Law or Policy Archives - Engineering Professors Council

Home
Toolkits
Law or Policy

Toolkit: Complex Systems Toolkit.

Author: Professor Robert Geyer (Lancaster University).

Topic: Complexity and engineering policy.

Title: A tool for thinking about complex systems and policy.

Resource type: Knowledge article.

Relevant disciplines: Any.

Keywords: Law or Policy; Stacey Matrix; Politics; Decision making; Personal values.

Licensing: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. 

Downloads: A PDF of this resource will be available soon.

Learning and teaching resources:

The tools of complexity: the Stacey Diagram (Video)

Who is this article for?: This article should be read by educators at all levels in higher education who are seeking an understanding of the connection between complex systems in engineering education and public policy.

Related INCOSE Competencies: Toolkit resources are designed to be applicable to any engineering discipline, but educators might find it useful to understand their alignment to competencies outlined by the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). The INCOSE Competency Framework provides a set of 37 competencies for Systems Engineering within a tailorable framework that provides guidance for practitioners and stakeholders to identify knowledge, skills, abilities and behaviours crucial to Systems Engineering effectiveness. A free spreadsheet version of the framework can be downloaded.

This resource relates to the Systems Thinking and Critical Thinking INCOSE competencies.

AHEP mapping: This resource addresses several of the themes from the UK’s Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4):  Analytical Tools and Techniques (critical to the ability to model and solve problems), and Integrated / Systems Approach (essential to the solution of broadly-defined problems). Additionally, this resource addresses the Communication theme.

Premise:

In engineering there is often a direction/endpoint: the building is completed, the project finalised, the product made. In policy, different groups want different things: the goals may shift and the values become contested, uncertain, and emergent (depending on ‘events’) – more of an on-going ‘dance’ than a final outcome. So what happens when the relatively simple/complicated field of engineering and physical systems bump into the complex/chaotic and often tumultuous, emotional, and values-laden arena of public policy?

Engineering complexity and public policy:

For the past 30+ years, there has been a growing literature on complex systems/complexity and policy making, and more recently, increasing work within UK government circles (2023 UK Systems Thinking Toolkit ; 2020 Magenta Book – Handling Complexity in Policy Evaluation) on how to use systems and complex systems thinking to better understand public policy. This short article introduces one popular tool for conceptualising complexity and policy: the Complexity Diagram (also known as a Stacey Diagram/Matrix) and how it can help people to see the larger policy picture and an engineer’s role in it.

The diagram was originally developed by Professor Ralph Stacey in the 1990s and has been used widely in complexity and systems thinking (including in the aforementioned 2020 Magenta Book). The description below is from Geyer and Rihani (2010), and there is also a related YouTube video.

Figure 1: A Version of the Complexity Diagram. Harrison and Geyer (2022).

As shown in Figure 1, the Complexity Diagram combines two axes based on the degree of certainty and the degree of agreement for a particular policy area. High levels of certainty indicate that the issue is well known, understood, and data is available, while low levels of certainty imply that it is unknown and contested with poor or no data. Meanwhile, high levels of agreement denote substantial public agreement over the issue and its solution, while low levels of certainty imply substantial public debate and disagreement. These two axes create five main zones of decision-making:

Zone 1 (Quantitative-rational): high certainty-high agreement. The issue is well understood, and the policy response agreed between the majority of key stakeholders. Data is clear, abundant and easily accessible. Evidence-based actions and audit and targeting strategies work well here.

Zone 2 (Political): high certainty-low agreement. Data is clear and abundant, and the experts/actors understand the problem. However, the stakeholders disagree over the solution/response. More evidence is of little use and political bargaining, and consensus-building become key decision-making tactics.

Zone 3 (Judgemental): low certainty-high agreement. All the main actors agree about the nature of the issue, but there is no simple policy response to the problem. Available data may be contradictory, and more data may only increase the uncertainty. Experts do not know how to properly respond to it. Multiple strategies may be required, and discretionary decision-making becomes increasingly important.

Zone 4 (mixed complex): mixed certainty-mixed agreement. Data may be uncertain and contested. Stakeholders and experts disagree, to varying levels, over the nature of, and responses to the issue. This requires a flexible response that blends political decision-making with evidence-based processes and discretionary decision-making.

Zone 5 (disorder/intuition): low certainty-low agreement. Data is negligible, unclear and untrustworthy. There is significant disagreement and no clear answer. Evidence is very poor, limited and continually shifting. Moreover, the issue may be highly emotive and politicised, effectively nullifying evidence-based strategies. Intuitive responses based on emotional intelligence/skills may be just as important as evidence-informed thinking.

It is important to note that the complexity diagram can be applied to any level of policy.

Complexity and policy in practice:

At a local level, one example of the complexity diagram in practice would be the need for transmission masts that emerged with the development of mobile phones. The technological need for some form of mast system was relatively clear and particular specifications (distance of coverage, etc.) could be mapped out. However, there was substantial political disagreement over where they should be placed (In which neighbourhoods? Near schools?). Moreover, there were clear judgemental debates over whether the masts could or should be disguised (What was the best disguise? How much should locals be involved in making these decisions?). In many areas, decisions over mast placements were a mixture of technical demands, political consultation and debate, and chance (having easily accessible land and infrastructure available). Occasionally, they involved the techno-social fears of physical harm and led to protests and occasional acts of destruction against masts.

At a national/global level, one can easily see climate change as a case for using the Complexity diagram. The evidence for climate change is very clear. Engineering a solution to it is relatively straightforward – reduce CO2 outputs. However, as demonstrated by the continued lack of global/national consensus, the politics surrounding this are fraught with different values and political debates are clearly part of the process for resolving this issue. At the same time, there is substantial debate over the specific type of transformation required (reduce consumption, green energy, nuclear power), even by the experts, and judgemental decisions linked to particular situations will be needed as well. Clearly, a mix of approaches is essential, particularly in relation to strong emotional elements that the issue generates.

Does the Stacey Diagram solve all of these difficulties? NO! However, it does allow students to recognise that there are a range/spectrum of policy systems and system dynamics and not a hierarchy with quantitative-rational/evidence-based approaches at the top. When confronting a complex problem embedded in physical and human systems (building a new hospital, altering an urban electrical grid, changing a road system), engineering students should try to recognise the type of zone they are dealing with and adjust their approach to fit the situation. Using the diagram to reflect on this range and choose the right approach for the right situation is fundamental to learning that the engineer’s role in society is more than just a builder of things. She/he may also be playing a key role in social/political debates and policy choices that will continually change over time and place. Hence, the policy world is more akin to a dance with multiple actors, often pulling in different directions, than orderly Newtonian science.

References:

Bicket, M., Gilbert, N., Hills, D., Penn, A. and Wilkinson, H. (2025) HM Treasury (Magenta Book) Supplementary Guide: Handling Complexity in Policy Evaluation (HTML). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-magenta-book/supplementary-guide-handling-complexity-in-policy-evaluation-html#fn:1

Byrne, D. and Callaghan, G. (2022) Complexity Theory and the Social Sciences: The State of the Art (2nd edition). London: Routledge.

Eppel, E. and Rhodes, M. (eds.) (2020) Complexity Theory in Public Administration, London: Routledge.

Harrison, N. and Geyer, R. (2022) Governing Complexity in the 21^st Century, London: Routledge.

Geyer, R and Rihani, S. (2010) Complexity and Public Policy, London: Routledge.

Haynes, P. (2015) Managing Complexity in the Public Services. New York: Routledge.

Morçöl, G. (2012) A Complexity Theory for Public Policy, New York: Routledge.

Room, G. (2011) Complexity, Institutions and Public Policy: Agile Decision-making in a Turbulent World. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Stacey, R. (1993) Strategic Management and Organizational Dynamics. London: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.

UK Government Office for Science, (2023) An Introductory Systems Thinking Toolkit for Civil Servants. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/systems-thinking-for-civil-servants/toolkit

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters. 

Toolkit: Complex Systems Toolkit.

Author: Milan Liu, Ph.D. Candidate (Cranfield University); Dr. Lampros Litos (Cranfield University).

Topic: Towards circular economy: development of systems-based interventions in complex systems.

Title: Improving metal recycling and recycled content intake.

Resource type: Guidance article.

Relevant disciplines: Any; Production and manufacturing engineering.

Keywords: Recycled materials; Circular economy; Socio-technical systems; Waste management; Life cycle; Sustainability.

Licensing: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. 

Downloads: A PDF of this resource will be available soon.

Who is this article for?: This article should be read by educators at all levels of higher education looking to highlight the connection between complex systems and sustainability within engineering learning.

Related INCOSE Competencies: Toolkit resources are designed to be applicable to any engineering discipline, but educators might find it useful to understand their alignment to competencies outlined by the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). The INCOSE Competency Framework provides a set of 37 competencies for Systems Engineering within a tailorable framework that provides guidance for practitioners and stakeholders to identify knowledge, skills, abilities and behaviours crucial to Systems Engineering effectiveness.  A free spreadsheet version of the framework can be downloaded.

This resource relates to the Systems Thinking, Life Cycles, Capability Engineering, Systems Modelling and Analysis, and Design INCOSE competencies.

AHEP mapping: This resource addresses several of the themes from the UK’s Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4): Analytical Tools and Techniques (critical to the ability to model and solve problems), and Integrated / Systems Approach (essential to the solution of broadly-defined problems). In addition, this resource addresses AHEP themes of Materials, equipment, technologies and processes, and Sustainability.

