Engineering Ethics

Chapter 5: The Ethical CYCLE

Samir R. Traboulsi, PhD, P.Eng.

Fall 2021
 Problems
• A Moral Problem has two or more positive
moral values or norms that cannot be fully
realized simultaneously.
• A Moral Dilemma is a specific Moral Problem
where the agent has a limited number of
options for action and that doing any of which
entails a moral wrong.
• Cycle on page 139

Spring 2020
Moral questions

Spring 2020
 Ethical Cycle

Moral
Problem Options for
Problem
Analysis Action
Statement

Moral
Ethical
Reflection Acceptable
Evaluation
Action

Spring 2020
 Moral questions
• Must meet 3 conditions:
– Clearly state the moral problem
– Clearly state who must act
– Articulate the moral nature of the problem
• What is the moral question in CHALLENGER?
• In the Gilban Gold?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb0wXGkFl
-8
Spring 2020
EXAMPLE

HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS

Spring 2020
 The case
• David Weber: 23 year old civil engineer
• Role: responsible for safety improvements for
District 7 (area composed of 8 counties)
• Uncommitted budget: near the end of the
fiscal year, the district engineer tells David
that 50,000$ is available due to delay in
delivery of a new snow plow.
• David is asked to propose a project that can be
contracted before the end of the year for 50k
Spring 2020
 Options for projects
• David narrows down the list to two projects
– Site A: intersection Main/Oak in the major city of
the District
– Site B: intersection Grape/Fir in a rural area of the
district

Spring 2020
nos A B
Main Road traffic (veh/d) 20,000 5,000
Minor Road Traffic(veh/d) 4,000 1,000
fatality 2 1
injury 6 2
PD 40 12
percent A B
fatality reduction 50 50
injury reduction 50 60
PD reduction 25 -25
nos A B
fatality reduction 1 0.5
injury reduction 3 1.2
PD reduction 10 -3
Spring 2020
 savings in monetary terms
A B A B
NSC NSC NHSTA NHSTA
fatality $52,000 $26,000 $235,000 $117,500
injury $9,000 $3,600 $33,600 $13,440
PD $4,400 -$1,320 $5,000 -$1,500
$65,400 $28,280 $273,600 $129,440

With THESE Figures, PD A B

What would your fatality 19 9.5
recommendation be? injury 21 7
PD 40 12
total PD
A or B 80 28.5

The equivalent cost:

$ NSC $35,200 $12,540
$ NHSTA
Spring 2020 $40,000 $14,250
 Moral Problem Statement
• Which of the two improvements should David
recommend?
• Why is it moral?
– Consequentialist view: @ Site A: reduces largest
number of fatalities
– Deontologist view: @ Site B: fairer to reduce risk
for those subjected to highest risk

Spring 2020
 Problem Analysis
• Relevant Facts,
• Stakeholders,
• Interests, and
• Values.

Spring 2020
 Facts
• Relevant versus irrelevant
• Obvious versus concealed/unknown
• Significance of facts
• Agreement on facts
• Completeness of factual details
• Awareness of all relevant facts
• ➔ is the moral dilemma truly moral?
• ➔ or is it a conflict over technical or factual matters:
hardship in resolving factual matters

Spring 2020
 Stakeholders
• David, a fresh graduate
• Drivers + passengers
• Tax payers
• City/municipality

Spring 2020
 Stakeholders/interests
Stakeholder Interests
David
Drivers + Passengers in Site Safety, Speed, Min Cost
A (tax payers)
Drivers + Passengers in Site Safety, Speed, Min Cost
B (tax payers)
Drivers + Passengers in A & Safety, Speed, Min Cost
B (tax payers)
Tax Payers Min cost
City/Municipality Max safety for Min Cost
Spring 2020
 values
• Safety
• Fairness
• Public Welfare (evident through Lower Cost)

Spring 2020
 Options for Action
• Traffic Signals in Site A
• Traffic Signals in Site B
• Any other option?

Spring 2020
 Ethical Cycle

Moral
Problem Options for
Problem
Analysis Action
Statement

Moral
Ethical
Reflection Acceptable
Evaluation
Action

Spring 2020
 Ethical Evaluation
• Common Sense
– Look at relevant values
– What is most dominant value?
– Best option is the one that promotes that value in
absolute numbers ➔ site A
– OR
– Best option is the one that promotes that value in
relative numbers ➔ site B

Spring 2020
 Ethical Evaluation
• Utilitarianism
– Calculate expected social utility using a cost-
benefit analysis
– The pricing schemes suggested provide monetary
values for pleasure and pain
– What about uncertainty??

