Engineering Ethics: Risk and Safety

Course Learning Outcomes

• Identify ethical and professional issues related to personal integrity, professional conduct, society, and the environment.
• Apply reasoning to ethically-based discriminating decisions considering legal implications and liabilities.

Contents Overview

• Key discussion points: Safety and Risk, Assessing and Reducing Risk, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Safe Exit.

Engineering as Experimentation

• "A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for," which highlights the need to take calculated risks in engineering. This quote serves as a metaphor emphasizing the importance of innovation and risk-taking in engineering practices, suggesting that while safety is a priority, stagnation can hinder progress and development.

Risk and Safety

• An engineer's most important duty is protecting public safety and well-being, which includes being proactive in identifying and mitigating potential hazards to ensure that engineering practices do not compromise the safety of individuals and communities.
• Safety entails being free from harm or injury, as well as preventing any potential risk to oneself and others. Understanding the various facets of safety within the engineering context is essential to develop effective designs and solutions.
• Risk is defined as the likelihood of experiencing harm or loss, and it encompasses both quantitative and qualitative aspects, making it a crucial factor to consider in all engineering decisions.

Risk vs Safety Definitions

• The definitions of safety and risk are inherently interconnected; an understanding of one is vital to interpret the other. A failure to acknowledge the relationship between the two can lead to miscalculations in risk management.
• Risky behavior occurs when engaging in activities that expose individuals to potential dangers or uncertainties. This highlights the necessity for engineers to evaluate the risk associated with various engineering practices.
• Something is deemed unsafe if it encompasses substantial risk, thus underscoring the fundamental principle that engineers must continuously assess the safety of their designs and materials.

Absolute Safety

• Absolute safety, characterized by entirely risk-free activities or products, or achieving a level of safety that satisfies every individual, is often seen as unattainable and excessively costly. Recognizing the limits of safety is essential in engineering to prioritize feasible solutions.
• Understanding the meaning of safety is paramount; being well-versed in safety principles enables engineers to design effectively while embracing necessary risks.

Safety Definitions

• Safety can be articulated as Acceptable Risk, which refers to the level of risk that is considered acceptable given the circumstances and informed consent of those involved.
• Safety may also be described simply as the Absence of risk, highlighting a situation where potential dangers have been eliminated.
• Furthermore, safety can be defined as conditions where risks are fully known and deemed acceptable by a reasonable person based on comprehensive assessments.

Lowrance Definition of Safety

• A thing is deemed safe if its associated risks are considered acceptable, emphasizing that safety judgments are, in essence, value judgments based on the perspectives of individuals or groups.
• Underestimating Risks: The first scenario involves underestimating risks, for example, when someone uses a toaster obtained from a garage sale without assessing its safety, reflecting a common complacency toward everyday risks.
• Overestimating Risks: In the second scenario, risks may be overestimated, illustrated by an irrational fear of fluoride in drinking water despite scientific consensus on its safety; this exemplifies how public perception can skew understanding of risk.
• No Judgment: The third situation arises when a group collectively makes no judgment about associated risks, leading to potentially neglectful outcomes.

Concept of Safety

• Equating safety with the absence of risk isn't practical in engineering, as it can lead to overzealous risk aversion that could stifle innovation and capability.
• A thing can be considered safe only if its risks are fully known and judged acceptable by reasonable individuals taking into account their values and experiences.
• Safety is often characterized in degrees or relative terms, hence a scale or spectrum of safety may be used to communicate various levels of risk associated with different engineering practices or products.
• Comparing safety levels involves contrasting risks in relation to something else while taking into consideration the relevant data; this process is central to informed decision-making in engineering.

Defining Risk

• Risk is defined as the potential for something unwanted and harmful to occur, making it a fundamental consideration for engineers in every project.
• William D. Rowe provides a definition that reflects the complexities involved, identifying risk as the "potential for the realization of unwanted consequences from impending events." This perspective underscores the unpredictability of risk in various contexts.
• Technology-related risks encompass a plethora of concerns, including bodily harm, economic loss, and environmental degradation, thereby necessitating careful evaluation from a holistic standpoint.

