Sustainable Engineering Science for Resolving Wicked Problems

Because wicked problems are beyond the scope of normal, industrial-age engineering science, sustainability problems will require reform of current engineering science and technology practices. We assert that, while pluralism concerning use of the term sustainability is likely to persist, universities should continue to cultivate research and education programs specifically devoted to sustainable engineering science, an enterprise that is formally demarcated from business-as-usual and systems optimization approaches. Advancing sustainable engineering science requires a shift in orientation away from reductionism and intellectual specialization towards integrative approaches to science, education, and technology that: (1) draw upon an ethical awareness that extends beyond the usual bounds of professional ethics or responsible conduct of research to include macroethics, (2) adopt anticipatory and adaptive approaches to unintended consequences resulting from technological innovation that result in more resilient systems, and (3) cultivate interactional expertise to facilitate cross-disciplinary exchange. Unfortunately, existing education and research training programs are ill-equipped to prepare scientists and engineers to operate effectively in a wicked problems milieu. Therefore, it is essential to create new programs of graduate education that will train scientists and engineers to become sustainable engineering science experts equipped to recognize and grapple with the macro-ethical, adaptive, and cross-disciplinary challenges embedded in their technical research and development programs.

[1]  W. Clark,et al.  Sustainability science: The emerging research program , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  T. Seager,et al.  Beyond eco-efficiency: A resilience perspective , 2008 .

[3]  P. Schulze Engineering within ecological constraints , 1996 .

[4]  Fu Zhao,et al.  A resilience perspective on biofuel production , 2011, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[5]  J. Lovelock,et al.  Halogenated Hydrocarbons in and over the Atlantic , 1973, Nature.

[6]  E. Woodhouse,et al.  Science policies for reducing societal inequities , 2007 .

[7]  R. Ayres,et al.  Strong versus weak sustainability: Economics, natural sciences, and consilience , 2001 .

[8]  J. Fiksel Sustainability and Resilience: Toward a Systems Approach , 2006, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[9]  M. Molina,et al.  Chlorofluoromethanes in the Environment , 1975 .

[10]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  The sustainability spectrum and the sciences of sustainability , 2008 .

[11]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  Experiential teaching strategies for ethical reasoning skills relevant to sustainability , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology.

[12]  S. Iijima Helical microtubules of graphitic carbon , 1991, Nature.

[13]  J. Schnoor,et al.  Sustainability science and engineering: the emergence of a new metadiscipline. , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[14]  John D Graham,et al.  The Benefits and Costs of New Fuels and Engines for Light‐Duty Vehicles in the United States , 2008, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[15]  Michael E. Gorman,et al.  Trading zones and interactional expertise , 2007 .

[16]  H. M. Collins,et al.  Tacit and Explicit Knowledge , 2010 .

[17]  Thomas L. Theis,et al.  A life cycle framework for the investigation of environmentally benign nanoparticles and products , 2011 .

[18]  W. Clark Sustainability Science: A room of its own , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  Hartmut Bossel,et al.  Policy assessment and simulation of actor orientation for sustainable development , 2000 .

[20]  J. Lovelock,et al.  Atmospheric Fluorine Compounds as Indicators of Air Movements , 1971, Nature.

[21]  S. Connelly Mapping Sustainable Development as a Contested Concept , 2007 .

[22]  S. Dovers Sustainability: Demands on Policy , 1996, Journal of Public Policy.

[23]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[24]  Karel Mulder,et al.  EDUCATING ENGINEERS FOR/IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? WHAT WE KNEW, WHAT WE LEARNED, AND WHAT WE SHOULD LEARN , 2009 .

[25]  Arnim Wiek,et al.  Moving Forward on Competence in Sustainability Research and Problem Solving , 2011 .

[26]  David B. Wilson,et al.  Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life: A Philosophical Inquiry by Albert Borgmann (review) , 1986 .

[27]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  A thermodynamic basis for evaluating environmental policy trade-offs , 2003 .

[28]  K. Takeuchi,et al.  Sustainability science: building a new discipline , 2006 .

[29]  Brad Allenby Macroethical systems and sustainability science , 2006 .

[30]  Robert U. Ayres,et al.  The price-value paradox , 1998 .

[31]  L. Gunderson,et al.  Adaptive management and adaptive governance in the everglades ecosystem , 2007 .

[32]  W. B. Gallie IX.—Essentially Contested Concepts , 1956 .

[33]  B. Norton Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management , 2005 .

[34]  Vicki Stone,et al.  Toxicology of nanoparticles: A historical perspective , 2007 .

[35]  Thomas P. Seager,et al.  A taxonomy of metrics for testing the industrial ecology hypotheses and application to design of freezer insulation , 2004 .

[36]  Lindsay Chappell,et al.  Slump shows who's flexible, who's not , 2009 .

[37]  Arnim Wiek,et al.  User engagement in sustainability research , 2011 .

[38]  Arnim Wiek,et al.  Educating Students in Real-world Sustainability Research: Vision and Implementation , 2011 .

[39]  M. L. Healy,et al.  Environmental Assessment of Single‐Walled Carbon Nanotube Processes , 2008 .

[40]  Thomas P Seager,et al.  Lessons in risk‐ versus resilience‐based design and management , 2011, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[41]  A. M. Fet,et al.  Use of life cycle assessments to evaluate the environmental footprint of contaminated sediment remediation. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[42]  Rodolphe Durand Rethinking Expertise , 2008 .

[43]  T. Wonnacott,et al.  The Ultimate Resource 2 , 1982 .

[44]  Herman E. Daly,et al.  Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development , 1997 .

[45]  W. B. Gallie Essentially Contested Concepts , 1994, The Importance of Language.

[46]  S. Funtowicz,et al.  Science for the Post-Normal Age , 1993, Commonplace.

[47]  Arnim Wiek,et al.  Sustainable governance of emerging technologies—Critical constellations in the agent network of nanotechnology , 2007 .

[48]  M. Gorman Levels of Expertise and Trading Zones , 2002 .

[49]  G. Oberdörster,et al.  Nanotoxicology: An Emerging Discipline Evolving from Studies of Ultrafine Particles , 2005, Environmental health perspectives.

[50]  David H. Guston,et al.  Innovation policy: not just a jumbo shrimp , 2008, Nature.

[51]  Richard Nelson,et al.  Three rules for technological fixes , 2008, Nature.

[52]  Aidan Davison Technology and the Contested Meanings of Sustainability , 2001 .

[53]  T. Seager,et al.  Developing a pedagogy of interactional expertise for sustainability education , 2011, Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology.

[54]  G. Brundtland,et al.  Our common future , 1987 .

[55]  R. Kasperson,et al.  Sustainability Science , 2019, Critical Skills for Environmental Professionals.