An Interrelationship between Engineering and Ethics - Assignment Example

Engineering, Ethics, and Sustainability; An interrelationship (Name) (University) Engineering, Ethics, and Sustainability; An interrelationship Abstract The engineering code necessitates the need to prioritise the public’s interest in various functions. This tends to present conflicting interests to the market features of the public’s interests wherein; public’s interest is achieved through pursuing the society’s interests. It is the latter advocacy that is central to sustainable development, with profound economic instruments and economic valuations in achieving environmental protection. With an increasingly complex role in the society, this paper confronts, engineers are compelled to uphold high ethical standards in dispensing various functions when undertaking different projects. It is this issues that are the focus of the ethics and sustainable development in the engineering profession. Contents 1.0 Introduction 4 2.0 Business Interest and Professional Interest 5 2.1 Focus on Individual Interest 6 2.2 Value judgment 8 3.0 Ethics of Sustainability in Engineering 8 4.0 Challenges faced 10 5.0 Competencies 10 6.0 Recommendation 11 7.0 Conclusion 11 References 12 Engineering, Ethics, and Sustainability; An interrelationship 1.0 Introduction Sustainable development policies, in most cases, integrate an economic focus attuned to dynamism in technological change. It predisposes ethical issues and assumes environmental, economic goals that are incompatible with the society’s needs. Yet, engineers are struggling to come to terms with ethical dilemmas poised in dilemmas in conflicts between the environmental and economic requirements in dispensing their work. Evidently, conflict between the public’s interests and self-interests have been problematic, given that engineers work is almost attuned to human development. Presently, environmental issues have resulted to dissimilarities between employer’s interest, public interest, self-interest and professional interest (Davidson et al., 2007). However, how correct it is to anticipate an engineer’s conformance to the ethical standards, contrary to those expected by the community? Contrariwise, can personal ethics play a mediating role in affecting technologies that are cumulatively modelled by philosophies and workplace attributes? Contemporary engineering code of ethics dictates the increasingly important role of prioritising the public’s interest before business and professional interests (Hoke, 2012). In this respect, the first section of this paper will showcase that business interest are always interrelated, where code of ethics have been modelled to protect workplace interests within such environments. The second section presents ethical consideration for engineers in addressing public’s interest while comparing it to the prevailing ethical situations that uphold self-interests as an imperative role in the profession (Hoke, 2012). In the third section of this paper, a consideration of attuning professional interest and business interest, as well as, conflict between the public’s interests and self-interest are intensified by the environment. Finally, the paper will attempt to showcase that sustainable development does not offer new support by increasing the public’s interest above self-interest, business interest and professional interest. 2.0 Business Interest and Professional Interest The Institution of Civil Engineers in England was the first society to create a code of ethics. Consequently, other engineering groups within the U.S integrated this code to model their code of ethics that was subsequently followed the preceding year (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2011). These set the tradition of setting up the code of ethics for the engineering profession. These codes were, and still are an amalgamation of the rules of business and moral aspects that guides the engineering relation, as opposed to, a code of conducts that protects the society’s interest. Code of ethics primarily serves various purposes. Codes of ethics are a hallmark of the engineering profession (Webler and Tuler, 2010) As such, they assert the professional conformance to group themselves uniquely from workers and allocate the prestige of other professions. Davidson et al., (2007) attests that the development of the identity was in response to bureaucratic features, where professional functioned in. This idealism was founded on an esoteric knowledge, Lyton identities and social services- three imperative aspects to the new phenomena. The engineers are conceptualised as essential to human progress since they are agents of technological change. Secondly, engineers are thought to be “logical thinker free-of unfairness” hence they are capable of leading and arbitrate between divergent issues. Additionally, engineers are conceptualised as socially responsible in enhancing progress and the benevolence of technological improvement. Professionalism and conformance to social needs have enabled engineers to attest their separation to business. Engineers have readily attuned themselves to business and the capitalist values which made them build great works. Davidson at al., (2007) suggests that engineers, without question absorbed the power, structure and essential attributes of principles in business. In this respect, the engineers, notably in the west have integrated business values in their daily operations. Arguably, expense is itself a technical efficiency that needs to be incorporated with respect to physical attributes of the dissimilar materials. Technology’s