Advertisement

Encouraging Engineering Students to Question Technological Solutions for Complex Ecological and Social Problems

  • Sabine Pongratz
  • André BaierEmail author
Chapter
  • 725 Downloads
Part of the World Sustainability Series book series (WSUSE)

Abstract

Sustainability in the curriculum of engineering students is either ignored or solely focuses on technological solutions. As the UN Rio+20 debate and its focus on Green Economy shows, there is a strong demand for technological innovations as a remedy for ecological destruction and as pathway to poverty eradication. Consequently, the predominant belief in technological progress is held up through technicians as well as a society wishing for easy technological solutions for complex ecological and social problems. Taking this into account, this paper outlines a course design that promotes socially and ecologically responsible engineering through a variety of alternative teaching methods. Engineering students acquire the competence to unveil the complex interdependency of their social, political, ecological and economic surroundings. This includes the consideration of different values, interests and needs within a global perspective as well as within one class(room). The course design encourages democratic decision-making not only to solve but also to define problems within the course itself and moreover outside of the classroom. This method is applied in order to adequately respond to the specific needs of users and to cooperatively develop technologies which are socially useful, locally adapted, durable, repairable and recyclable.

Keywords

Engineering education Sustainable development Green economy Democracy Society nature relations 

References

  1. Baier A (2013) Student-driven courses on the social and ecological responsibilities of engineers. Sci Eng Ethics 19(4):1469–1472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baier A, Pongratz S (2013) Collectively and critically reflecting on technology and society. In: Proceedings of the 41st SEFI annual conference, Leuven, Belgium, 16–20 Sept 2013Google Scholar
  3. Becker E, Jahn T (2005) Societal relations to nature. Outline of a critical theory in the ecological crisis. In: Böhme G, Manzei A (eds.) (2003). Kritische Theorie der Technik und der Natur. Fink, München, pp 91–112. http://www.isoe.de/ftp/darmstadttext_engl.pdf. Last accessed 16 March 2014
  4. Blue Engineering (2011) Blue Engineering Baukasten. Ein Handbuch. http://www.blue-engineering.org/baukasten.pdf. Last accessed 24 March 2014
  5. Blue Engineering (2014) Blue engineering website. http://www.blue-engineering.org. Last accessed 24 March 2014
  6. Boni A, Pérez-Foguet A (2008) Introducing development education in technical universities: successful experiences in Spain. Eur J Eng Educ 33(3):343–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brand U (2012) Beautiful green world. On the Myths of a Green Economy. Luxemburg Argumente 2, 3, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. Brand U (2014) Growth and domination. Shortcomings of the (De-) Growth Debate. ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
  9. Brand U, Wissen M (2013) Crisis and continuity of capitalist society-nature relationships: the imperial mode of living and the limits to environmental governance. Rev Int Polit Econ 20(4):687–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brey P (2009) Converging technologies and ethics of the good life. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference of the society for philosophy and technology, Enschede, Netherlands, 8–10 July 2009Google Scholar
  11. Brunnengräber A, Haas T (2012) Rio+20: Die Grüne Beliebigkeit. Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik 2(2012):15–18Google Scholar
  12. Conlon E (2008) The new engineer: between employability and social responsibility. Eur J Eng Educ 33(2):151–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Demirović A (1997) Demokratie und Herrschaft. Aspekte kritischer Gesellschaftstheorie. Westfälisches Dampfboot, MünsterGoogle Scholar
  14. Demirović A (2007) Demokratie in der Wirtschaft. Positionen, Probleme, Perspektiven. Westfälisches Dampfboot, MünsterGoogle Scholar
  15. Demirović A (2012) Marx Grün. Die gesellschaftlichen Naturverhältnisse demokratisieren. Luxemburg, 3, 2012, VSA, Hamburg, pp 60–70Google Scholar
  16. Deppe F (2009) Kapitalismus und Demokratie? Reflexionen über ein problematisches Verhältnis. Luxemburg, 2, 2009, VSA, Hamburg, pp 39–50Google Scholar
  17. Dietz K (2012) Trügerische Hoffnung. Green Economy und ökologische Modernisierung. Rosalux 2, 2012. http://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/RosaLux/RosaLux_2-2012.pdf. Last accessed 11 March 2014
  18. Görg C (2003) Nichtidentität und Kritik. Zum Problem der Gestaltung der Naturverhältnisse. In: Böhme G, Manzei A (eds) Kritische Theorie der Technik und der Natur. München, Fink, pp 113–133Google Scholar