Spring 2020
 Utilitarianism without uncertainty
savings in monetary terms

A B A B

NSC NSC NHSTA NHSTA

fatality $52,000 $26,000 $235,000 $117,500

injury $9,000 $3,600 $33,600 $13,440

PD $4,400 -$1,320 $5,000 -$1,500

$65,400 $28,280 $273,600 $129,440

Spring 2020
 Utilitarianism with uncertainty
1. Rely on available data for Decision Making ➔
you may be relying on the wrong assumptions.
2. Validate accuracy and applicability of available
data on sites A & B before deciding ➔ this
consumes considerable amount of time that is
not available.
3. Take some engineered guesses and assumptions
to render the analysis more valid ➔ such
assumptions must have some form of accuracy.
Spring 2020
 Utilitarianism with uncertainty
1. Assume the averages of the results of NSC
and NHTSTA
A. = (65400+273,600)/2 = 169,500$
B. = (58,400+129440)/2 = 78,860$
2. Assume some percentage of inaccuracy of
data
– Old data (1975)
– Data collected at national level
– Data may not be representative of your District

Spring 2020
 $ 169,500

Data accurate $ ????

$ (50,000) ??%
A EMV = $ ??????
$ ?????
Data $ ????
inaccurate
??%
SITE
A OR B $ 78,860
Data accurate $ ????
??%

B EMV = $ ??????
$ ?????
$ (50,000) Data $ ????
inaccurate
??%

Spring 2020
 Utilitarianism with uncertainty
1. Need probability of uncertainty of data
2. Need the value of the outcome should the
data be inaccurate… what is the accurate
outcome…
3. By trial and error, (goal-seek) we find the
outcomes that tilt the results in favor of site
B!

Spring 2020
 $ 169,500 =169,500-50,000

Data accurate $ 119,500

$ (50,000) 60%
A EMV = $ 136,000
$ 85,750
Data $ 35,750
inaccurate
40%
SITE
A OR B $ 78,860
Data accurate $ 28,860
60%

B EMV = $ 139,516
$ 230,500
$ (50,000) Data 180,500
$ 280,500
inaccurate
40%

EMV = Savings 1 * Pb 1 + Savings 2 * Pb 2

Spring 2020
 Ethical Evaluation
• Kantian Theory: fairness
• People deserve Equal concern and respect
• People should be subjected to the same
maximum risk factor
• People should receive the same amount of
protection and safety

Spring 2020
 Ethical Evaluation
nos A B
Main Road traffic (veh/d) 20,000 5,000
Minor Road Traffic(veh/d) 4,000 1,000
fatality 2 1
injury 6 2
PD 40 12
RISK A B
Fatality
(1 person per vehicle) 2.3 E-07 4.6E-07
injury 6.9E-07 9.2E-07
PD 46E-07 55.2E-07
Spring 2020
 Reflection
• Moral Deliberation (preferably collective)
– To expose your analysis to debate and criticism
– To collect additional data and info from other
stakeholders
– To listen to other analyses and choices
• Should not be affected by authority/power
• Should be decided based on arguments
• Should be sincere and open
• People should argue their points of view
Spring 2020
 Walkway Disaster
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=walkway+hyatt+disas
ter&view=detail&mid=68DFFF37B0D0E5A1178068DFFF37B0D
0E5A11780&FORM=VIRE

• SITUATION:
• July 17, 1981
• Hyatt Regency, Kansas City: 32 Ton Suspended Walkway
used as a dancing floor
• Failure of rods & beams ➔ Collapse of walkway during
dance
➔ 114 killed
➔ 200 injured

Spring 2020
 Why
1. Failing to meet the requirements of the
Kansas City Building Code by the designers
2. Change of the walkway construction by the
contractor because it was difficult to
construct as designed
3. Engineer approval of the drawings without
noticing the change
4. Lack of communication between the designer
and contractor
Spring 2020
 Walkway Disaster

as designed as built

Spring 2020
 Walkway Disaster
• 4 years later:
– Structural engineers found guilty of
• gross negligence, Misconduct, and unprofessional conduct
• One day before ruling, ASCE announced policy
holding structural engineers liable for all
aspects of structural safety of their designs.
• Project Manager found guilty of “a conscious
indifference to his professional duties…who
was primarily responsible for the preparation
of design drawings and review of shop
drawings…”

Spring 2020
 Walkway Disaster
• The chief engineer failed to closely monitor
the PM… “a conscious indifference to his
professional duties as an engineer of record.”
• Design responsibility in the collapse lies if
faulty engineering design.

Spring 2020
 Walkway Disaster
• ANALYSIS:
• Liability apportionment;
• Liability of Engineers and their Subordinates;
• Role of ASCE in articulating engineer responsibilities.
• QUERIES:
• What should be the role of professional societies in
such matters?
• What impact does the delivery method have on
liability apportionment?
• Insurance?

Spring 2020
 Chapter Summary
• Moral problem solving is a difficult and complex
process because of the ill structured.
• Solving them require both analytical and systhetic
reasoning and creativity: Ethical Cycle
• a. Formulation of the moral problem
• b. Analyzing the problem in terms of stakeholders
and their interests, values and facts.
• c. Identifying and devising options for actions with
the help of strategies: B & W and the cooperation
strategy.
• d. Ethical evaluation of the various options for action
with the help of various ethical frameworks.

Spring 2020
 Chapter Summary
• e. Reflection on the outcomes of the evaluation
phase, resulting in a well-argued choice for one of
the options for action:
• Wide reflective equilibrium approach aims at
coherence between moralbeoliefs at three levels:
i. considered moral judgements
ii. Moral principles &
iii. Background theories

Spring 2020