Above and beyond: ethics and responsibility in civil engineering

S. Chance, R. Lawlor, I. Direito, John Mitchell
{"title":"Above and beyond: ethics and responsibility in civil engineering","authors":"S. Chance, R. Lawlor, I. Direito, John Mitchell","doi":"10.1080/22054952.2021.1942767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This exploratory study investigates how nine London-based civil engineers have enacted ‘global responsibility’ and how their efforts involve ethics and professionalism. The study assesses moral philosophies related to ethics, as well as professional engineering bodies’ visions, accreditation standards, and requirements for continuing professional development. Regarding ethics, the study questions where the line falls between what an engineer ‘must do’ and what ‘would be good to do’. Although the term ethics did not spring to mind when participants were asked about making decisions related to global responsibility, participants’ concern for protecting the environment and making life better for people did, nonetheless, demonstrate clear ethical concern. Participants found means and mandates for protecting the health and safety of construction workers to be clearer than those for protecting society and the natural environment. Specific paths for reporting observed ethical infringements were not always clear. As such, angalyses suggest that today’s shared sense of professional duty and obligation may be too limited to achieve goals set by engineering professional bodies and the United Nations. Moreover, although professional and educational accreditation standards have traditionally embedded ethics within sustainability, interviews indicate sustainability is a construct embedded within ethics.","PeriodicalId":38191,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"2 1","pages":"93 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal of Engineering Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2021.1942767","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

ABSTRACT This exploratory study investigates how nine London-based civil engineers have enacted ‘global responsibility’ and how their efforts involve ethics and professionalism. The study assesses moral philosophies related to ethics, as well as professional engineering bodies’ visions, accreditation standards, and requirements for continuing professional development. Regarding ethics, the study questions where the line falls between what an engineer ‘must do’ and what ‘would be good to do’. Although the term ethics did not spring to mind when participants were asked about making decisions related to global responsibility, participants’ concern for protecting the environment and making life better for people did, nonetheless, demonstrate clear ethical concern. Participants found means and mandates for protecting the health and safety of construction workers to be clearer than those for protecting society and the natural environment. Specific paths for reporting observed ethical infringements were not always clear. As such, angalyses suggest that today’s shared sense of professional duty and obligation may be too limited to achieve goals set by engineering professional bodies and the United Nations. Moreover, although professional and educational accreditation standards have traditionally embedded ethics within sustainability, interviews indicate sustainability is a construct embedded within ethics.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超越:土木工程中的道德和责任
本探索性研究调查了九位伦敦土木工程师如何制定“全球责任”,以及他们的努力如何涉及道德和专业精神。该研究评估了与伦理相关的道德哲学,以及专业工程团体的愿景、认证标准和持续专业发展的要求。在伦理方面,该研究质疑工程师“必须做”和“应该做”之间的界限在哪里。虽然当参与者被问及如何做出与全球责任相关的决定时,他们不会想到“道德”这个词,但参与者对保护环境和改善人们生活的关注确实表现出了明确的道德关切。与会者认为,保护建筑工人健康和安全的手段和任务比保护社会和自然环境的手段和任务更明确。报告观察到的道德侵犯行为的具体途径并不总是明确的。因此,分析表明,今天共同的专业责任和义务感可能过于有限,无法实现工程专业机构和联合国制定的目标。此外,尽管专业和教育认证标准传统上将道德嵌入可持续性,但采访表明,可持续性是嵌入道德的一个结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, SciSpace and Wolfram versus higher education assessments: an updated multi-institutional study of the academic integrity impacts of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on assessment, teaching and learning in engineering Development of the Bipolar Junction Transistor Diagnostic Test (BJTDT) to explore the second-year undergraduate Myanmar electronic and Thai electrical engineering students’ understanding of BJT working principles and applications Unfolding learning difficulties in engineering drawing problem solving Unfolding learning difficulties in engineering drawing problem solving Recontextualising the teaching learning cycle within engineering education to improve the development of written communication skills
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1