role is determined by the predominant market where engineers are viewed as a means, not an end (Webler and Tuler, 2010). A study showcases that engineers highlighted the importance of assisting companies gain profits (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2011). It is evident engineers are socialised and selected from the inception in accepting the dominance of the business values and the bureaucratic authority. These are guaranteed through a career structure and reward for trustworthy. It is evident that engineering interest and business interests are interrelated showcasing little conflict between the professional’s interests and public interest since the functions of engineers are viewed to be in line with human development. Nevertheless, as the wider community questioned whether improved technologies have always served the engineering interests. Engineering interest, therefore, has conflicted with the public’s interest, and recent development has stressed the significance of prioritising the public interests. As such, the attribute of code of ethics can be described in terms of the social correlation between the community and the profession; wherein, the profession offers public service in return for professional status from the society. 2.1 Focus on Individual Interest Most societies have a basic presumption that all professionals should function in fulfillment of its business objectives. In the course of business, engineering professionals interact with people, get influenced or are influenced by their activities. However, further influence may call for the government’s intervention, regulators, and the public sphere that seek to intervene in the public’s interest. The irrefutable role engineers are obliged in ensuring an avoidance of information falsification, omissions, including any deliberate distortions. This begs the question, whether ethical reasoning would only apply to important areas susceptible to changes. Rather do engineers have the ethical obligation in their operation within the confines of scientific credibility, to judge favorably with regards to environmental protection and public interest? As such, can it be expected that people will keenly focus on the methodology of shaping scientific studies while making decisions to avoid the influence by vested interests in these transformations? The mantra, “Engineers shall hold paramount the public’s safety, health and welfare while undertaking professional functions,” is a fundamental canon in most codes of engineering ethics. The engineering code of ethics gives the engineers a social status, within the community in which they operate. When dealing with perceived risk, Rosen (2008) argues that engineers ought to prioritise the community’s welfare before other considerations, in which the organizations was championing for engineering regulations. The ethics of engineering professional in most cases is based on cultural conventions which are often categorized under ethical egoism or self-interest (Pearce, 2012). Ethical egoism advocates that individuals function towards the accomplishment of personal interests. It can be argued that ethical egoism has little or no connection with morality since it presupposes the need to prioritize one’s interest. Contrastingly, ethical egoism involves considering of other people’s interest, as well as, serving one’s interests to realize the desired results. Evidently, ethical egoism is demonstrated by advocating that social aspects is best realised by individuals seeking to satisfy their interests and organisations that seek to gain maximum gains in the market (Pearce, 2012). In engineering, ethics may surpass attributes of egoism. These advocacies necessitate the engineer’s consideration of the public’s welfare, as opposed to fulfilling their interest. However, it is argued by some philosophers that, social morality and ethics, in the long run, serves self-interest. The condition of this argument is that the society would be a better place if individuals adhered to aspects of morality, as opposed to the gaining personal interest. Humans are compelled to comply with rules that make enhances their approach to various activities, in view of the detrimental effects of a free world. Employer’s assessment of engineers’ loyalty and reliability are a major determinant of their career prospects, given that the relationship between employee and employer firmly rooted on mutual trust (Davidson et al., 2007). Since job applicants require favorable references from previous, rather, former employers – the employer is mandated to exploit beyond organizational boundaries before making taking appropriate decisions. Unlike scientists, engineers lack the kind of independent reputations to construct through publications; rather years working in the field showcases the professionalism (Davidson et al., 2007). With an engineer’s ability to deliver, clients make judgments about engineers. Thus, self-employed consultants with ‘overdeveloped’ consciousness risk their propensity of securing job opportunities within the field (Davidson et al., 2007). With the limitation in the number of potential clients, engineering consultants are unable to attain required standards of social responsibility are bound to be soon identified and shunned. However, the community expects engineers to exceed self-interest, where the code of ethics prevents them from producing favorable for clients or employers, in cases where the public’s welfare are endangered. In cases where public welfare, health and safety are not endangered, engineers receive some justification for making sure that the integrity analysis seems supportive. This is regardless of whether the judgments were made within the confines of important areas surrounding it. This is typically applicable since most of the engineering code of ethics stipulates the need to conform to the client’s request as a governing aspect in applying tentative knowledge and skill set. The Code of Ethics, despite debate within the Australian engineering association, AIE, deliberately limits the inclusion of environment, thus leaving the decision to the engineer’s discretion in determining whether protection of the environment could be considered a component of community welfare. Arguably, most engineers are conscious of their manipulation of engineering integrity, targeting to give a favorable outcome. In addition, reputation rather than ethical behavior is the sole determiner of their integrity. 2.2 Value judgment Engineering is a collective activity constructed from past engineers’ works with a combination of the consensus within the profession dictated by the appropriateness of technological solutions. An increased concern in environmental awareness has prompted governments to shift to sustainable development as a preferred approach to managing the environment. However, does it offer social ethics in replacement of individually focused ethics? Webler and Tuler, (2010) stipulate that engineering projects outcomes are typically as a result of a dedicated teamwork rather than individual effort. As such, the design, implementation and choice of technology are essentially a team or group procedure. It is unreasonable to rely on an engineers’ individual ethics for protection of the environment, particularly in an economy dominated by self-interest. 3.0 Ethics of Sustainability in Engineering The central tenet of sustainable development is intergenerational equity (Webler and Tuler, 2010). Simply put, intergenerational equity can be articulated as a deontological and consequentiality aspect. The environmental degradation threatens the very existence of the environment surrounding society. This attribute can be viewed as duties of the present generation have to future generations. Nevertheless, the way sustainable development is conducted protests the market system, hence promoting individualism and self-interests above and beyond any ethical considerations (Hoke, 2012; Rosen, 2008). Arguably, engineers are tasked to maintain the intergenerational equity which ensures that the future generations are compensated for any damages caused to the environment by the present generation. In order to compensate for the future generation, it is imperative for the engineers to uphold the importance of protecting the environment, the same way humans uphold business assets. Sustainability with respect to engineering is founded in three imperative pillars namely, social, environmental and techno-economic (Rosen, 2008). As a feature of the sustainable development, engineering professionals are compelled to create preferred sustainable designs, which develop products, services and processes attuned to the society’s needs. This is achievable through creating a balance between environmental and economic interest. The benefits realised through sustainable design are publicly realised, and such achievement must place profound decisions into context of companies. It is increasingly complex, therefore, to define engineering in an operational context. Sustainable designs are easily realised in dynamic and competitive process of formulating design aspects in the market (Parrish, 2007). Complicating sustainable strategies furthers environmental aspects which rely on definite stressor effects, contrary to the products or process that causes them. For instance, the atmosphere is dissimilar to a gram of carbon dioxide accumulated by altering refrigerating designs, as opposed to changing the television designs (Herrmann and Hesselbach, 2011). Due to such varying characteristics sustainable designs necessities the incorporation of a well-coordinated and consistent and implementation designs that are achieved in a meaningful approach (Herrmann and Hesselbach, 2011). Ethical, sustainable conformance in this respect is increasingly challenging. Given the challenge existing challenge between the tradeoffs in economic, social and environmental factors, affecting a design becomes complicated (Skerlos et al., 2006, p. 1). A number of governments have exhibited interests in operationalizing sustainable development; dictating the feasible space of options available for the engineers. Policies such as the Restrictions on Hazardous Materials and End of Life Vehicles and Waste Electric (EEEW) in EU, have significantly influenced ethical considerations in engineering (Skerlos et al., 2006, p. 1). Whereas these directives tend to simplify sustainable implementations, they do not accomplish their goals. The removal of toxic substances, for instance, from a product like mercury from lamps may result in an increased use of incandescent lamps, which have higher energy consumption (Skerlos et al., 2006, p. 2). Contrariwise, in industrial cleaning machines, reducing detergents usage result to increased water temperatures, resulting in increased energy consumption (Skerlos et al., 2006, p. 2; Rosen, 2008). Designing fuel cell automobiles, where material is selected on basis of recyclability could eventually result in vehicles with increased mass, which result in increased hydrocarbon emissions – negatively affecting the environment in this respect (Skerlos et al., 2006, p. 3). Professional engineer is therefore expected to take full responsibility for projects and program while considering ethical implications. These integrate reliability in functional systems, technologies, sustainability and self-consistent and interaction within which it operates (Pearce et al., 2012). These encompass an understanding of society and stakeholder, where the environment and economic outcomes are fully exploited. 