  19. Grunwald A (2011) Einführung in das Schwerpunktthema. Büro für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung beim Deutschen Bundestag (ed.), TAB-Brief Nr. 39, Berlin, p 6Google Scholar
  20. Guerra A (2012) What are the common knowledge and competencies for education for sustainable development and for engineering education for sustainable development? In: Proceedings of the 40th SEFI annual conference, Thessaloniki, Greece, 23–26 Sept 2012Google Scholar
  21. Hald M (ed) (2011) Transcending boundaries. How Cemus is changing how we teach, meet and learn. Cemus/CSD Uppsala, Uppsala University and Swedish University for Agricultural Sciences. http://www.cemus.uu.se/openuniversity/PUBLICATIONS/BOOK.transcending.bounderies.CEMUS.pdf. Last accessed 24 March 2014
  22. Horkheimer M, Adorno TW (2002) Dialectic of enlightenment. Philosophical fragments. Stanford University Press, StandfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Jahn T, Wehling P (1998) Gesellschaftliche Naturverhältnisse—Konturen eines theoretischen Konzepts. In: Brand KW (ed) Soziologie und Natur. Theoretische Perspektiven. Leske+Budrich, Opladen, pp 75–93Google Scholar
  24. Kastenhofer K, Lansu A, van Dam-Mieras R, Sotoudeh M (2010) The contribution of university curricula to engineering education for sustainable development. GAIA 19(1):44–51Google Scholar
  25. Köhler B, Wissen M (2010) Gesellschaftliche Naturverhältnisse. Ein kritischer theoretischer Zugang zur ökologischen Krise. In: Lösch B (ed) Kritische politische Bildung. Ein Handbuch. Reihe Politik und Bildung, 54, Wochenschau-Verlag, Schwalbach/Ts, pp 217–227Google Scholar
  26. Krätke M (2003) Wirtschaftsdemokratie und Marktsozialismus. Kritische Interventionen 8, Hannover, p 58Google Scholar
  27. Lovelock J (2010) On the Value of Sceptics and Why Copenhagen Was Doomed. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock. Last accessed in 24 March 2014
  28. Maroshek-Klarman U, Ulrich S (1997) “Miteinander—Erfahrungen mit Betzavta. Ein Praxishandbuch auf der Grundlage des Werks «Miteinander» von Uki Maroshek-Klarman, Adam-Institut, Jerusalem. Bertelsmann Stiftung, GüterslohGoogle Scholar
  29. Maroshek-Klarman U, Vaddai D (1993) There is no such thing as some democracy. On educating towards democracy and on democracy in the educational system. Kinneret Publishing HouseGoogle Scholar
  30. Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J (1972) The limits to growth: a report for the club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. Universe Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Michel J (2008) Editorial. A new issue devoted to sustainable development. Eur J Eng Educ 33(3):245–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ropohl G (2000) Demokratische Technikgestaltung braucht konzeptionelle Konvergenz. Büro für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung beim Deutschen Bundestag (ed.), TAB-Brief Nr. 18, Berlin, p 40Google Scholar
  33. Santarius T (2012) Green growth unraveled. How rebound effects baffle sustainability targets when the economy keeps growing. Heinrich Boell Foundation, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  34. Schmiade B, Becker F (2008) Branchenreport Windenergiewirtschaft Europa. Arbeitsorientierte Fragestellungen und Handlungsmöglichkeiten. Hans-Böckler-Stiftung and IG Metall Vorstand (eds), BerlinGoogle Scholar
  35. Segalàs D, Ferrer-Balas D, Mulder KF (2008) Conceputal maps: measuring learning processes of engineering students concerning sustainable development. Eur J Eng Educ 33(3):297–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sunderland M (2013) Using student engagement to relocate ethics to the core of the engineering curriculum. Sci Eng Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s11948-013-9444-5 Google Scholar
  37. Umweltbundesamt (ed) (2009) Report on the environmental economy 2009. Facts and figures for Germany. http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/report-on-environmental-economy-2009. Last accessed 21 March 2014
  38. UNEP (2011) Towards a green economy: pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication. United Nations Environment Programme. http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/ger_final_dec_2011/Green%20EconomyReport_Final_Dec2011.pdf. Last accessed 11 March 2014
  39. Wissen M (2012) Von Rio nach Rio. Sackgassen internationaler Umweltpolitik: Von 1992 bis 2012. Rosalux 2, 2012. http://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/RosaLux/RosaLux_2-2012.pdf. Last accessed 11 March 2014
  40. Zandvoort H (2008) Preparing engineers for social responsibility. Eur J Eng Educ 33(2):133–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Transport SystemsTechnische Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations