Advertisement

Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 23, Issue 6, pp 1775–1790 | Cite as

Engineering Students’ Views of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Case Study from Petroleum Engineering

  • Jessica M. SmithEmail author
  • Carrie J. McClelland
  • Nicole M. Smith
Original Paper

Abstract

The mining and energy industries present unique challenges to engineers, who must navigate sometimes competing responsibilities and codes of conduct, such as personal senses of right and wrong, professional ethics codes, and their employers’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the current dominant framework used by industry to conceptualize firms’ responsibilities to their stakeholders, yet has it plays a relatively minor role in engineering ethics education. In this article, we report on an interdisciplinary pedagogical intervention in a petroleum engineering seminar that sought to better prepare engineering undergraduate students to critically appraise the strengths and limitations of CSR as an approach to reconciling the interests of industry and communities. We find that as a result of the curricular interventions, engineering students were able to expand their knowledge of the social, rather than simply environmental and economic dimensions of CSR. They remained hesitant, however, in identifying the links between those social aspects of CSR and their actual engineering work. The study suggests that CSR may be a fruitful arena from which to illustrate the profoundly sociotechnical dimensions of the engineering challenges relevant to students’ future careers.

Keywords

Engineering ethics Corporate social responsibility Petroleum engineering Pedagogical strategies Student learning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1540298. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Research with Human Subjects

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Babidge, S. (2013). “Socios”: The contested morality of “partnerships” in indigenous community–mining company relations, Northern Chile. The Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology, 18(2), 274–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baillie, C. (2011). A multidisciplinary approach to curriculum development for engineering graduates who are socially and environmentally just. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.Google Scholar
  3. Benson, P., & Kirsch, S. (2010). Capitalism and the politics of resignation. Current Anthropology , 51(4), 459–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas: critical perspectives on corporate social responsibility in the developing world. International Affairs, 81(3), 499–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bucciarelli, L. L. (2008). Ethics and engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 33(2), 141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burningham, K., Barnett, J., & Walker, G. (2015). An array of deficits: Unpacking NIMBY discourses in wind energy developers’ conceptualizations of their local opponents. Society & Natural Resources, 28(3), 246–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Catalano, G. D. (2006). Engineering ethics: Peace, justice, and the earth. Synthesis Lectures on Engineers, Technology, and Society, 1(1), 1–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cech, E. (2014). Culture of disengagement in engineering education? Science, Technology and Human Values, 39(1), 42–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clarke, C. E., Boudet, H. S., & Bugden, D. (2013). Fracking in the American mind: Americans’ views on hydraulic fracturing in September, 2012. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Retrieved from http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/reports.
  10. Davis, R., & Franks, D. M. (2014). Costs of companycommunity conflict in the extractive sector. Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Report. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. Retrieved from http://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/research/Costs%20of%20Conflict_Davis%20%20Franks.pdf.
  11. Didier, C., & Huet, R. (2008). Corporate social responsibility in engineering education. A French survey. European Journal of Engineering Education, 33(2), 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dobb, E. (2013). The new oil landscape. National Geographic. Retrieved from http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/bakken-shale-oil/dobb-text.
  13. Dolan, C., & Rajak, D. (Eds.). (2016). The anthropology of corporate social responsibility. New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  14. Douglas, D., Papadopoulos, G., & Boutelle, J. (2009). Citizen engineer: A handbook for socially responsible engineering. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  15. Fergus, J.W. (2013). Materials engineering as a catalyst for sustainability education. 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Google Scholar
  16. Frey, W.J., Papadopoulos, C., Castro-Sitiriche, M., Zevallos, F., & Echevarria, D. (2012). On integrating appropriate technology responsive to community capabilities: A case study from Haiti. 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Explosition.Google Scholar
  17. Frynas, J. G. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in the oil and gas sector. Journal of World Energy Law and Business, 2(3), 178–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Galambosi, A., & Ozelkan, E. (2011). Integrating sustainability into systems engineering curriculum. 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Google Scholar
  19. Gardner, K., Ahmed, Z., Bashir, F., & Rana, M. (2012). Elusive partnerships: Gas extraction and CSR in Bangladesh. Resources Policy, 37(2), 168–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Herkert, J. R. (2001). Future directions in engineering ethics research: Microethics, macroethics and the role of professional societies. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7(3), 403–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holsapple, M. A., Carpenter, D. D., Sutkus, J. A., Finelli, C. J., & Harding, T. S. (2012). Framing faculty and student discrepancies in engineering ethics education delivery. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(2), 169–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kirsch, S. (2014). Mining capitalism: Dialectical relations between corporations & their critics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  23. Koehn, J., Nagumantri, P., & Koehn, K. (2008). Environmental concepts of civil/construction engineering students. 2008 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Google Scholar
  24. Lucena, J., Schneider, J., & Leydens, J. (2010). Engineering and sustainable community development. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypool.Google Scholar
  25. Ottinger, G. (2013). Refining expertise how responsible engineers subvert environmental justice challenges. New York: New York University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rajak, D. (2011). In good company: An anatomy of corporate social responsibility. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Rolston, J. S. (2015). Turning protesters into monitors: Appraising critical collaboration in the mining industry. Society & Natural Resources, 28(2), 165–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rulifson, G., Bielefeldt, A., & Thomas, W. (2014). Understanding of social responsibility by first year engineering students: Ethical foundations and courses. 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis.Google Scholar
  29. Sharpt, J. (2006). Corporate social responsibility and development: An anthropological perspective. Development Southern Africa, 23(2), 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith, J. M. (2017). From corporate social responsibility to creating shared value: Contesting responsibilization and the mining industry. In Competing responsibilities: The ethics and politics of contemporary life. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Society of Petroleum Engineers. (2013). Our industry, public perception. Special Issue of the Way Ahead, 9(2), 1–32.Google Scholar
  32. Sutkus, J., Finelli, C., Carpenter, D., & Harding, T. (2009). An examination of student experiences related to engineering ethics: Initial findings. 2009 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Google Scholar
  33. Tougaw, D., & Schroeder, D. (2005). Collaborative teaching of a course in technology, society and the natural environment. 2005 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Google Scholar
  34. United Nations Environmental Program. (2009). Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products. New York: UNEP.Google Scholar
  35. Welker, M. (2014). Enacting the corporation: An American mining firm in post-authoritarian Indonesia. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wynne, B. (1991). Knowledges in context. Science, Technology and Human Values, 16(1), 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wynne, B. (2001). Creating public alienation: Expert cultures of risk and ethics on GMOs. Science as Culture, 10(4), 445–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zandvoort, H., Børsen, T., Deneke, M., & Bird, S. J. (2013). Editors’ overview perspectives on teaching social responsibility to students in science and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(4), 1413–1438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jessica M. Smith
    • 1
    Email author
  • Carrie J. McClelland
    • 1
  • Nicole M. Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.Colorado School of MinesGoldenUSA

Personalised recommendations