Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to explore the rationale for teaching sustainability and engineering ethics within a decision‐making paradigm, and critically appraise ways of achieving related learning outcomes.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presents the experience of the School of Civil Engineering at the University of Sydney in teaching environmental sustainability and engineering ethics to third‐year undergraduate students. It discusses the objectives of the course and the merits and drawbacks of incorporating ethics and sustainability in the same teaching framework. In addition, it evaluates ways of incorporating theoretical and applied perspectives on sustainability.FindingsEthics and sustainability overlap but do not coincide; incorporating them in the same engineering course can be effective, provided that points of linkage are clearly recognized in the syllabus, a suitable combination of theory and practical applications is drawn upon and adequate teaching methods, including decision‐making case problems, are used.Research limitations/implicationsWhile environmental sustainability, economic rationality and ethical reasoning can be easily fitted into the syllabus, social sustainability is more difficult to teach because it requires a significant conceptual departure from deep‐seated preconceptions on the part of students and teachers, and does not lend itself easily to conventional classroom activity, such as lectures and weekly workshops. Further research on effective ways of incorporating social sustainability in engineering curricula is therefore needed.Originality/valueThe paper evaluates sustainability issues within the context of civil engineering education.

Public debate about health is rare in Arab countries. But getting the social and political issues underlying health problems onto the agenda could have wider effects on the region's political stagnation

Differences in environmental priorities within an urban neighborhood of Beirut are analyzed. The explanatory capabilities of five categories of contextual variables are compared: socioeconomic status, locality, health, behavior, and environmental beliefs. Semi‐structured interviews with key individuals in the community and residents were first conducted. Four environmental issues of concern were identified. A survey was carried out to identify the relative priority accorded by respondents to these four issues, and to measure variables likely to explain differences of opinion. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted for each of the four problems. The 99% confidence interval (CI) of the odds ratio (OR) was used as a test of significance. Respondents suffering from a respiratory disease (OR = 6.94, 99%CI = 1.54–31.25), those living in less crowded houses (OR = 4.88, 99%CI = 1.38–17.24), and those not living close to the neighborhood's industrial street (OR=5.26, 99%CI = 1.01–27.78) are significantly more likely to rank poor air quality first. Significant associations are found between poor water quality as first priority and nonpresence of a smoker in the household (OR = 6.12, 99%CI = 1.84–20.32) and perception of water salinity as a problem (OR = 7.46, 99%CI = 1.50–37.03). Males (OR = 6.94, 99%CI = 1.02–47.62) and tenants versus owners (OR = 10.49, 99%CI = 1.36–80.61) are significantly more likely to rank the residential‐industrial mix first. Socioeconomic variables retain their explanatory capability in the studied neighborhood, despite relatively small income disparities. Behavioral variables, such as smoking, may be causative factors of priorities. Analyzing relative priorities, rather than "concern" or lack of it, reveals more complex patterns of association. Identifying environmental‐perception divide lines can help develop a more inclusive and effective participatory environmental management.

Discussions leading to the Rio+20 UN conference have emphasised the importance of sustainable development and the protection of the environment for future generations. The Arab world faces large-scale threats to its sustainable development and, most of all, to the viability and existence of the ecological systems for its human settlements. The dynamics of population change, ecological degradation, and resource scarcity, and development policies and practices, all occurring in complex and highly unstable geopolitical and economic environments, are fostering the poor prospects. In this report, we discuss the most pertinent population–environment–development dynamics in the Arab world, and the two-way interactions between these dynamics and health, on the basis of current data. We draw attention to trends that are relevant to health professionals and researchers, but emphasise that the dynamics generating these trends have implications that go well beyond health. We argue that the current discourse on health, population, and development in the Arab world has largely failed to convey a sense of urgency, when the survival of whole communities is at stake. The dismal ecological and development records of Arab countries over the past two decades call for new directions. We suggest that regional ecological integration around exchange of water, energy, food, and labour, though politically difficult to achieve, offers the best hope to improve the adaptive capacity of individual Arab nations. The transformative political changes taking place in the Arab world offer promise, indeed an imperative, for such renewal. We call on policy makers, researchers, practitioners, and international agencies to emphasise the urgency and take action.