4.0 Challenges faced i. The acquisition of applicable and specific content for the research was problematic as they were not readily available. ii. Securing interviews was problematic since on site engineers were not readily available given the nature of their work iii. Comprehending some of the technological approaches and concepts was complex given the nature of the technologies used. 5.0 Competencies This research has improved my broad understanding on various issues regarding ethical considerations in the engineering profession. As such, I have garnered extensive analysis on the preferred business analysis and approaches various issues that will guide the very profession that I am studying. Through such understanding, I have developed critical thinking capabilities that have enabled me understand the importance of the public’s interests and the need to satisfy such needs. I can attest to an effective approach to sustainability in engineering designs and environment as a whole. However, hands on experience will significantly improve my approach to such ethical conformance in the engineering field. 6.0 Recommendation Ethical approach to engineering calls for the integration of specific approaches to creating sustainable designs and practices. A subsequent production of a product should be followed by predictors, notably system tools that predict its environmental stressor profile. The 2003 Sandestin Conference on Green Engineering has spearheaded such development, through the provision of specific principles for sustainable development. Tentatively, Motorola has followed ethics in engineering through the developing App specific applications (Green design Advisor) offering information on recyclability and disassembly information to calculate a product’s maximum degree of recyclability. This should act as guiding approaches that are the cornerstone of a better approach to ethical sustainability in the society. The creation of preferred rules should be created with respect to guiding ethical and sustainability conformance in the contemporary society. Such regulations would guide the designing of systems and processes with an ultimate goal of promoting the need for such conformance. 7.0 Conclusion It is evident therefore that, ethical revolution is needed in displacing the powerful egoism that implicates the market as an essential decision-making aspect in the present societal aspects. Evidently, it is impracticable to anticipate the engineering professionals to the exhibit increased ethical conduct than is the approach in the contemporary society. Sustainable development is, however, is a way that can potentially improve market morality through endorsing a preferred solution to modern problems. In the case that the engineers fully depend on ethical egoism for critical decision making and moral reasoning then they should look beyond the employer’s interests in the preparation of successive systems that influences the development of the project. Nevertheless, the engineers are expected to think beyond the community and self-interests. Such code of ethics is aimed at developing the production of unfavourable systems for the clients in the case that the public is put at risk. In the case, that the engineer is confident that the project may not endanger the public, and then his/her cause can be justified by the subsequent use of appropriate measures for the system. Arguably engineers are increasingly conscious on how they approach their functions in the field, in order to offer favourable outcomes, given that their integrity is more pronounced on reputation than ethical consideration. Despite the debate within the engineering profession, the code of ethics significantly leave out important mentions of the environment attributes, leaving it to engineer’s discretion in deciding on the importance of environment protection as an ingredient in the environment’s welfare. References ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers) Code of Ethics. (2015). Retrieved from: . Davidson, C., Matthews, H., Hendrickson, C., Bridges, M., Allenby, B., Crittenden, J., Chen, Y., Williams, E., Allen, D., and Murphy, C. (2007). Adding sustainability to the engineer’s toolbox: A challenge for engineering educators. Environmental Science and Technology, 41(14), 4847. Hesselbach, J., and Herrmann, C. (2011). Globalized Solutions for Sustainability in Manufacturing: Proceedings of the 18th: CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany. Hoke, T. (2012). The Importance of Understanding Engineering Ethics. Civil Engineering, 82(5), 40-41. Parrish, B.D. (2007). Designing the Sustainable Enterprise. Futures, 39, 846. Skerlos, J., Michalek, J., Morrow, W. (2006). Sustainable Design Engineering and Science: Selected Challenges and Case Studies Rosen, M., Dincer, I., Kanoglu, I. (2008). Role of energy in increasing efficiency and sustainability and reducing environmental impact. Energy Policy, 36, 128–137. Pearce, O., Murry, N., Broyd, T. (2012). Systems engineering for sustainable development. Proceedings of the ICE—Engineering Sustainability, 165, 129–140. Webler, T., and Tuler, S. (2010). Getting the engineering right is not always enough: Researching the human dimensions of the new energy technologies. Energy Policy, 38, 2690–2691. Read More