Acceptability of Risk

• According to William D. Rowe, a risk is acceptable when those affected are no longer worried about its potential consequences. This observation points to the importance of public perception in evaluating risk acceptability.
• Apprehensiveness concerning risk can depend on various factors, including:
  • Whether the risk is accepted voluntarily; typically, individuals perceive voluntarily taken risks as less burdensome compared to involuntary risks.
  • Knowledge of the probabilities of harm or benefit, which plays a crucial role in shaping attitudes toward risk.
  • Job-related pressures or external influences that can affect decision-making regarding risk acceptance.
  • Immediacy of the effects resulting from the risky activity; immediate consequences tend to be perceived more acutely than delayed ones.
  • Whether potential victims can be identified beforehand, which often impacts how risks are considered and judged socially.

Subjective risks

• Numerous types of risks require careful assessment, including:
  • Voluntary vs. involuntary; people often judge risks more favorably when they have control over their exposure.
  • Short-term vs. long-term consequences, where immediate risks might receive more attention as they have immediate effects on individuals.
  • Expected probability, particularly focusing on statistical likelihoods as well as perceived probabilities.
  • Reversible vs. irreversible effects; irreversible consequences tend to draw more caution and concern.
  • Delayed vs. immediate effects, where the timeline of risk manifestation can alter perception and responses.

Control and Voluntarism

• Risks taken voluntarily are generally perceived as less worrisome than those imposed involuntarily; personal agency plays a significant role in risk assessment.
• Engineering as social experimentation suggests that individuals often favor being subjects of their own experiments rather than passive participants, emphasizing the importance of autonomy in risk perception.
• Control is closely tied to voluntarism; the need for perceived control can mitigate fears associated with various risks.
• Activities like motorbiking, skiing, and bungee jumping are usually performed under the assumption of participant control which can lead to a higher acceptance of risk.
• These thrill-inducing sports rarely result in innocent bystanders being injured, indicating that managed risks can be acceptable within certain contexts.

Information Effect Risk Assessments

• The manner in which information is presented for decision-making significantly impacts how risks are perceived; communication strategies can shape public acceptance or rejection of risks.
• Changes in information presentation can dramatically alter preferences regarding how to address perceived dangers, suggesting the importance of context in risk communication.

Risk assessments example

• When confronted with a disease outbreak projected to result in 600 fatalities, two separate programs are considered:
  • Program A saves 200 people, presenting a seemingly straightforward solution.
  • Program B offers a 1/3 chance to save all 600 people while posing a 2/3 chance of saving none, indicating a more complex risk-reward scenario. Preferences for these choices are recorded and analyzed.
• A notable 72% of participants opted for Program A while only 28% chose Program B. This demonstrates that the choice of saving 200 lives led many to select a lower-risk option rather than gamble on a probabilistic outcome to save more.
• If Program C is implemented, it would lead to the death of 400 people; however, if Program D is adopted, there is a 1/3 probability of no deaths occurring and a 2/3 chance that all 600 individuals will die. Participants are then asked to choose between these different programs.
• 22% chose Program C, reflecting the same choice pattern as Program A, while 78% favored Program D, which mirrors the characteristics of Program B, showcasing how perceived risk affects decision-making.

The Experiment

• Options deemed as leading to secure gains tend to be preferred over riskier alternatives that may yield probabilistic outcomes.
• Additionally, options that emphasize potential losses are often avoided in favor of perceived chances for success, further illustrating human tendencies toward risk aversion.
• Individuals show a stronger inclination to mitigate sure losses than to seize opportunities for potential gains, indicating a psychological bias in risk assessment.

Job-Related Risks

• In many instances, employees may find themselves compelled to accept available jobs without being fully aware of possible exposure to toxic substances or various dangers associated with the work environment, which emphasizes systemic issues in job safety.
• Unions and occupational health regulations play an essential role in safeguarding workers against severe risks, suggesting a collective responsibility to ensure workplace safety; however, workplace standards frequently lag behind those established for the general public.

Magnitude and Proximity

• Future risks may be downplayed due to a phenomenon known as "out of sight, out of mind" thinking, where individuals are less likely to consider risks that will manifest far in the future.
• Future predictions are often flagged with lower probabilities in discussions, leading to a discounting of potential consequences.
• Moreover, there's an inclination to believe that effective countermeasures will eventually be discovered, which may lead to complacency.
• Engineers encounter challenges stemming from:
  • An overly optimistic perspective towards familiar elements, leading to an underestimation of associated risks.

Assessing and Reducing Risk

• Enhancing safety in engineered products frequently results in increased production costs, placing pressure on engineering practices to balance safety with economic viability.
• The formula for Product Cost comprises Primary and Secondary elements.
• The Primary Cost typically refers to direct manufacturing costs, which include raw materials, labor, and overhead.

Secondary Costs Assessment

• Products are often associated with secondary costs:
  • Warranty expenses, which may arise from product malfunctions or defects over a specified period.
  • A loss of customer goodwill due to product-related injuries can severely damage a company's reputation and future sales.
  • Lawsuits may surface following product failures that lead to injury, representing significant legal costs and potential settlement payouts.
  • Manufacturing downtime resulting from safety recalls or redesign efforts can incur substantial financial losses.

Four Safety Criteria For Engineers

• Engineers must always comply with applicable laws and regulations, ensuring that their practices meet legal and safety standards.
• Meeting accepted engineering practice encompasses following industry standards set by professional societies and regulatory bodies.
• Exploring safer alternative designs is imperative, as innovation and safety should go hand in hand within engineering practice.
• Engineers must predict consumer misuses to design in such a way that minimizes related risks; understanding potential user behavior is critical for ensuring safety.

Designing for Safety

• Define the problem, identifying the specific needs, requirements, and constraints; a thorough understanding of these factors is fundamental to effective engineering design.
• Generate multiple potential solutions to address the problem, fostering creativity and exploration of various approaches.
• Analyze the pros and cons of each solution to ensure that potential trade-offs are understood and assessed.
• Test, select, and implement the best solution based on the analysis, which should also include consideration of safety and feasibility.

Uncertainties in Design

• Risks persist particularly when information isn't freely shared, especially in scenarios where the cost of rectifying an issue exceeds the potential costs of failure, leading to a cover-up of known problems.
• Problems and their causes may be concealed following legal settlements through nondisclosure agreements, which could prevent future learning and safety improvements.
• Moreover, the introduction of new applications of existing technologies or materials can render previously collected data less relevant, presenting a significant challenge for engineers.
• Risk is generally not the result of intentional decisions; rather, it arises from uncertainties associated with design, manufacturing, and sales processes.

Design Factors Continued

• Uncertainties in design may pertain to the applications of certain technologies or materials, requiring rigorous evaluation to mitigate risks effectively.
• Engineers utilize a "factor of safety" to account for uncertainties related to materials, components, and operating conditions; this factor acts as a buffer against potential failures.
• The safety factor is specifically crucial for mitigating risks posed by excessive load or stress when designs do not perform as initially intended, ensuring that sufficient margins are maintained for safety.

Risk-Benefit Analysis

• In risk-benefit assessments, risks and benefits are often assigned dollar amounts; the pursuit of the most favorable ratio becomes a guiding principle in decision-making.
• This process can be challenging due to:
  • The inherent difficulty in accurately assigning these risks can lead to discrepancies in understanding the true cost of risks.
  • Potential misuse of techniques in risk assessment can skew outcome expectations.
• Analysis must effectively balance product worth against the identified risks, taking into account both context and future implications; future risks and benefits should also be examined carefully to inform productive decision-making.

Risk-Benefit Analysis Focuses on Project Advisability

• The risk-benefit analysis, akin to cost-benefit analysis, aims to evaluate the advisability of pursuing specific projects or designs from various perspectives, ultimately guiding informed and responsible engineering practices.

Designing Safe Exits

• Completely safe, fail-proof products are almost impossible to achieve in practical engineering scenarios due to the unpredictable nature of real-world applications.
• When a product fails:
  • It should fail safely to minimize danger to users and surroundings, ensuring that failure modes are understood and accounted for in the design.
  • It should be able to be safely abandoned, leading to the creation of protocols that facilitate safe disengagement in the event of a failure.
  • Users should have the means to escape safely, reinforcing the importance of exit strategies and user safety mechanisms in engineering design.
• Ensuring a safe exit is an essential engineering practice, intertwined with the overall commitment to safety throughout the design and manufacturing processes.
• The provision of sound engineering is thus an integral part of the procedure, supporting both public safety and confidence in engineered systems.