Learning and teaching resources:

Systems Dynamics Society Pedagogical Tools

Resource	Type	Best for	Quick classroom use	URL
Insight Maker	Web-based modelling tool	Building stock-and-flow models and simple simulations	Convert the aluminium CLD into stocks/flows and run a scenario	https://insightmaker.com
Loopy	Interactive causal-loop diagram app	Fast, visual CLDs and in-class demonstration of loop behaviour	Live demo of reinforcing vs balancing loops; students toggle link polarities	https://ncase.me/loopy
Vensim PLE	Free desktop system-dynamics software	Introductory quantitative modelling and sensitivity runs	Short lab: implement simplified aluminium-recycling model and compare policy scenarios	https://vensim.com/free-download/
Leverage Points (Meadows)	Concept primer on leverage points	Framing where to intervene in systems	Assign as required reading; students map which leverage points the CLD targets	https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverages-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/
MIT System Dynamics materials	Course notes and lecture videos	Structured curriculum and worked examples for deeper study	Use selected lectures and problem sets for follow-up or flipped classroom	https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/15-871-introduction-to-system-dynamics-fall-2013/

Premise:

Several sustainability challenges, such as transitioning to a circular economy, are embedded in complex socio-technical systems. A circular economy is an economic model that replaces the linear take-make-dispose pattern with systems that keep materials and products in use for longer through designing for durability, reuse, remanufacturing, and recycling, while minimising waste and regenerating natural systems (Rizos, Tuokko, and Behrens, 2017).

Complex systems like these exhibit feedback loops, delays, non-linear change, path dependence and emergent behaviour (Sterman, 2000; Meadows, 2008). This article introduces the idea of systems-based interventions using the example of aluminium recycling systems. It is designed for engineering educators who plan to provide learners with a baseline understanding of complexity and practical entry points for designing and developing and evaluating interventions that can move a system towards sustainability.

Complexity of aluminium recycling systems:

Aluminium is infinitely recyclable, yet achieving truly closed material loops at scale remains a challenge. Most of today’s recycling occurs in situations where post-consumer scrap is collected from a wide variety of end-of-life products and the boundaries of the recycling system are difficult to define and control. This creates high variability in both the composition and the quality of recovered aluminium, since different products contain different alloys and levels of contamination (IRT M2P, 2023). At the same time, the volume of available scrap is difficult to predict, as it depends on product lifespans and consumer behaviour. These fluctuations make it harder for producers to plan and optimise secondary aluminium output, particularly when industries rely on consistent standards or just-in-time manufacturing.

The recycling system is also shaped by broader economic and regulatory forces. On the one hand, demand for low-carbon materials and the cost advantage of recycled over primary aluminium are powerful drivers of growth. On the other hand, the system faces constraints from volatile scrap prices and shifting global trade dynamics, such as U.S. tariffs on aluminium imports. Meanwhile, new policy instruments are adding further complexity. The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is set to reshape trade flows and investment patterns, while the forthcoming Digital Product Passport (DPP) will transform how information is shared across the value chain. Together, these forces influence technologies, markets and business models, underscoring the dynamic and interconnected nature of aluminium recycling.

These interconnected factors highlight aluminium recycling as a complex socio-technical system, in which technological capabilities, market incentives, policy frameworks, and global trade are deeply interconnected. For educators, this makes aluminium an effective example for teaching students how multiple forces interact to create both opportunities and challenges for sustainable engineering.

Intervention from systems perspective:

System Dynamics (SD), first formalised by Forrester (1968), has proven to be a highly valuable approach for understanding and managing complex resource and recovery systems. SD is an interdisciplinary approach, drawing on insights from psychology, organisational theory, economics, and related fields (Sterman, 2000). More supporting information about SD pedagogical tools and techniques can be found through the System Dynamics Society and Insight Maker.

From a systems perspective, interventions are not isolated events but strategic effort to influence system behaviour by targeting its structure and dynamics. A key concept here is leverage points – places within a complex system where small changes can lead to significant, systemic effects (Meadows, 1999). Meadows identified twelve types of leverage points, ranging from adjusting parameters to transforming the system’s underlying goals and paradigms, proving a conceptual framework for identifying impactful intervention.

Figure 1. Donella Meadows’ leverage points (Source: based on Meadows (1999); credit: UNDP/Carlotta Cataldi; reproduced from Bovarnick and Cooper (2021))

Exploration of potential leverage points:

System Dynamics (SD) tools such as Causal Loop Diagrams (CLDs) can help explore leverage points. CLDs can help visualise main components of a system and their interdependencies, making complex dynamics easier to understand. Besides, the process of building a CLD or more computational SD model encourages practitioners to clarify system boundaries, relationships, and drivers, laying the foundation for identifying leverage points.

For example, a CLD of aluminium recycling might capture how classification and sorting processes influence scrap quality, which then affects remelting efficiency and ultimately market uptake of recycled alloys (see Figure 2 below).

Figure 2. The causal loop diagram for auto aluminium recycling (Liu et al., 2025)

By tracing these circular cause-and-effect relationships, learners can see where interventions may ripple through the system. Highlighting reinforcing loops, balancing loops, and delays also shows why some interventions produce limited short-term results but more substantial long-term effects.

Leverage points can also be examined through the lens of information, rules, and goals. Improved information flows, such as those enabled by the Digital Product Passport, could reshape how scrap is sorted and valued. Rules, such as alloy specifications or trade tariffs, determine what types of recycled material can enter the market. At a deeper level, the goals of the system, whether to maximise throughput or to retain material value, fundamentally shape behaviour. Here too, CLDs are valuable because they allow users to visualise how changes to information, rules, or goals can shift system dynamics, providing a clearer picture of where interventions might be most effective.

Implication for educators:

This article equips educators with a focused, practical pathway to teach systems thinking through the example of aluminium recycling. Students can gain both conceptual understanding and hands-on skills to map feedback loops, identify delays, and design interventions that account for short-term trade-offs and long-term system behaviour. Teaching a single clear CLD followed by one modelling or scenario activity produces measurable learning gains while keeping the task accessible for beginners.

Educational approach:

Prioritise structure before solutions: have students map feedback loops and delays before proposing fixes.

Use one classroom-ready CLD as the anchor activity and one hands-on modelling task to test interventions.

Emphasise leverage thinking: move from parameter tweaks to information, rules, goals and paradigms as students mature.

Keep language simple and concrete: avoid jargon, introduce terms with examples, and reuse the same CLD across activities.

Use open-access tools (Insight Maker, Loopy, Vensim PLE) so students can visualise and experiment without software barriers.

Focus assessment on reasoning about system behaviour and predicted long-term effects rather than exact numerical answers.

Potential related learning outcomes within this topic:

Define stocks, flows, feedback loops, delays, reinforcing and balancing loops.

Explain why aluminium recycling is a complex socio-technical system influenced by technology, markets, policy, and information.

Construct a simple CLD for an aluminium recycling pathway and identify at least two reinforcing and one balancing loop.

Identify two leverage points and justify which one to prioritise, citing anticipated short- and long-term system effects.

Translate the CLD into a basic stock-and-flow sketch in an open-access tool and run one scenario to compare outcomes.

Further resources:

European Commission: Joint Research Centre, Environmental and socio-economic impacts of the circular economy transition in the EU cement and concrete sector – Analysing plastics material flows with life cycle-based and macroeconomic assessment models, Publications Office of the European Union, 2025, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/6579506

The Complexity and Interconnectedness of Circular Cities and the Circular Economy for Sustainability — analysis of research themes and networked interactions relevant for urban/material systems; useful for teaching complexity and cross-sector links. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/sd.2766

Systems Dynamics Society Pedagogical Tools

References

Bovarnick, A. and Cooper, S. (2021) “From what to how: rethinking food systems interventions,” Agriculture for Development. Edited by K. Hussein, 22 April, pp. 49–53.

Forrester, J.W. (1968) “Industrial Dynamics—After the First Decade,” Management Science, 14(7), pp. 398–415. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.14.7.398.

IRT M2P (2023) Market Development for Secondary Casting Alloys beyond Motor Blocks – Study on casting alloy market and recycling, International Aluminium Institute. Available at: https://international-aluminium.org/resource/current-and-future-secondary-casting-alloy-market-in-europe/ (Accessed: February 27, 2024).

Liu, M., Schneider, K., Litos, L., Salonitis, K., 2025. Enhancing Secondary Aluminium Supply: Optimising Urban Mining Through a Systems Thinking Approach, in: Edwards, L. (Ed.), Light Metals 2025. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, pp. 1273–1279.

Meadows, D.H. (1999) Leverage Points – Places to Intervene in a System, The Sustainability Institute.

Meadows, D.H. (2008) Thinking in systems: A primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing Company.

Rizos, V., Tuokko, K., and Behrens A. (2017). The Circular Economy: A Review of definitions, processes, and impacts. CEPS Energy Climate House. https://circulareconomy.europa.eu/platform/sites/default/files/rr2017-08_circulareconomy_0.pdf

Sterman, J. (2000) “Business Dynamics, System Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World.” Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/102741 (Accessed: September 4, 2025).

Toolkit: Complex Systems Toolkit.

Author: Dr. Scott Strachan (University of Strathclyde).

Topic:  Sociotechnical aspects of implementing renewable energy systems.

Title: Climate science and policy solutions workshops.

Resource type: Teaching activity: Workshop.

Relevant disciplines: Any.

Keywords: Available soon.

Licensing: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. It was originally developed as part of the Strathclyde Climate Ambassadors Networks (StrathCAN) at Strathclyde in collaboration with the Centre for Sustainable Development.

Related INCOSE Competencies: Toolkit resources are designed to be applicable to any engineering discipline, but educators might find it useful to understand their alignment to competencies outlined by the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). The INCOSE Competency Framework provides a set of 37 competencies for Systems Engineering within a tailorable framework that provides guidance for practitioners and stakeholders to identify knowledge, skills, abilities and behaviours crucial to Systems Engineering effectiveness.  A free spreadsheet version of the framework can be downloaded.

This resource relates to the Systems Thinking, and Critical Thinking INCOSE Competencies.

AHEP mapping: This resource addresses several of the themes from the UK’s Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4):  Integrated / Systems Approach (essential to the solution of broadly-defined problems), Problem analysis, Sustainability, and Science, mathematics, and engineering principles.

