Teaching Engineers How To Make A Difference: Inte

Engineers, regardless of their areas of specialization, routinely are involved in projects with broad public policy implications. For example, engineers usually play a leading role in the design, permitting, and construction of controversial facilities. In addition, the design and development of any new technology often requires support or involvement from the public as well as the government. In many cases, engineers are poorly prepared to handle political, administrative and legal processes that are vitally important in the implementation of almost any engineering design, construction, or development project. Engineers also miss important opportunities to participate in the development of public policy at the highest levels, including the legislative process and agency rule-making, due to a lack of familiarity and relative comfort with the applicable processes. Consequently, the public and governmental bodies are denied the benefit of the engineer’s unique perspective on policy issues. This paper identifies specific areas of public policy often encountered by engineers and discusses policy development processes that would be greatly enriched by increased participation from the engineering community. In addition, the paper identifies ways in which undergraduate and graduate engineering programs can prepare engineers to be more effective practitioners and better serve their clients, their employers, and their profession in the political, legal and administrative environments. Typical Public Policy Forums In a democratic society, the development and implementation of public policy can take many forms. Even the term “public policy” is not susceptible to a uniformly accepted definition. In general, the term is most often used to describe the results of actions taken by the government in response to real or perceived public issues and concerns, in a manner that directly or indirectly affects the public. In particular, in the United States, the conversion of a particular issue into policy may occur through various governmental bodies in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Perhaps the type of policy development most familiar to the public is the legislative process, at both the federal and state levels. The public at large becomes involved in this process primarily through the election of legislators. In addition, because state and federal legislation must go through “bicameralism and presentment” (passage by the legislative branch and signing by the President or governor, as appropriate), the public theoretically has another chance to influence legislative policy through elections. However, during the process through which an issue first appears on the legislative agenda, and the subsequent debate, committees, and other legislative decision-making processes, the public has many opportunities to become involved in a more P ge 7.077.1 “Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2002, American Society for Engineering Education” direct manner. Public policy scholars often state that an issue will only make it to the legislative agenda if a number of factors coalesce. Often, these factors include advocacy from the public in the form of media attention, interest group involvement, and testimony from a variety of individuals. Once an issue is placed on the legislative agenda, more opportunities for public involvement present themselves, including lobbying activities and again, testimony. The fact that relatively few citizens take advantage of these opportunities does not make them any less available. Although legislative action sometimes receives a larger share of media attention, other governmental bodies often play an even more pervasive role in the creation of public policy. Once a policy is enacted into law by a state legislature or the U.S. Congress, administrative agencies normally shoulder the major responsibility for implementing the legislative directives. In fact, the legislative branch, by necessity, often explicitly delegates the development and implementation of the technical details of a statutory program to agencies. These agencies typically are housed within the executive branch of government, but carry out many different functions with a significant impact on policy development, including rule-making, permit issuance, and, in some cases, adjudication of cases. For instance, a government agency such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers numerous statutory programs, such as the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act. In so doing, the EPA routinely engages in the promulgation of regulations (rule-making) that affect millions of individuals, corporations, and other entities. The agency also issues permits for various activities on a daily basis, and also acts as a first level of appeal on many issues. The states have their own environmental agencies, which work with and assist EPA in many of its responsibilities, and also fulfill responsibilities as defined in state legislation. The public may exert influence on agency actions in a variety of ways. Federal and state laws require agencies to go through a minimal “notice and comment” rule-making procedure prior to finalizing regulations. This process requires the agencies to solicit and consider comments from the public whenever a new regulation or revision is proposed. In addition, most permits and related actions require some type of public notice and/or public hearing before a decision is made. Finally, the directors of state and federal executive agencies are appointed by the governors and President, respectively, and normally serve at the “will and pleasure” of the executive. In this manner, the public has an opportunity to make an impact on agency po licy through use of its voting and lobbying power to affect selection of agency leaders. 8, 15 Just as it does with the legislative branch, the public also can exert significant influence on agency action in the form of well-organized, focused attention on a particular issue, which generates media attention and resulting pressure on the agency. This form of public participation often has played a particularly important role in shaping environmental policy through agency action. Although the judiciary often is not associated with policy development, courts can have a powerful influence on the manner in which policies are implemented. Through its statutory interpretation powers, and also the ability to develop judicial policies in the context of civil cases, the court system is an important part of public policy development. For instance, the interpretation of a relatively technical statutory or regulatory term often depends on the approach utilized by a particular judge. More conservative judges tend to rely only on the express Page 7.077.2 “Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2002, American Society for Engineering Education” language of a particular provision to interpret its meaning, while less conservative judges will look to such things as overall legislative intent and the policies behind a statute to make a decision. The difference in these two approaches makes a very significant difference in the outcome of cases. The Engineer’s Role In all the processes described above, engineers can and do play important, albeit sometimes overlooked, roles. With respect to each of three branches of government, examples abound where engineers have influenced the outcome of policy-making processes. As noted by one writer, “...it is the engineers who draw up the politicians’ shopping lists by furnishing specific solutions to particular problems.” The writer goes on to describe how engineers utilized political expediency to promote their plan to put a man on the moon, which required the President’s support and legislative funding. This high-profile example of the engineer’s political influence, when properly exerted, is but one of many, less publicized examples. By acting as advocates for solutions to existing problems, through agenda-setting activities such as legislative testimony or more behind-the-scenes efforts, engineers have helped move issues forward that may otherwise have fallen subject to other legislative and agency priorities. One of the most important aspects of public policy development is prioritizing or agenda setting. This is something that by necessity occurs in all policy-making forums, including the legislative process and agency rule-making. The term “agenda setting” has been defined as “the politics of getting problems to government.” Due to finite public resources, this first step in policy development is critical – examples abound of issues that made it to the top of the priority list only because of enhanced attention from the public or interest groups. A far greater number of issues remain unaddressed and unresolved in the public policy arena due a lack of appropriate advocacy and attention. This is especially true for complex technical issues, which often do not make it onto the public policy agenda unless aggressively advanced by an interest or professional group with not only technical knowledge, but also the communication skills and political awareness required to make the issue appealing to policy makers. Charles Jones identifies three patterns of agenda setting in the public policy process. The first type involves a relatively passive government that reacts to the expression of public interest. Under the second model, government defines a process and actively encourages participation from public and private interests in prioritization of issues. The third pattern plays out when institutions “systematically review societal events for their effects and set an agenda of government actions.” Engineers and other technical professionals have an important role to play in all three of these patterns, as representatives of the pub