Contrariwise, can personal ethics play a mediating role in affecting technologies that are cumulatively modelled by philosophies and workplace attributes? Contemporary engineering code of ethics dictates the increasingly important role of prioritising the public’s interest before business and professional interests (Hoke, 2012). In this respect, the first section of this paper will showcase that business interest are always interrelated, where code of ethics have been modelled to protect workplace interests within such environments.

The second section presents ethical consideration for engineers in addressing public’s interest while comparing it to the prevailing ethical situations that uphold self-interests as an imperative role in the profession (Hoke, 2012). In the third section of this paper, a consideration of attuning professional interest and business interest, as well as, conflict between the public’s interests and self-interest are intensified by the environment. Finally, the paper will attempt to showcase that sustainable development does not offer new support by increasing the public’s interest above self-interest, business interest and professional interest. 2.0 Business Interest and Professional Interest The Institution of Civil Engineers in England was the first society to create a code of ethics.

Consequently, other engineering groups within the U.S integrated this code to model their code of ethics that was subsequently followed the preceding year (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2011). These set the tradition of setting up the code of ethics for the engineering profession. These codes were, and still are an amalgamation of the rules of business and moral aspects that guides the engineering relation, as opposed to, a code of conducts that protects the society’s interest. Code of ethics primarily serves various purposes.

Codes of ethics are a hallmark of the engineering profession (Webler and Tuler, 2010) As such, they assert the professional conformance to group themselves uniquely from workers and allocate the prestige of other professions. Davidson et al., (2007) attests that the development of the identity was in response to bureaucratic features, where professional functioned in. This idealism was founded on an esoteric knowledge, Lyton identities and social services- three imperative aspects to the new phenomena.

The engineers are conceptualised as essential to human progress since they are agents of technological change. Secondly, engineers are thought to be “logical thinker free-of unfairness” hence they are capable of leading and arbitrate between divergent issues. Additionally, engineers are conceptualised as socially responsible in enhancing progress and the benevolence of technological improvement. Professionalism and conformance to social needs have enabled engineers to attest their separation to business.

Engineers have readily attuned themselves to business and the capitalist values which made them build great works. Davidson at al., (2007) suggests that engineers, without question absorbed the power, structure and essential attributes of principles in business. In this respect, the engineers, notably in the west have integrated business values in their daily operations. Arguably, expense is itself a technical efficiency that needs to be incorporated with respect to physical attributes of the dissimilar materials.

Technology’s role is determined by the predominant market where engineers are viewed as a means, not an end (Webler and Tuler, 2010). A study showcases that engineers highlighted the importance of assisting companies gain profits (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2011). It is evident engineers are socialised and selected from the inception in accepting the dominance of the business values and the bureaucratic authority. These are guaranteed through a career structure and reward for trustworthy.

It is evident that engineering interest and business interests are interrelated showcasing little conflict between the professional’s interests and public interest since the functions of engineers are viewed to be in line with human development.

Read More