INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS
ICE papers looking to the future,
Rogers (2012) argues that civil engineers have “always addressed the core issues of sustainability, working for society within the environment to least cost or greatest value”.
That may be true in an ideal view of civil engineering, however, recent evidence outlined in this paper for possible over-engineering and missing opportunities for making the most of using surface water for the wider benefit of society, suggest that there are many interpretations of ‘sustainability’ and what ‘greatest value’ may mean in practice.
At a time of economic stringency it is inevitable that a number of professional engineers will find themselves working as technicians, unable to practice to the breadth and scope of their calling, and carrying out duties that lead to solutions to problems that are not as sustainable as they might be.
A fear of upsetting employers or powerful clients by expressing doubts about the scope, direction and scale of a scheme also constrains any professional concerned about their own personal welfare and future (a moral dilemma); resulting in the placing of personal interests before society’s; an unethical stance but one in which the ICE or others are powerless to help.
In a second paper, addressing the future of the ICE (Foulkes, 2012) describes the Institution as highly traditional and that radically new thinking is demanded to keep up with the demands of the competitive world; necessitating changes that many members will not be comfortable with.
The new place for the Institution needs to be ‘credible, inspiring and sustainable’; a vision that requires a restatement of the ICEs’ ethical position and a grasping of the challenge laid down by Prince Charles to work with rather than controlling nature. In an increasingly demanding society, members and the Institution itself will need to be confident in their ethical and moral positions if they are to truly help society into a sustainable future.
ICE papers looking to the future,
Rogers (2012) argues that civil engineers have “always addressed the core issues of sustainability, working for society within the environment to least cost or greatest value”.
That may be true in an ideal view of civil engineering, however, recent evidence outlined in this paper for possible over-engineering and missing opportunities for making the most of using surface water for the wider benefit of society, suggest that there are many interpretations of ‘sustainability’ and what ‘greatest value’ may mean in practice.
At a time of economic stringency it is inevitable that a number of professional engineers will find themselves working as technicians, unable to practice to the breadth and scope of their calling, and carrying out duties that lead to solutions to problems that are not as sustainable as they might be.
A fear of upsetting employers or powerful clients by expressing doubts about the scope, direction and scale of a scheme also constrains any professional concerned about their own personal welfare and future (a moral dilemma); resulting in the placing of personal interests before society’s; an unethical stance but one in which the ICE or others are powerless to help.
In a second paper, addressing the future of the ICE (Foulkes, 2012) describes the Institution as highly traditional and that radically new thinking is demanded to keep up with the demands of the competitive world; necessitating changes that many members will not be comfortable with.
The new place for the Institution needs to be ‘credible, inspiring and sustainable’; a vision that requires a restatement of the ICEs’ ethical position and a grasping of the challenge laid down by Prince Charles to work with rather than controlling nature. In an increasingly demanding society, members and the Institution itself will need to be confident in their ethical and moral positions if they are to truly help society into a sustainable future.
No comments:
Post a Comment