Can engineers' choices and behavior be compatible with sustainable development?[i]

Dr. Avshalom M. ADAM. Research Fellow, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel. ?

?

Keywords

engineer’s ethics, intergenerational equity, circular economy, sustainable development.

Abstract

The compatibility of engineers' choices and behavior with sustainable development is crucial in the context of a circular economy.

Sustainable development can be characterized by "The principle of intergenerational equity [which] recognizes the rights of each generation to use and enjoy the natural resources of the planet, and the corresponding duty to conserve these resources for the future?(Brown Weiss, In Fairness to Future Generations 1989)."

?

This paper is dedicated to examining the ethical duties of engineers within the ecosystem. It distinguishes between negative duties, such as 'do no harm' (Primum non nocere), and positive duties that contribute to the conservation of natural resources.

This paper underscores the pivotal role of engineers in leading sustainable development. It delves into the predicament they face, where economic constraints, social structures, and societal norms often limit their freedom of choice and behavior. Despite these challenges, engineers are well-equipped to minimize their customers' environmental footprint by making informed choices among available alternatives, while also considering plausible sustainable options.

The Ethical Responsibilities of Engineers in the Pursuit of Sustainable Development: A Critical Examination[ii]

Introduction

The question "Can engineers' choices and behavior be compatible with sustainable development?" is not merely complex; it is a fundamental challenge to the very nature of engineering practice in the modern world. To grapple with this question is to delve into the choices engineers make and the behaviors they exhibit in the context of sustainability. But this is not simply a question of capability; it is a question of will and ethics. Are engineers willing to make the hard choices that align with sustainable development? And what pressures might prevent them from doing so? Let us unpack this further.

?

Internal and External Pressures on Engineers

The gap between an engineer's decisions and their corresponding actions is often not a matter of incompetence but of pressure—both internal and external. Internally, engineers may fear personal and professional repercussions. The fear of a high personal price—such as job loss, damaged reputation, or stalled career progression—can deter an engineer from insisting on a sustainable decision that may be unpopular with superiors or clients. This internal conflict is further exacerbated by external pressures. Employers and clients may impose constraints that prioritize immediate financial gains or project timelines over long-term sustainability goals. For instance, an employer may demand that a project be delivered under a tight deadline, or a client may refuse to allocate a sufficient budget for sustainable practices. In such a scenario, the engineer is often coerced into making decisions that do not align with sustainable development.

?

Legal Boundaries and Ethical Gatekeeping

This leads us to a critical ethical dilemma: if a choice or action falls within the legal framework, should an engineer still act as a gatekeeper for sustainable practices? The law often lags behind technological advancements and evolving societal values. In a capitalist economy driven by self-interest, agents are conditioned to operate within the "liberal market" rules, focusing on profit maximization within the legal confines. Given this context, why should engineers play by a different set of rules? Should they prioritize the public good over their self-interest, even when it does not conflict with their professional code of ethics?

?

The Conflict Between Self-Interest and Public Good

The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics mandates that engineers "hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public." This ethical directive raises important questions: should engineers be content with merely adhering to the letter of the law, or should they strive to fulfill its spirit by going beyond what is legally required? The narrow legal interpretation of public safety, health, and welfare often does not encompass the broader impacts of environmental degradation or unsustainable practices. Therefore, engineers who limit their actions to what is strictly legal may be shirking their broader ethical responsibilities.

?

Constraints on Engineers' Freedom of Choice

While engineers are armed with professional knowledge and expertise that ideally positions them to make decisions aligned with sustainable development, their freedom of choice is frequently compromised. This poses a question on the asymmetry of information and moral hazard which is the crux of the engineer's predicament. Since, the interests of employers, clients, and other stakeholders can heavily bias an engineer's decision-making process. Which inclination will engineers choose? These stakeholders often possess the power to adversely impact an engineer's career prospects and financial well-being, effectively limiting their ability to act in accordance with sustainable principles. However, even when an engineer's choices are legally sound and ethically defensible, they may still be inadequate in addressing the pressing need for sustainable development, especially when the law itself fails to keep pace with the rapid technological changes.

?

Ethical Duties Beyond Legal Obligations

Given these constraints, what ethical duties should engineers uphold? The primary ethical obligation of any engineer should be to "do no harm (Primum non nocere)." This principle requires engineers to refrain from actions that could cause harm, even if such actions are legally permissible. Engineers should be proactive in informing employers, clients, and the public about the potential risks associated with certain choices or actions. The ethical responsibility of an engineer goes beyond the medical profession, where harm is typically confined to individual patients. Engineers' decisions have the potential to impact entire communities and ecosystems, underscoring the need for a broader ethical perspective.

?

Positive Obligations Towards Sustainability

In addition to Primum non nocere, engineers have a positive obligation to advocate for and implement sustainable practices. This includes striving towards Net Zero emissions and adopting circular economy models that promote resource efficiency and waste reduction. As regulations and market incentives gradually shift towards sustainability, engineers must position themselves as key players in this transformation. By embracing these roles, engineers not only align themselves with sustainable development but also establish themselves as equal stakeholders in the marketplace, capable of influencing and driving change.

?

Conclusion

In conclusion, the compatibility of engineers' choices and behavior with sustainable development is contingent upon their willingness to navigate complex ethical, legal, and practical landscapes. While engineers have the potential to align their practices with sustainability goals, achieving this alignment often requires going beyond mere compliance with legal requirements. Engineers must adopt a proactive stance, advocating for sustainable solutions that balance ethical duties with practical realities. Ultimately, the question is not whether engineers can make sustainable choices but whether they will choose to make those choices in the face of significant challenges and pressures. Yet, the primary ethical obligation of any engineer remains to "do no harm (Primum non nocere)."

The path to sustainable development is fraught with obstacles, but it is a path that engineers must tread with caution, conviction, and a commitment to the greater good. And since engineers are best equipped with the knowledge and skills required to run spaceship earth, we remain with the open question: Are engineers the gatekeepers of spaceship earth by default?

References:

Beder, S. (1997). Engineers, Ethics and Sustainable Development. In: Chiara, M.L.D., Doets, K., Mundici, D., Van Benthem, J. (eds) Structures and Norms in Science. Synthese Library, vol 260. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0538-7_8

?

Bunge, M. (1989). Treatise on basic philosophy, Vol. 8. Ethics: The good and the right. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

?

Maslen, S, Hayes, J, Holdsworth, S, Sandri, O. (2021). When Ethics is a Technical Matter: Engineers' Strategic Appeal to Ethical Considerations in Advocating for System Integrity. Sci Eng Ethics. 2021 Jul 9;27(4):46. doi: 10.1007/s11948-021-00324-7. PMID: 34241717; PMCID: PMC8267511.

?

NSPE. The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics. https://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics

??

Weiss, E. B. (1989). In Fairness to Future Generations: International Law, Common Patrimony, and Intergenerational Equity.? New York: Transnational Publishers, Inc.

?

[i] Title of the abstract which was accepted to the HSCE Conference in Chania 11-13 September 2024 Crete, Greece. https://hsce.gr/conference/

[ii] The modified title of the paper that has been presented on 12 September 2024 in the HSCE Conference, Chania, Crete.