Educational level: Beginner.

Learning and teaching notes: 

The two complementary workshops, Climate Fresk and En-ROADS, are introduced to situate Renewable Energy Technologies within the wider context of the Net Zero transition. Their purpose is first to deepen students’ understanding of the climate science that underpins climate change as the driver of technical innovation, and then to broaden awareness of the social, economic, political, and environmental factors that shape global decarbonisation pathways. Building on this foundation, the workshops shift focus to the policy levers required to enable systems change – highlighting, often with surprising insights, their relative effectiveness in reducing emissions and limiting temperature rise. Together, they provide the context for a Renewable Energy Technologies module, where attention turns to the role of renewables and other low-carbon technologies as climate solutions. The central takeaway is that there is no single “silver bullet” solution; instead, a coordinated “silver buckshot” approach is essential.

Learners do not require any prior learning in the area of climate change or climate solutions for these workshops. The workshops are the perfect introduction to these. Climate Fresk facilitator training begins with attending a workshop as a participant, followed by a session on facilitation. Staff can train via local workshops, the CF MOOC and peer-to-peer practice, or through official training, enabling institutions to build a self-sustaining community of facilitators at minimal cost.

Learners have the opportunity to: 

Learn about the climate science that underpins the IPCC assessment reports.

Develop an understanding of systems thinking by applying it to climate science and the impacts of climate change, while also exploring the policy solutions needed to drive systems-level change.

Be Introduced to the En-Roads Climate Simulator tool and the possibility of becoming trained Climate Fresk Facilitators themselves.

Teachers have the opportunity to: 

Actively engage the students in taking a systems thinking approach to their understanding of ‘the problem’ of climate change, and exploring ‘the solutions’ to it.

Use these workshops as stand-alone activities (for outreach) or embed within the curriculum.

Collaborate with other teachers and students, by training them as facilitators to support future workshops.

Engage students with different competencies such as systems thinking, critical thinking, and anticipatory thinking and highlight to students how these are relevant and applied.

Downloads: A PDF of this resource will be available soon.

Learning and teaching resources:

Climate Fresk (2025) Climate Fresk (world) – Climate Fresk.

Climate Interactive (no date) The En-Roads Climate Solutions Simulator.  (Accessed: August 27, 2025).

En-ROADS resources (no date).

The En-ROADS guided assignment (no date).

Training, C.I. (no date) Mastering En-ROADS.

Strachan, S. et al. (no date) From StrathCEKO to StrathCAN – building a community of climate education ambassadors from the bottom up in a higher education institution. International Conference on Sustainable Development.

BBC Sounds – The Climate Tipping Points – available episodes (no date).

TEDx Talks (2023) Positive Tipping Points – Viewing the world as a system | Tim Lenton | TEDxPorto.

Activity overview:  

This activity utilises off-the-shelf educational tools in the form of the Climate Fresk workshop and the En-Roads Climate Simulator tool. These are used in two separate (but connected) workshops adapted from the guided assignment that is presented in the resources above. These are not intended to be run back-to-back. In fact, some gap (of days) in between is desirable as together, this would be too exhausting, and also give time for reflection in between.

The Climate Fresk workshop is designed to build a solid understanding of cause-and-effect in climate systems. This develops baseline systems thinking without overloading students.

En-ROADS, is designed to engage students with the types of sectors that we need to decarbonise and get them thinking about the need for system wide policies to achieve system wide decarbonisation of our energy system.

Figure 1. Using Climate Fresk and En-ROADS as complementary workshops focusing on ‘the climate problem’ and ‘climate solutions’.

A key aspect of both workshops is highlighting the need for systems thinking in both understanding the problem of, and exploring the solutions to, climate change. This involves introducing students to the cause and effects of climate change, feedback loops and the concept of tipping points – both in terms of climate tipping points (BBC Sounds – The Climate Tipping Points, no date) that can potentially trigger irreversible changes in the climate system, as well as positive, social tipping points (TEDx Talks 2023) that once crossed can shift social norms, and how policies can affect this. It allows discussions around leverage points in the context of climate solutions and policies, which Donella Meadows describes as where “a small shift in one thing can produce big changes in everything”.

Part one: Climate Fresk workshop: Understanding the problem of climate change (or the ‘science piece’):

Overview:

Climate Fresk is a 2-2.5 hour facilitator-led gamified workshop based on the latest IPCC report, where participants work in groups to build a causal-loop diagram (or fresk) of the Earth’s climate system using specially designed cards. The activity encourages discussion, challenges assumptions, and develops systems thinking by illustrating the interconnections, feedback loops, and tipping points of climate change. In doing so, it supports UNESCO Education for Sustainable Development competencies in anticipatory and systems thinking, helping participants understand the potential impacts of climate dynamics on ecological, social, and economic systems in a way that is accessible.

Scalability and setup:

The Climate Fresk workshop can be delivered to almost any number of participants, limited only by the size of the space, the number of trained facilitators available, and the number of card decks. Participants are usually divided into groups of 8 (10 at a push), each working around a table roughly 2m x 1m in size. Each group (table) requires a dedicated facilitator to guide the process.

Facilitation and training:

Facilitators must be trained before running the activity. Training can be undertaken through official Climate Fresk courses (see resources) or, once enough experience has been built, in-house peer-to-peer training supported by staff development units. Facilitators use a “crib sheet” containing guiding questions and timings to help keep groups on track.

Workshop materials:

The Fresk uses a deck of 42 cards, each representing a cause, effect, or impact within the climate system-ranging from fossil fuel use across industry, buildings, transport and agriculture, to wider impacts on society, biodiversity, and ecosystems. Each card has a graphic on one side and explanatory text on the other, which participants use to determine its role in the system.

Learning process:

Over the session, participants collaboratively arrange the cards on a large sheet of paper to construct a causal-loop diagram of the climate system. In doing so, they identify drivers of carbon emissions, critical carbon sinks, feedback loops, and potential tipping points. The activity encourages discussion, challenges assumptions, and introduces key climate science terminology, while making visible the complex interdependencies of Earth systems.

Reflection and discussion:

After constructing the Fresk, participants are encouraged to reflect on how the process made them feel (normative competency) and what insights they gained. This is followed by open discussion on mitigation strategies and possible solutions. In a standard Climate Fresk workshop, around 45 minutes is devoted to this. However, when combined with the En-Roads simulator, this discussion naturally transitions from the “problem space” of the Fresk workshop to the “solutions space” of the subsequent En-Roads workshop, where participants explore the realistic impacts of different climate solutions, their co-benefits, and the equity issues they raise – engaging participants in deeper systems-level thinking.

Part two: En-ROADS workshop: ‘Exploring the solutions’ to climate change (or the ‘policy piece’): 

Overview:

This En-ROADS workshop can be run from one to two hours, and can follow a role-play format, where participants are asked to take on the role of policymakers, exploring different policy options to limit global temperatures to 1.5oC (or 2oC). They are introduced to the workshop by telling them “you are policymakers tasked with limiting global heating”. En-Roads is a climate change simulator developed by Climate Interactive and MIT that uses roleplay to explore global policy interventions for limiting temperature rise. It enables participants—from students to policymakers—to test combinations of climate solutions, examine trade-offs and unintended consequences, and understand that no single “silver bullet” exists. The workshop develops UNESCO Education for Sustainable Development competencies in anticipatory, systems, critical, and strategic thinking, while highlighting the challenges of achieving policy consensus across diverse stakeholders.

Preparation:

1. Participants

- Suitable for classes split into small groups.

- Works well in groups of 3–5 for discussions.

2. Facilitators

- 1 facilitator to introduce the tool and guide reflection.

- Teaching assistants can circulate during group tasks to prompt discussion.

3. Materials and tools

- Internet access and projector.

- EN-ROADS simulator: https://en-roads.climateinteractive.org.

- Handouts: list of possible climate “levers” (policy actions) – See resources – En-Roads Control Panel

- Online polling software (e.g. Mentimeter)

Step-by-step instructions for 60-minute workshop (but can be expanded to 2 hours involving more discussion and more interaction with En-Roads simulator):

1. Introduction (5 mins)

- Introduce EN-ROADS as an interactive simulator for testing climate solutions.

- Explain the goal: Can we keep global heating below 1.5 °C?

- Use causal loop diagram below to demonstrate how mitigating actions effect positive change.

Figure 2. Causal loop diagram showing how increasing GHG emissions drive climate action and emissions reduction.

2. Initial actions brainstorm (5 mins)

- Ask cohort to use an online polling system, asking them to vote for their Top action (from the list of mitigating actions – see resources – En-Roads Control Panel) that that they think will have the greatest impact on reducing emissions and temperature.

Figure 3. Example of a Menti poll to capture learners’ understanding of climate solution impacts.

Don’t show this yet – keep this for later, when you will ask them to vote again and can then compare how their views have changed from beginning to end of session.

Ask participants to self-sort into groups of 3–4, and now ask them to discuss what their Top 3 actions would be – they must agree on these.

3.Using EN-ROADS (15 mins)

- As facilitator, ask one group to volunteer their top action. Demonstrate their action using the simulator with an example (e.g. applying a coal phase-out or carbon tax).

- IMPORTANT: Before you implement the action – ask the group (and others) what they expect to happen to emissions and temperature.

- Apply their action and ask if it is what they expected. Then discuss why it is, or is not, what they expected to see.

- Highlight unintended consequences (e.g. rising energy prices and discussion on the real-world impacts this can have on local communities or households, land-use impacts).

- This does require the facilitator to be familiar with the simulator and what these impacts might be and how to use the simulator to show these (there is a Climate Interactive course available (Training, no date), which is free, and there are also many resources available for individuals to work through at their own pace).

- Can repeat this with other groups volunteering their top action. Ask for a group who has a different top action, or ask a group for their second top action to ensure you cover different levers.

4. Group simulation (15 mins)

- Ask groups to now use En-Roads to consider other levers to get temperature as close to 1.5oC as possible, to determine whether their initial top 5 ranking has changed.

