By: Submitted by Esam Hussein, P.Eng., Ph.D., Professor and Dean, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Regina
William Sullivan defined engineering as, “an occupation characterized by three features: specialized training in a field of codified knowledge usually acquired by formal education and apprenticeship, public recognition of a certain autonomy on the part of a community of practitioners to regulate their own standards of practice, and a commitment to provide service to the public that goes beyond the economic welfare of the practitioner”.
The latter part of the definition has become more relevant than ever in our role as professional engineers. It begs the questions: Do we have a responsibility to be social and environmental activists? What does that mean to us as a profession that deals with inanimate objects? Are these values more important and relevant to the profession than when I started my career decades ago? Is it time for our profession to be a compassionate profession like other caring professions?
The Scope of Change
The world is changing around us. Climate is changing in front of our eyes and is playing havoc with many of our designs. Some of our products, while serving the public well, generate waste and hazards that we can no longer ignore. Our sensible solutions to address these problems and other economic and environmental challenges are often resisted by the public and by some decision makers. We are frustrated by the public’s perception of risk that seems to be more emotional than rational.
We observe helplessly the effect our automation technology has on employment. A recent report by Deloitte and the Human Resources Professionals Association estimates that up to 42 per cent of jobs in Canada are likely to be eliminated by automation. Globally up to 800 million jobs could disappear by 2030 according to McKinsey research.
The jobs are not only going to the global south or to Asia. They are being replaced by robots. We engineers and technologists may be making our own jobs obsolete by developing intelligent systems that soon will do the technical work for us.
What will these unemployed people do with their time? What is the effect of this so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution on social order and stability? Should we control technological development for the sake of social order? Are these questions for us engineers to answer or even worry about?
We Must Be Responsible
We know the public depends on us. Think of a few hours without power, as we have experienced recently in parts of Saskatchewan, never mind a few days or a few months. Imagine life without computers, Internet, cellular phones, gas pumps, checkout counters and so on. Almost everything in our life is dependent on reliable stable and inexpensive electric power.
Yes, there was life before these advances, but we the engineers created technology that became the bloodline of civilization which we cannot afford to give up.
Yet, our rapid advancement in developing and deploying renewable energy systems may pose a challenge to the stability and reliability of our systems and threaten the stability of our social systems.
Centralized power generation, transmission and distribution systems served us well for a century. As we welcome renewable distributed energy, we may impoverish our centralized power utilities. Who will then maintain and expand our transmission lines, provide baseload backup and operate the smart grids needed for the distributed power systems associated with renewable energy? Should governments impose a renewable-energy tax to ensure that the essential infrastructure for power transmission and distribution is maintained and upgraded? Is it our responsibility as professional engineers to alert decision makers and the public to the unintended consequences of new technologies?
Inclusion, Diversity and Lifestyle
As we examine the composition of our profession, we see clearly that it is male-dominated, in spite of decades of focused efforts to be inclusive and welcoming of women. Is it because of the culture or the nature of the profession, or is it because our profession is not seen as a compassionate profession by women?
Our engineering programs are demanding and intense, but they are not different from other professional programs and many of us will argue that they are more fun because they challenge the mind. Nevertheless, many of our students acquire the habits of workaholics by the time they graduate and many of us practice engineering this way and we love it. We are sending, however, a message that this a profession for those whose definition of work-life balance is that work is life and life is work.
Do you wonder why we have very few Indigenous people in our profession? Is it because we lack the collective and holistic view that integrates economic activities with our environment and people? We manage projects around their scope, budget and schedule. Should we also manage the immediate and long-term social impact of projects?
Broadening Our Horizons
We tend to be internally-focused on technical aspects (inside-out design) rather than on the human impact of our work (outside-in design). Should we devise a Humanitarian Engineering Program or, like many other professions, require our graduates to have some liberal arts education before being enrolled to study engineering?
Engineering students are currently required to take some courses outside engineering, which we call complementary or non-technical electives. These are not core courses and does calling them complementary imply that they are marginal to engineering? Should this paradigm change and humanities be in the core of studying engineering? Engineering, after all, is a subject that affects almost every aspect of modern human life.
In his book In Defense of a Liberal Education, Fareed Zakaria says that it costs an engineer a dollar to make a widget and it takes a liberal-arts graduate to sell it for a hundred dollars. Why are not we doing the selling, telling the story and conducting the public relations and advocacy work ourselves?
Pillars of Sustainability
As our esteemed colleague, Wayne Clifton, P.Eng., emphasizes, engineering is a driver for economic growth. We are also becoming more engaged in providing ecological balance to our activities. It is about time, I believe, to engage in the third pillar of sustainability: the social one.
Beyond safeguarding human life, we need to better understand people and their fears and aspirations. We need to better tell our story, better listen to people’s concerns and do better in social engagements, in spite of our introverted tendencies.
I have posed here more questions than answers, in the hope of generating a debate within the profession. What a better place to start this conversation than in Saskatchewan, the birthplace of medicare and the cooperative movement.