Abstract

Many engineering activists have emphasized the need to reframe engineering as a sociotechnical field in order to expand engineers' contributions to social justice and peace. Yet, reframing engineering as sociotechnical does not always lead to critical engagement with social justice. We provide several examples of how “social” aspects have been brought into engineering in a depoliticized manner that limits engagement with political and social justice goals. We link these examples to Cech’s three pillars of the “culture of disengagement” in engineering: social/technical dualisms, meritocracy, and depoliticization. We argue that reframing engineering as sociotechnical addresses the first pillar, the social/technical dualism, but does not necessarily include the second and third pillars. We propose that all three pillars can be addressed through integrating explicit attention to political engagement and social justice in efforts to reframe engineering as a sociotechnical field. Doing so can increase engineers’ capacity to contribute to social justice and peace.

Highlights

  • Niles, Roudbari and Contreras Integrating Social Justice and Political Engagement into Engineering and how are projects and ideas related to capitalism, industry, the military, and the environment (Cech 2014; Riley 2008)

  • We link the limitations of sociotechnical framings of engineering to Cech’s three pillars of the “culture of disengagement” in engineering: social/technical dualisms, meritocracy, and depoliticization

  • We argue that reframing engineering as sociotechnical addresses the first pillar, the social/technical dualism, but does not necessarily address the second and third pillars

Read more

Summary

Integrating Social Justice and Political Engagement into Engineering

Many engineering activists have emphasized the need to reframe engineering as a sociotechnical field in order to expand engineers' contributions to social justice and peace. Sociotechnical Frameworks in Engineering Many engineering activists and scholars have drawn attention to the need to reframe engineering as a heterogeneous, sociotechnical field (Cech 2014; Cumming-Potvin and Currie 2013; Faulkner 2007; Leydens and Lucena 2018; Riley 2008; Winner 1980) These scholars critique dominant concepts of engineering practice as a technical endeavor, devoid of social context and consequences. Broadening engineering practice beyond technical problem-solving opens up engineering to a more complex engagement with society-technology relations, and increases the potential of engineers to contribute to a more just and peaceful world. More widespread transformations towards social justice, peace, and public welfare engagement in engineering

Addressing the Three Pillars of Disengagement
Limitations of Dominant Sociotechnical Frameworks
Conclusion and Future Directions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call