- They should record how much each action reduces emissions and temperature rise.

- Take the poll again.

- Show both polls and look at differences – have they changed their views on certain actions – ask them why.

- Discuss: Which actions had the biggest effect? Which had less than expected? Why?

5. Achieving 1.5 °C (10 mins)

- Ask who reached 1.5oC

- Ask them to show their combined actions.

- Open up for discussion on how feasible these actions look – what are the implementation challenges associated with them. Are there risks of unintended consequences such as GDP, equity, biodiversity, etc?

6. Reflection and debrief (5 mins)

- Discuss key takeaways:

- The importance of combining multiple actions (“silver buckshot” rather than a silver bullet).

- Trade-offs and co-benefits (e.g. health, equity, biodiversity).

- The role (and challenge) of collaboration and consensus in policy decisions.

7. Post Workshop – optional

- Challenge groups to adjust policies and combinations of levers to approach the IEA’s Net Zero 2050 (1.5 °C) pathway, and compare their pathways with this. Gives them a sense of how challenging/possible the net-zero pathway will be.

Toolkit: Complex Systems Toolkit.

Author: Dr. Rebecca Margetts (Nottingham Trent University).

Topic: The importance of teaching and learning about complex systems.

Title: The real world is a complex system.

Resource type: Knowledge article.

Relevant disciplines: Any.

Keywords: Problem solving; Feedback loops; Decision-making; VUCA; Optimisation; Public health and safety; Risk; Sustainability; Ethics; Responsible design; Life cycle; Societal impact; Enterprise and innovation.

Licensing: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. 

Downloads:

PDF version

Learning and teaching resources:

Glossary: This article refers to many concepts and terms which are more fully described and explained in this companion resource.

Ask an MIT Professor: What Is System Thinking and Why Is It Important? – by MIT xPRO on September 14th, 2022

What is a Complex System? (2025) by James Ladyman and Karoline Wiesner: An overview from Bristol University (with James Lambert) here, or the full book published by Yale University Press on JSTOR (which should be accessible via your institution).

Who is this article for?: This article should be read by educators at all levels in higher education who are seeking an overall perspective on teaching approaches for integrating complex systems in engineering education.

This resource relates to the Systems Thinking and Critical Thinking INCOSE competencies.

Premise:

We live in a complex world. Complexity is a key challenge, captured in leadership terms by the VUCA framework: volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (Lanucha 2024). Engineers have the privilege of creating products and processes for humans to use in this landscape. Each of these likely has numerous parts which interact, as well as interacting with the environment, people, and needing to meet a host of safety, quality, sustainability, ethics, and financial obligations. Traditionally, engineers analyse problems by breaking them down into simple parts. This helps understanding and makes calculations feasible, but it’s easy to lose understanding of the whole system. Any change can easily create a problem elsewhere. From a technical viewpoint, engineers need to understand this interconnectedness in order for their creations to work. In a wider sense, ‘systems thinking’ is a skill central to engineering quality and management techniques, which seek to rationalise the complexity of entire organisations and their ever-changing market pressures.

The case for understanding systems:

Systems is perhaps one of the most misunderstood words in engineering. It is often found combined with mathematical modelling or control – topics often perceived as challenging – and is used in other fields like Computer Science, where tools and models are different. In all cases, the idea revolves around a group of interacting or interrelated elements which form a unified whole. Those elements can be physical or information, hardware or software, or any combination of mechanical, electrical, and other engineering domains. Thinking in terms of systems can therefore be thought of as a holistic approach.

The Engineering Council UK’s AHEP criteria include a systems approach: C/M6 – “Apply an integrated or systems approach to the solution of complex problems.” Several other AHEP criteria also reference complexity and complex problems, which they define as having “no obvious solution and may involve wide-ranging or conflicting technical issues and/or user needs that can be addressed through creativity and the resourceful application of engineering science. The Systems Thinking Alliance (2025) gives a broader definition of complexity as referring to “the condition of systems, objects, phenomena, or concepts that are challenging to understand, explain, or manage due to their intricate and interconnected nature. It involves multiple elements or factors that interact in unpredictable ways, often requiring significant information, time, or coordinated efforts to address.” For these, there is no ‘one-size-fits-all solution’ (Ellis 2025). This is the reality that engineers need to manage by understanding the potential effects on all parts of the system.

In order to analyse, engineers dissect complexity into manageable components, and educators teach these simple components before moving onto more complex systems. For example, students initially learn basic electrical components, simple beams, rigid bodies, etc. before bringing these together in case studies, and then moving onto topics like mechatronic systems. Historically, engineers specialised on graduation, perhaps becoming a stress engineer or fluid dynamicist in dedicated offices and functional teams. A design decision by one team could have unintended consequences for another, as well as additional uncertainty. The advent of cross-functional project and ‘matrix’ organisations mitigated against this, and companies have moved towards attribute teams which can consider the balance of behaviour. Even so, some uncertainty remains in the form of assumptions in calculations, changes in material properties with temperature or stress, or small variations in composition and manufacturing tolerances, which can all accumulate. Any parts which are bought ‘off-the-shelf’ or made by other companies under license must be carefully specified. Relationships can be nonlinear – or even chaotic – and contain feedback loops which can amplify changes (Kastens et al 2009). This all increases the risk of a product’s comfort, performance, and safety being impacted in ways that weren’t anticipated. Any problem that doesn’t come to light until the testing phase – late in the design process – represents costly redesigns and delays. In the unlikely event that a problem isn’t captured during testing either, the outcome could be disastrous.

Systems engineers will bring the product together and establish these complex behaviours through models and testing. Identifying potential problems early in the design phase can save significant money and facilitate better designs. This can be challenging, especially for systems using novel materials or operating in extreme environments, which aren’t accurately captured by standard calculations. Models may be linearised, neglect external forcing, or be derived for an assumed air density or ambient temperature which may not be valid. In recent decades, the engineering industry has moved towards model-based design and virtual prototyping, facilitated by advances in computer tools. These are increasingly sophisticated, but models still need to be built by engineers with an appreciation of complexity and the mechanisms by which a problem could arise. As humans develop new materials and technologies, and explore the limits of what is possible, engineering techniques and calculations need constant revision, and software tools are frequently updated to facilitate this.

That holistic view of problems has benefits outside of designing engineering artefacts. The manufacturing process is itself a complex system with potentially long supply chains. As is the organisation, which is comprised of numerous people operating in a landscape of financial pressures, employment law, politics and culture. Quality guru William Deming’s 14 Points for Management (Deming 2018) can be viewed as a systems approach to handling this complexity, by breaking down barriers between departments and instigating continuous improvement. Once a product is produced, it exists in a wider world and continues to interact with it. From a sustainability viewpoint, this can be the user and surrounding community, the environmental impact over a product’s lifecycle, and the financial markets which dictate whether a product is viable. It can also be the social, political, and legal landscapes: these can place direct constraints in the forms of laws governing safety and emissions (such as the UK’s legally binding target of net zero by 2050), or through embargos, tariffs, and subsidies. Each country has its own regulations, which can necessitate multiple variations of a product: a good example is cars, which need to be produced in both left- and right-hand drive, satisfy varying safety and emissions regulations, and cater for differing personal and cultural preferences for size, noise, usage and driving styles. Even when not legislated, a company might choose to support fair trade, lead the way in sustainable practices, or refuse to do business with suppliers or regimes they find objectionable – potentially making this a key part of their brand.

An engineer’s ability to appreciate and understand the wider social and business landscape is a reason why finance and management consultancy companies can often be seen recruiting engineers at student careers fairs. The Sainsbury Management Fellowship (SMF) scheme notably develops UK engineers as industry leaders, and fellows have made a major contribution to the UK’s economic prosperity (RAEng 2025).

Conclusions:

Complex systems are the “real world” that engineers attempt to understand and design for. They are complicated, interconnected, changing, and uncertain. The well-known part of engineering is analysis: breaking systems into understandable parts. There needs to be a parallel operation where those parts are assembled or integrated into a whole, and that whole interacts with everything around it. This is where unforeseen problems can occur. Systems models and a holistic systems thinking approach can mitigate this risk. A systems approach and ability to manage complexity is a key skill for engineers, and positions them well for other fields like management.

References:

Deming, W. Edwards (2018) Out of the Crisis, The MIT Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11457.001.0001

Ellis, Jordan (2025) ‘Making Sense of Chaos: The Role of Systems Thinking in Understanding Complexity’, The Systems Thinking. Available from: https://thesystemsthinking.com/making-sense-of-chaos-the-role-of-systems-thinking-in-understanding-complexity/ (Accessed 2nd September 2025).

ESCAP (2019) Introduction to Systems Thinking Principles and Analytical Tools, United Nations ESCAP. Available from: https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/Introduction%20to%20systems%20thinking%20tools_Eng.pdf (Accessed 2nd September 20250.

Kastens, K., Manduca, C., Cervato, C., & Frodeman, R., Goodwin, C., Liben, L., Mogk, D., Spangler, T., Stillings, N., Titus, S. (2009). How Geoscientists Think and Learn. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union. 90. 10.1029/2009EO310001.

Lanucha, K. (2024) ‘Navigating VUCA: Unraveling the Dynamics of Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity in Organizational Challenges’, University of Cambridge Online. Available from: https://advanceonline.cam.ac.uk/blog/what-is-vuca-and-what-does-it-mean-for-you-and-your-international (Accessed 24/10/2025).

RAEng (2025) ‘Sainsbury Management Fellowship’, Royal Academy of Engineering. Available from: https://raeng.org.uk/smf (Accessed 2nd September 2025).

Systems Thinking Alliance (2025) ‘What is Complexity?’. Available from: https://systemsthinkingalliance.org/glossary/complexity/ (Accessed 24th October 2025).

Case study example: Water wars: managing competing water rights

Activity: Assessment. This example demonstrates how the questions provided in Assessing ethics: Rubric can be used to assess the competencies stipulated at each level.

Authors: Dr. Natalie Wint (UCL); Dr. William Bennett (Swansea University).

Related content:

Water wars: managing competing water rights

This example demonstrates how the questions provided in the accompanying rubric can be used to assess the competencies stipulated at each level. Although we have focused on ‘Water Wars’ here, the suggested assessment questions have been designed in such a way that they can be used in conjunction with the case studies available within the toolkit, or with another case study that has been created (by yourself or elsewhere) to outline an ethical dilemma.

Year 1

Personal values: What is your initial position on the issue? Do you see anything wrong with how DSS are using water? Why, or why not?

Students should provide a stance, but more importantly their stance should be justified. In this instance this may involve reference to common moral values such as environmental sustainability, risk associated with power issues and questions of ownership.

Professional responsibilities: What ethical principles and codes of conduct are relevant to this situation?

Students should refer to relevant principles (e.g. from the Joint Statement of Ethical Principles). For example, in this case some of the relevant principles may include (but not be limited to) “protect, and where possible improve, the quality of built and natural environment”, “maximise the public good and minimise both actual and potential adverse effects for their own and succeeding generations” and “take due account of the limited availability of natural resources”.

Ethical principles and codes of conduct can be used to guide our actions during an ethical dilemma. How does the guidance provided in this case align/differ with your personal views? (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)

Students’ answers will depend upon those given to the previous questions but should include some discussion of similarities and differences between their own initial thoughts and principles/codes of conducts, and allude to the tensions involved in ethical dilemmas and the impact on decision making.

What are the moral values involved in this case and why does it constitute an ethical dilemma? (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)

Students should be able to identify relevant moral values and explain that an ethical dilemma constitutes a problem in which two or more moral values or norms cannot be fully realised at the same time.
There are two (or a limited number of) options for action and whatever they choose they will commit a moral wrong. The crucial feature of a moral dilemma is not the number of actions that are available but the fact that all possible actions are morally unsatisfactory.

What role should an engineer play in influencing the outcome? What are the implications of not being involved? (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)

Engineers are responsible for the design of technological advancements which necessitate data storage. Although this brings many benefits, engineers need to consider the adverse impact of technological advancement such as increased water use. Students may therefore want to consider the wider implications of data storage on the environment and how these can be mitigated.

Year 2

Formulate a moral problem statement which clearly states the problem, its moral nature and who needs to act. (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)

An example could be: “Should the civil engineer working for DSS remain loyal to the company and defend them against accusations of causing environmental hazards, or defend their water rights and say that they will not change their behaviour”. It should be clear what the problem is, the moral values at play and who needs to act.

Stakeholder mapping: Who are all the stakeholders in the scenario? What are their positions, perspective and moral values?

Below is a non-exhaustive list of some of the relevant stakeholders and values that may come up.

Stakeholder	Perspectives/interests	Moral values
Data Storage Solutions (DSS)	Increasing production in a profitable way; meeting legal requirements; good reputation to maintain/grow customer base.	Accountability; sustainability (primarily economic).
Farmers’ union	Represent farmers who suffer from economic implications associated with costly irrigation.	Accountability; environmental sustainability; justice.
Farm	The farm (presumably) benefits from DSS using the land.	Ownership and property; environmental sustainability; justice.
Local Green Party	Represent views of those concerned about biodiversity. May be interested in opening of green battery plant.	Human welfare; environmental sustainability; justice.
Local Council	Represent views of all stakeholders and would need to consider economic benefits of DSS (tax and employment), the need of the university and hospital, as well as the needs of local farmers and environmentalists. May be interested in opening of green battery plant.	Human welfare and public health; trust; accountability; environmental sustainability; justice.
Member of the public	This may depend on their beliefs as an individual, their employment status and their use of services such as the hospital and university. Typically interested in low taxes/responsible spending of public money. May be interested in opening of green battery plant.	Human welfare; trust; accountability; environmental sustainability; justice.
Stakeholders using DSS data storage	Reliable storage. They may also be interested in being part of an ethical supply chain.	Trust; privacy; accountability; autonomy.
Non-human stakeholders		Environmental sustainability.

What are some of the possible courses of action in the situation. What responsibilities do you have to the various stakeholders involved? What are some of the advantages and disadvantages associated with each? (Reworded from case study.)

Students should provide a stance but may recognise the tensions involved. For example, at a micro level, tensions between loyalty to the profession and loyalty to the company/personal financial stability. Responsibilities to fellow employees may include the degree to which you risk their jobs by being honest. They may also feel that they should protect environmental and natural resources.
At a macro level, they may consider the need for engineers to inform decisions regarding issues that engineering and technology raise for society (e.g. increased water being needed for data storage) and listen to the aspirations and concerns of others, and challenging statements or policies that cause them professional concern.

What are the relevant facts in this scenario and what other information would you like to help inform your ethical decision making? (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)

Students should identify which facts within the case study are relevant in terms of making an ethical decision. In this case, some of the relevant facts may include:

- Water use permissible by law (“the data centre always uses the maximum amount legally allotted to it.”)

- This centre manages data which is vital for the local community, including the safe running of schools and hospitals, and that its operation requires sufficient water for cooling.

- In more arid months, the nearby river almost runs dry, resulting in large volumes of fish dying.

- Water levels in farmers’ wells have dropped, making irrigation much more expensive and challenging.

- A new green battery plant is planned to open nearby that will create more data demand and has the potential to further increase DSS’ water use.

- Obtaining water from other sources will be costly to DSS and may not be practically possible, let alone commercially viable.

Students should be aware that incomplete information hinders decision making during ethical dilemmas, and that in some cases, further information will be needed to help inform decisions. In this case, some of the questions may pertain to:

- Exactly how much water is being used and the legal rights.

- Relationship between farmer and DSS/contractual obligations.

- How costly irrigation is to the farmers (economic impact), as well as the knock-on impact to their business and supply chain.

- How many people DSS employ and how important they are for local economy.

- Detail regarding biodiversity loss and its wider impact.

- How likely it is that the green battery plant will open and whether DSS is the only eligible supplier.

- How much the green battery plant contract is worth to DSS.

- How much water the green battery plant will use in the case that DSS get the contract.

- Whether DSS is the only option for hospital and university.

- What will happen if the services DSS provide to the hospital and university stop or becomes unreliable.

Year 2/Year 3

(At Year 2, students could provide options; at Year 3 they would evaluate and form a judgement.)

Make use of ethical frameworks and/or professional codes to evaluate the options for DSS both short term and long term. How do the uncertainty and assumptions involved in this case impact decision making?

Students should list plausible options. They can then analyse them with respect to different ethical frameworks (whilst we don’t necessary make use of normative ethical theories, analysis according to consequences, intention or action may be a useful approach to this). Below we have included a non-exhaustive list of options with ideas in terms of analysis.

Option	Consequences	Intention	Action
Keep using water	May lead to expansion and profit of DSS and thus tax revenue/employment and supply. Reputational damage of DSS may increase. Individual employee piece of mind may be at risk. Farmers still don’t have water and biodiversity still suffers which may have further impact long term.	Intention behind action not consistent with that expected by an engineer, other than with respect to legality	Action follows legal norms but not social norms such as good will and concern for others.
Keep using the water but limit further work	May limit expansion and profit of DSS and thus tax revenue/employment and supply. Farmers still don’t have water and biodiversity still suffers and may have further impact long term. This could still result in reputation damage.	Intention behind action partially consistent with that expected by an engineer.	Action follows legal norms but only partially follow social norms such as good will and concern for others.
Make use of other sources of water	Data storage continues. Potential for reputation to increase. Potential increase in cost of water resulting in less profit potentially less tax revenue/employment. Farmers have water and biodiversity may improve. Alternative water sources may be associated with the same issues or worse.	Intention behind action seems consistent with that expected by an engineer. However, this is dependent upon whether they chose to source sustainable water with less impact on biodiversity etc.	This may be dependent on the degree to which DSS proactively source sustainable water.
Reduce work levels or shut down	Impact on profit and thus tax revenue/employment and supply chain. Farmers have water and biodiversity may improve. May cause operational issues for those whose data is stored.	Seems consistent with those expected of engineer. Raises questions more generally about viability and feasibility of data storage.	Action doesn’t follow social norms of responsibility to employees and shareholders.
Investigate other cooling methods which don’t require as much water/don’t take on extra work until another method identified.	May benefit whole sector. May cause interim loss of service.	This follows expectations of the engineering profession in terms of evidence-based decision making and consideration for impact of engineering in society.	It follows social norms in terms of responsible decision making.

Downloads:

Assessing ethics: Guidance

Assessing ethics: Rubric

Assessing ethics: Case study assessment example: Water Wars

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

“A new report from the National Engineering Policy Centre about resource efficiency and demand reduction for critical materials to support the UK’s existing Net Zero Strategy.

This report provides an overview of the underutilised policy options for achieving reductions in demands for critical materials and dependency on imports of scarce materials.

It presents a range of policy and engineering interventions around three main areas of demand-side resource management. These include: infrastructure and technology planning, design and design skills and circular economy.

The report concludes with 25 recommendations for policymakers which will help the UK cut its critical material footprint. Lead recommendations from the report call for: an integrated materials strategy, a National Materials Data Hub, infrastructure planning for material sustainability, and a new target to halve the UK’s material footprint.

The report also makes specific recommendations for targeted action, such as committing to the ban on single-use vapes, and improving repair and recycling of electronics to reduce e-waste.

Without intervention, the UK risks not achieving its Net Zero strategy and exposure to future economic uncertainty.” – The Royal Academy of Engineering

Author: Ramiro Jordan (University of New Mexico).

Topic: Communicating river system sustainability.

Tool type: Teaching.

Relevant Disciplines: Civil; Mechanical.

Keywords: Water and sanitation; Infrastructure; Community sustainability; Health; Government policy; Social responsibility; AHEP; Higher education; Sustainability; Project brief; Water quality control.

AHEP mapping: This resource addresses two of the themes from the UK’s Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4): The Engineer and Society (acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) and Engineering Practice (the practical application of engineering concepts, tools and professional skills). To map this resource to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4  here and navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37. 

Related SDGs: SDG 3 (Good health and well-being); SDG 4 (Quality education); SDG 6 (Clean water and sanitation); SDG 8 (Decent work and economic growth).

Educational level: Intermediate.

Learning and teaching notes:

This is an example project that could be adapted for use in a variety of contexts. It asks students to devise a “sustainability dashboard” that can not only track indicators of river system sustainability through technical means, but also communicate the resulting data to the public for the purpose of policy decisions. Teachers should ideally select a local river system to focus on for this project, and assign background reading accordingly.

Learners have the opportunity to:

Investigate the links between history, politics, and engineered systems;
Research existing data sources;
Devise a technical solution for community impact.

Teachers have the opportunity to:

Showcase real-world implications of the SDGs;
Integrate technical learning with sustainability issues;
Emphasise the importance of the engineer’s role in public life.

Supporting resources:

Introduction:

Two vital and unique resources for the planet are water and air. Any alterations in their composition can have detrimental effects on humans and living organisms. Water uses across New Mexico are unsustainable. Reduced precipitation and streamflows cause increased groundwater use and recharge. Serious omissions in state water policy provide no protection against complete depletion of groundwater reserves.

The water governance status quo in New Mexico will result in many areas of New Mexico running out of water, some sooner, some later, and some already have. Because Water is Life, water insecurity will cause economic insecurity and eventual collapse.

Water resources, both surface and groundwater, and total water use, determine the amount of water use that can be sustained, and then reduce total water use if New Mexico is to have water security. The public must therefore recognise that action is required. Availability of compiled, accessible data will lead to and promote our critical need to work toward equitable adaptation and attain sustainable resiliency of the Middle Rio Grande’s common water supply and air quality.

A data dashboard is needed to provide on-line access to historical, modern, and current perspectives on water, air quality, health, and economic information. A dashboard is needed to help inform the public about why everyone and all concerned citizens, institutions and levels of government must do their part!

Project brief:

The Middle Rio Grande region of New Mexico has particular sustainability and resilience requirements and enforceable legal obligations (Rio Grande Compact) to reduce water depletions of the Rio Grande and tributary groundwater to sustainable levels. However, there is a lack of accessible depictions of the Middle Rio Grande’s water supply and demand mismatch. Nothing publicly accessible illustrates the surface water and groundwater resources, water uses, and current water depletions that cannot be sustained even if water supplies were not declining. Therefore, there is a corresponding lack of public visibility of New Mexico’s water crisis, both in the Middle Valley and across New Mexico. Local water institutions and governments are siloed and have self-serving missions and do not recognise the limits of the Middle Valley’s water resources.

A water data dashboard is needed to provide online open access to historical, modern, and current perspectives on water inflows, outflows, and the change in stored surface and groundwater. This dashboard should inform the public about why everyone and all water institutions and levels of government must do their part!

Given:

Data from numerous on-line and paper or spreadsheet data sources
Law of the Rio Grande
The 2004 water budget components and historical information.

Objectives:

Engage data providers to cooperatively secure access to the public data they collect and maintain.

Create one website Dashboard to present the relevant water data of the Middle Rio Grande.

Demonstrate the function and form of the Water Data Dashboard to illustrate the value of simplified presentation of aggregated data.

Illustrate the value of creating procedures for data aggregation and presentation in simplified, accessible formats so that the prototype dashboard is taken over by an institution with the resources to build and maintain an improved second-generation version.

Provide selected water data sets as set forth in 2019 Water Data Act standards and procedures to the NM Water Data Initiative.

Find a long-term home for the dashboard project with a government agency or Middle Rio Grande water institution.

Acknowledgements: The 2023 Peace Engineering summer cohort of Argentine Fulbright Scholars who analysed the Middle Rio Grande Case Study concluded that water in the Middle Rio Grande is a community problem that requires a community driven solution.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

To view a plain text version of this resource, click here to download the PDF.

Authors: Cortney Holles (Colorado School of Mines); Ekaterina Rzyankina (University of Cape Town).

Topic: Critical digital literacy.

Engineering disciplines: Computer Science; Information Systems; Biomedical engineering.

Ethical issues: Cultural context; Social responsibility; Privacy.

Professional situations: Public health and safety; Working in area of competence; Informed consent.

Educational level: Intermediate.

Educational aim: Engaging in ethical judgement: reaching moral decisions and providing the rationale for those decisions.

Learning and teaching notes:

The case involves an engineering student whose personal choices may affect her future professional experience. It highlights both micro- and macro-ethical issues, dealing with the ways that individual actions and decisions can scale to create systemic challenges.

An ethical and responsible engineer should know how to work with and use digital information responsibly. Not all materials available online are free to use or disperse. To be digitally literate, a person must know how to access, evaluate, utilise, manage, analyse, create, and interact using digital resources (Martin, 2008). It is important to guide engineering students in understanding the media landscape and the influence of misleading information on our learning, our political choices, and our careers. A large part of critical digital literacy is evaluating information found on the web. For students working on a research project or an experiment, accessing accurate information is imperative. This case study offers several approaches to engaging students in the critique and improvement of their critical digital literacy skills. The foundations of this lesson can be applied in multiple settings and can be expanded to cover several class periods or simplified to be inserted into a single class.

This case study addresses two of AHEP 4’s themes: The Engineer and Society (acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) and Engineering Practice (the practical application of engineering concepts, tools and professional skills). To map this case study to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4 here and navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37.

The dilemma in this case is presented in two parts. If desired, a teacher can use the Summary and Part one in isolation, but Part two develops and complicates the concepts presented in the Summary and Part one to provide for additional learning. The case allows teachers the option to stop at multiple points for questions and / or activities as desired.

Learners have the opportunity to:

explore how personal privacy has become increasingly more vulnerable to surveillance and commodification;
discover ways that uploading personal information to social networks means that we will increasingly allow others access to our data;
understand how vulnerable personal information has become to information-aggregation and reselling activities;
evaluate messaging on social media and the news to critique the information they take in and the entities that post it.

Teachers have the opportunity to:

address the definition and importance of expertise;
provide students with practice in evaluating sources of information;
critique students’ approaches to searching, sharing, and comprehending information;
evaluate how students respond to and engage with messaging about science and engineering.

Learning and teaching resources:

News articles:

Educational institutions:

Legal regulations:

GDPR Policy

Non-profit organisations:

Debunking Viral Claims Archives – FactCheck.org

Business:

Meta: Working to Stop Misinformation and False News on Facebook

Summary:

Katherine is a biomedical engineering student in her 3rd year in 2022, and will have a placement in a community hospital during her last term at university. She plans to pursue a career in public health after seeing what her country went through during the Covid-19 pandemic. She wants to contribute to the systems that can prevent and track public health risks from growing too large to manage, as happened with Covid-19. She is motivated by improving systems of research and treatment for emerging diseases and knows that communication between a variety of stakeholders is of the utmost importance.

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

1. Discussion: What can you determine about Katherine’s values and motivation for her studies and her choice of career?

2. Discussion: How do you connect with her mission to improve diagnostic and treatment systems for public health threats?

3. Discussion: Who should be responsible for the messaging and processes for public health decisions? How are engineers connected to this system?

4. Activity: Research the Covid-19 vaccine rollout in the United Kingdom versus other countries – how did power, privilege, and politics influence the response?

5. Activity: Research current public health concerns and how they are being communicated to the public. In what ways might engineers affect how and what is communicated?

Dilemma – Part one:

As Katherine approaches the winter holiday season, she makes plans to visit her grandmother across the country. She hasn’t seen her since before the Covid-19 pandemic and is excited to be around her extended family for the holidays once again. However, she receives an email from her cousin informing everyone that he and his family are not vaccinated against Covid-19 because the whole vaccination operation was forced upon citizens and they refused to participate. Katherine is immediately worried for her grandmother – at 85 years old, she is at a higher risk than most – and for her brother, who suffers from Addison’s disease, an autoimmune disorder. Additionally, if Katherine comes into contact with Covid-19 while celebrating the holidays with her family, she could suffer repercussions at both her university and the hospital where she will work for her placement.

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

1. Discussion: How can Katherine communicate with her cousin about her concerns for her brother and grandmother? How might she use her expertise as a biomedical engineer in this conversation?

2. Discussion: What kind of information will be most convincing to support her decision? What sources would provide the evidence she is looking for, and which ones would provide counter arguments?

3. Discussion: What impacts might the decision have on Katherine’s position as a student or in the hospital?

4. Discussion: Do engineers, scientists, and medical professionals have more of an obligation to promote and adhere to public health guidance? Why or why not?

5. Activity: Talk to people in your life about their experience of navigating the Covid-19 vaccine. Did they choose to get it as soon as it was available? Did they avoid getting the vaccine for particular reasons? Were there impacts on their personal relationships or work because of their choices about the vaccine?

6. Activity: Research some of the impacts on individuals with health concerns and comorbidities in regard to Covid-19 and other viruses or public health concerns. How do these experiences match with or differ from your own?

7. Activity: Investigate the different ways that engineers were involved in vaccination development and response.

Dilemma – Part two:

Katherine went back to university after a lengthy break for the holidays and immediately registered for an account on Facebook as a brand-new user. She was in such a hurry to have her profile up that she did not take the time to configure any privacy settings. She stayed up late reading an article about Covid-19 that had been posted on the website of one of the online newspapers. Before she posted this report on her own Facebook page, she did not verify the accuracy of the information or the source of the information.

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

1. Discussion: What kind of impact might this social media activity have on Katherine’s position as a student or in the company/organisation/hospital she is working for as an intern? What should Katherine be worried or concerned about after posting information?

2. Discussion: Do social media companies collect or ask for any other non-essential information from you? Why does the website claim that they are collecting or asking for your information? Does the website share/sell/trade the information that they collect from you? With whom does the website share your collected information? How long does the website keep your collected information? Does the website delete your information, or simply de-personalise it?

3. Discussion: Regarding question 2, how are engineers involved with products, processes, or services that enable those choices and actions?

4. Discussion: What is real and fake news? How do you know? What do you look for to know if it is real or fake news (share guidelines)? Do you expect it to be easy to spot fake news? Why should we care if people distribute and believe fake news?

Students are particularly susceptible to being duped by propaganda, misleading information, and fake news due to the significant role that information and communication technology which is problematic to verify plays in their everyday life. Students devote a significant portion of their time to participating in various forms of online activity, including watching television, playing online games, chatting, blogging, listening to music, posting photos of themselves on social networking sites, and searching for other individuals with whom they can engage in online conversation. Students owe a significant portion of what they know about the world and how they perceive reality to the content that they read online. While many people share reliable and positive information online, others may engage in negative impact information sharing:

Mis-information – false information shared with no intention of causing harm
Dis-information – false information shared intentionally to cause harm
Mal-information – true information shared intentionally to cause harm.

5. Discussion: What are some other examples of how engineering might fall prey to negative impact information sharing?

6. Discussion: How might engineers help address the problem of fake news and negative impact information sharing?

References:

Martin, A. (2008). ‘Digital Literacy and the “Digital Society”’, in Lankshear C. and Knobel M. (eds.), Digital Literacies: Concepts, Policies, and Practices. New York: Peter Lang, (pp. 151-176).

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors: Dr Yujia Zhai (University of Hertfordshire); Associate Professor Scarlett Xiao (University of Hertfordshire).

Topic: Data security of industrial robots.

Disciplines: Robotics; Data; Internet of Things.

Ethical issues: Safety; Health; Privacy; Transparency.

Professional situations: Rigour; Informed consent; Misuse of data.

Educational level: Intermediate.

Educational aim: Gaining ethical knowledge. Knowing the sets of rules, theories, concepts, frameworks, and statements of duty, rights, or obligations that inform ethical attitudes, behaviours, and practices.

Learning and teaching notes:

This case study involves an engineer hired to develop and install an Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) online machine monitoring system for a manufacturing company. The developments include designing the infrastructure of hardware and software, writing the operation manuals and setting policies. The project incorporates a variety of ethical components including law and policy, stakeholders, and risk analysis.

This case study addresses three of the themes from the Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4): Design and Innovation (significant technical and intellectual challenges commensurate the level of study), the Engineer and Society (acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) and Engineering Practice (the practical application of engineering concepts, tools, and professional skills). To map this case study to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4 here and navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37.

The dilemma in this case is presented in three parts. If desired, a teacher can use Part one in isolation, but Part two and Part three develop and complicate the concepts presented in Part one to provide for additional learning. The case study allows teachers the option to stop at multiple points for questions and/or activities as desired.

Learners have the opportunity to:

apply their ethical judgement relating to privacy and consent on the use of machine data;
determine the societal impact of a technical solution to a complex problem; 
analyse risks associated with ethical concerns and justify their ethical decisions;
communicate these risks and judgements to both technical and non-technical audiences.

Teachers have the opportunity to: 

highlight a range of ethical considerations within the scope of a complex engineering project;
introduce methods for risk analysis and ethical decision-making;
link Engineering Council statements of ethical principles with real world situations;
raise students’ awareness and demonstrate the importance of the ethics learning landscape.

Learning and teaching resources:

Professional organisations:

RAEng/Engineering Council Statement of Ethical Principles

Legal regulations:

UN agency:

Towards global code of ethics for AI research

Educational resource:

Government sites:

Educational institutions:

Ethical Risk Assessment

Summary: 

IIoT is a new technology that can provide accurate condition monitoring and predict component wear rates to optimise machine performance, thereby improving the machining precision of the workpiece and reducing the production cost.

Oxconn is a company that produces auto parts. The robotic manipulators and other automation machines on the production line have been developed at considerable cost and investment, and regular production line maintenance is essential to ensure its effective operation. The current maintenance scheme is based on routine check tests which are not reliable and efficient. Therefore Oxconn has decided to install an IIoT-based machine condition monitoring system. To achieve fast responses to any machine operation issues, the machine condition data collected in real time will be transferred to a cloud server for analysis, decision making, and predictive maintenance in the future.

Dilemma – Part one – Data protection on customers’ machines:

You are a leading engineer who has been hired by Oxconn to take charge of the project on the IIoT-based machine monitoring system, including designing the infrastructure of hardware and software, writing the operation manuals, setting policies, and getting the system up and running. With your background in robotic engineering and automation, you are expected to act as a technical advisor to Oxconn and liaise with the Facilities, Security, Operation, and Maintenance departments to ensure a smooth deployment. This is the first time you have worked on a project that involves real time data collection. So as part of your preparation for the project, you need to do some preliminary research as to what best practices, guidance, and regulations apply.

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

1. Discussion: What are the legal issues relating to machine condition monitoring? Machines’ real-time data allows for the identification of production status in a factory and is therefore considered as commercial data under GDPR and the Data Protection Act (2018). Are there rules specifically for IIoT, or are they the same no matter what technology is being used? Should IIoT regulations differ in any way? Why?

2. Discussion: Sharing data is a legally and ethically complex field. Are there any stakeholders with which the data could be shared? For instance, is it acceptable to share the data with an artificial intelligence research group or with the public? Why, or why not?

3. Discussion: Under GDPR, individuals must normally consent to their personal data being processed. For machine condition data, how should consent be handled in this case?

4. Discussion: What ethical codes relate to data security and privacy in an IIoT scenario?

5. Activity: Undertake a technical activity that relates to how IIoT-based machine monitoring systems are engineered.

6. Discussion: Based on your understanding of how IIoT-based machine monitoring systems are engineered, consider what additional risks, and what kind of risks (such as financial or operational), Oxconn might incur if depending on an entirely cloud-based system. How might these risks be mitigated from a technical and non-technical perspective?

Dilemma – Part two – Computer networks security issue brought by online monitoring systems:

The project has kicked off and a senior manager requests that a user interface (UI) be established specifically for the senior management team (SMT). Through this UI, the SMT members can have access to all the real-time data via their computers or mobiles and obtain the analysis result provided by artificial intelligence technology. You realise this has implications on the risk of accessing internal operating systems via the external information interface and networks. So as part of your preparation for the project, you need to investigate what platforms can be used and what risk analysis must be taken in implementation.

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

The following activities focus on macro-ethics. They address the wider ethical contexts of projects like the industrial data acquisition system.

1. Activity: Explore different manufacturers and their approaches to safety for both machines and operators.

2. Activity: Technical integration – Undertake a technical activity related to automation engineering and information engineering.

3. Activity: Research what happens with the data collected by IIoT. Who can access this data and how can the data analysis module manipulate the data?

4. Activity: Develop a risk management register, taking considerations of the findings from Activity 3 as well as the aspect of putting in place data security protocols and relevant training for SMT.

5. Discussion/activity: Use information in the Ethical Risk Assessment guide to help students consider how ethical issues are related to the risks they have just identified.

6. Discussion: In addition to cost-benefit analysis, how can the ethical factors be considered in designing the data analysis module?

7. Activity: Debate the appropriateness of installing and using the system for the SMT.

8. Discussion: What responsibilities do engineers have in developing these technologies?

Dilemma – Part three – Security breach and legal responsibility:

At the beginning of operation, the IIoT system with AI algorithms improved the efficiency of production lines by updating the parameters in robot operation and product recipes automatically. Recently, however, the efficiency degradation was observed, and after investigation, there were suspicions that the rules/data in AI algorithms have been subtly changed. Developers, contractors, operators, technicians and managers were all brought in to find out what’s going on.

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

1. Discussion: If there has been an illegal hack of the system, what might be the motive of cyber criminals?

2. Discussion: What are the impacts on company business? How could the impact of cyber-attacks on businesses be minimised?

3. Discussion: How could threats that come from internal employees, vendors, contractors or partners be prevented?

4. Discussion: When a security breach happens, what are the legal responsibilities for developers, contractors, operators, technicians and managers?

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Author: Wendy Attwell (Engineering Professors’ Council).

Topic: Balancing personal values and professional conduct in the climate emergency.

Engineering disciplines: Civil engineering; Energy and Environmental engineering; Energy.

Ethical issues: Respect for the environment; Justice; Accountability; Social responsibility; Risk; Sustainability; Health; Public good; Respect for the law; Future generations; Societal impact.

Professional situations: Public health and safety; Communication; Law / Policy; Integrity; Legal implications; Personal/professional reputation.

Educational level: Intermediate.

Educational aim: Practicing Ethical Reasoning: the application of critical analysis to specific events in order to evaluate and respond to problems in a fair and responsible way.

Learning and teaching notes:

This case study involves an engineer who has to weigh personal values against professional codes of conduct when acting in the wake of the climate crisis. This case study allows students to explore motivations and justifications for courses of action that could be considered morally right but legally wrong.

This case study addresses two of the themes from the Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4): The Engineer and Society (acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) and Engineering Practice (the practical application of engineering concepts, tools and professional skills). To map this case study to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4 here and navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37.

The dilemma in this case is presented in three parts. If desired, a teacher can use Part one in isolation, but Parts two and three develop and complicate the concepts presented in Part one to provide for additional learning. The case study allows teachers the option to stop at multiple points for questions and/or activities, as desired.

