Ethics and the Environment - Barakat

Page 4 of 4...