Learners have the opportunity to:

identify underlying values of professional situations;
practise developing, defending, and delivering arguments;
debate the potential options of an ethical decision;
make and justify an ethical decision;
identify and define positions on an ethical issue;
apply codes of ethics to an engineering ethics dilemma;
consider different perspectives on an ethical issue and what values inform those perspectives;
practise professional communication related to ethical dilemmas;
identify professional responsibilities of engineers in an ethical dilemma;
determine and defend a course of action in response to an ethical dilemma;
consider how they would act in an ethical situation.

Teachers have the opportunity to:

evaluate critical thinking, argumentation, and communication skills;
highlight professional codes of ethics and their relevance to an engineering situation;
provide an opportunity for reflection;
introduce aspects of professional responsibility.

Learning and teaching resources:

Professional organisations:

Educational institutions:

Education and campaign groups:

News articles:

Summary:

Kelechi is a civil engineer in a stable job, working on the infrastructure team of a County Council that focuses on regeneration and public realm improvements. Kelechi grew up in an environment where climate change and its real impacts on people was discussed frequently. She was raised with the belief that she should live as ethically as possible, and encourage others to consider their impact on the world. These beliefs were instrumental in leading Kelechi into a career as a civil engineer, in the hope that she could use her skills and training to create a better world. In one of her engineering modules at university, Kelechi met Amanda, who encouraged her to join a student group pushing for sustainability within education and the workplace. Kelechi has had some success with this within her own job, as her employer has been willing to participate in ongoing discussions on carbon and resilience, and is open to implementing creative solutions.

But Kelechi is becoming frustrated at the lack of larger scale change in the wake of the climate emergency. Over the years she has signed petitions and written to her representatives, then watched in dismay as each campaign failed to deliver real world carbon reduction, and as the government continued to issue new licenses for fossil fuel projects. Even her own employers have failed to engage with climate advocates pushing for further changes in local policy, changes that Kelechi believes are both achievable and necessary. Kelechi wonders what else she can do to set the UK – if not the world – on a path to net zero.

Dilemma – Part one:

Scrolling through a news website, Kelechi is surprised to see a photo of her friend and ex-colleague Amanda, in a report about climate protesters being arrested. Kelechi messages Amanda to check that she’s ok, and they get into a conversation about the protests. Amanda is part of a climate protest group of STEM professionals that engages in non-violent civil disobedience. The group believes that by staging direct action protests they can raise awareness of the climate emergency and ultimately effect systemic change.

Amanda tries to convince Kelechi to join the group and protest with them. Amanda references the second principle of the Statement of Ethical Principles published by the Engineering Council and the Royal Academy of Engineering: “Respect for life, law, the environment and public good.” Amanda believes that it is ok to ignore the tenet about respect for the law in an effort to safeguard the other three, and says that there have been plenty of unjust laws throughout history that have needed to be protested in order for them to be changed for the public good. She also references another part of the Statement: that engineers should ”maximise the public good and minimise both actual and potential adverse effects for their own and succeeding generations”. Amanda believes that by protesting she is actually fulfilling her duty to uphold these principles.

Kelechi isn’t sure. She has never knowingly broken the law before, and is worried about being arrested. Kelechi consults her friend Max, who is a director of a professional engineering institution, of which Kelechi is a member. Max, whilst she has some sympathies for the aims of the group, immediately warns Kelechi away from the protests. “Forget about being arrested; you could lose your job and end your career.”

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

1. Discussion: What personal values will Kelechi have to weigh in order to decide whether or not to take part in a civil disobedience protest?

2. Discussion: Consider the tenet of the Statement of Ethical Principles “Respect for life, law, the environment and public good.” To what extent (if at all) do the four tenets of this ethical principle come into conflict with one another in this situation? Can you think of other professional situations in which they might conflict?

3. Discussion: Is breaking the law always unethical? Are there circumstances when breaking the law might be the ethical thing to do in the context of engineering practice? What might these circumstances be?

4. Discussion: To what extent (if at all) does the content of the Statement of Ethical Principles make a case for or against being part of a protest where the law is broken?

5. Discussion: Following on from the previous question – does it make a difference what is being protested, if a law is broken? For example, is protesting fossil fuels that lead to climate change different from protesting unsafe but legal building practices, such as cladding that causes a fire risk? Why?

6. Activity: Research other professional codes of engineering: do these have clear guidelines for this situation? Assemble a bibliography of other professional codes or standards that might be relevant to this scenario.

7. Discussion: What are the potential personal and professional risks or benefits for Kelechi if she takes part in a protest where the law is broken?

8. Discussion: From a professional viewpoint, should Kelechi take part in the protest? What about from a personal viewpoint?

Dilemma – Part two:

After much deliberation, Kelechi decides to join the STEM protest group. Her first protest is part of a direct action to blockade a busy London bridge. To her own surprise, she finds herself volunteering to be one of two protesters who will climb the cables of the bridge. She is reassured by the risk assessment undertaken by the group before selecting her. She has climbing experience (although only from her local leisure centre), and safety equipment is provided.

On the day of the protest, Kelechi scales the bridge. The police are called and the press arrive. Kelechi stays suspended from the bridge for 36 hours, during which time all traffic waiting to cross the bridge is halted or diverted. Eventually, Kelechi is convinced that she should climb down, and the police arrest all of the protesters.

Later on, Kelechi is contacted by members of the press, asking for a statement about her reason for taking part in the protest. Kelechi has seen that press coverage of the protest is so far overwhelmingly negative, and poll results suggest that the majority of the public see the protesters’ actions as selfish, inconvenient, and potentially dangerous, although some have sympathy for their cause. “What if someone died because an ambulance couldn’t use the bridge?” asks someone via social media. “What about the five million deaths a year already caused by climate change?” asks another, citing a recent news article.

Kelechi would like to take the opportunity to make her voice heard – after all, that’s why she joined the protest group – but she isn’t sure whether she should mention her profession. Would it add credibility to her views? Or would she be lambasted because of it?

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

1. Discussion: What professional principles or codes is Kelechi breaking or upholding by scaling the bridge?

2. Activity: Compare the professional and ethical codes for civil engineers in the UK and elsewhere. How might they differ in their guidance for an engineer in this situation?

3. Activity: Conduct a risk assessment for a) the protesters who have chosen to be part of this scenario, and b) members of the public who are incidentally part of this scenario.

4. Discussion: Who would be responsible if, as a direct or indirect result of the protesters blocking the bridge, a) a member of the public died, or b) a protester died? Who is responsible for the excess deaths caused directly or indirectly by climate change?

5. Discussion: How can Kelechi best convey to the press and public the quantitative difference between the short-term disruption caused by protests and the long-term disruption caused by climate change?

6. Discussion: Should Kelechi give a statement to the press? If so, should she discuss her profession? What would you do in her situation?

7. Activity: Write a statement for Kelechi to release to the press.

8. Discussion: Suggest alternative ways of protesting that would have as much impact in the news but potentially cause less disruption to the public.

Dilemma – Part three:

Kelechi decides to speak to the press. She talks about the STEM protest group, and she specifically cites the Statement of Ethical Principles as her reason for taking part in the protest: “As a professional civil engineer, I have committed to acting within our code of ethics, which requires that I have respect for life, the environment and public good. I will not just watch lives be destroyed if I can make a difference with my actions.”

Whilst her statement gets lots of press coverage, Kelechi is called out by the media and the public because of her profession. The professional engineering institution of which Kelechi is a member receives several complaints about her actions, some from members of the public and some from other members of the institution. “She’s bringing the civil engineering profession into disrepute,” says one complaint. “She’s endangering the public,” says another.

It’s clear that the institution must issue a press release on the situation, and it falls to Kelechi’s friend Max, as a director of the institution, to decide what kind of statement to put out, and to recommend whether Kelechi’s membership of the institution could – or should – be revoked. Max looks closely at the institution’s Code of Professional Conduct. One part of the Code says that “Members should do nothing that in any way could diminish the high standing of the profession. This includes any aspect of a member’s personal conduct which could have a negative impact upon the profession.” Another part of the Code says: “All members shall have full regard for the public interest, particularly in relation to matters of health and safety, and in relation to the well-being of future generations.”

As well as the institution’s Code of Conduct, Max considers the historic impact of civil resistance in achieving change, and how those engaging in such protests – such as the suffragettes in the early 1900s – could be viewed negatively at the time, whilst later being lauded for their efforts. Max wonders at what point the tide of public opinion begins to turn, and what causes this change. She knows that she has to consider the potential impacts of the statement that she puts out in the press release; how it might affect not just her friend, but the institution’s members, other potential protesters, and also her own career.

Optional STOP for questions and activities:

1. Discussion: Historically, has civil resistance been instrumental or incidental in achieving systemic change? Research to find out if and when engineers have been involved in civil resistance in the past.

2. Discussion: Could Kelechi’s actions, and the results of her actions, be interpreted as having “a negative impact on the profession”?

3. Discussion: Looking at Kelechi’s actions, and the institution’s code of conduct, should Max recommend that Kelechi’s membership be revoked?

4. Discussion: Which parts of the quoted code of conduct could Max emphasise or omit in her press release, and how might this affect the tone of her statement and how it could be interpreted?

5. Activity: Debate which position Max should take in her press release: condemning the actions of the protesters as being against the institution’s code of conduct; condoning the actions as being within the code of conduct; remaining as neutral as possible in her statement.

6. Discussion: What are the wider impacts of Max’s decision to either remain neutral, or to stand with or against Kelechi in her actions?

7. Activity: Write a press release for the institution, taking one of the above positions.

8. Discussion: Which other authorities or professional bodies might be impacted by Max’s decision?

9. Discussion: What are the potential impacts of Max’s press release on the following stakeholders, and what decisions or actions might they take because of it? Kelechi; Kelechi’s employer; members of the STEM protest group; the institution; institution members; government policymakers; the media; the public; the police; fossil fuel businesses; Max’s employers; Max herself.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Let us know what you think of our website

Downloads:

<img decoding="async" class="wp-image-114605 alignright" src="http://epc.ac.uk/uploads/2023/07/Sustainability-1.jpg" alt="" width="280" height="144" />