Infrastructure development is critical in helping the people of underdeveloped nations attain a higher standard of living. Unfortunately, in many cases, development has proceeded at the expense of human health and environmental quality. Pollution prevention, risk communication, and risk management provide avenues in dealing with contamination without legislation. Consistent with ASCE's Code of Ethics, engineers have the duty to present all the environmental consequences of engineering projects. The affected community decides the fate of any project based on the accepted environmental risks associated with it.

Prior to its 1997 revision, the ASCE Code of Ethics only peripherally addressed the interaction of the engineer with the environment. Engineers seeking guidance on their professional responsibility found that only on issues where their actions harmed other human beings was the Code useful. In other words, the Code of Ethics did not address environmentally damaging actions that were not clearly detrimental to the “health, safety, or welfare of the public.” Recognition by the ASCE leadership that civil engineers face daily issues concerning environmental quality prompted the Society to modify its Code of Ethics to include a statement on “sustainable development.” Sustainable development is the concept that we can continue to develop and change the environment, but that we should do so in a way that will not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In this paper, we first examine the origin of the need to include the sustainable development clause in the Code of Ethics, and then, to examine the usefulness of this modification to the Code, concluding that its addition does not seem to prevent blatant environmental destruction. Most importantly, the sustainable development option does not offer assistance to engineers seeking guidance on their actions toward the environment. Finally, we offer one code that, although radical in its approach, clearly states the responsibility of engineers toward the environment, and recommend that the ASCE consider modifying its own Code of Ethics to reflect some of the principles in the alternative code.

The practice of civil engineering is becoming more global each day. No longer is American know-how required on major international infrastructure projects. The Kansai Airport in Osaka, Japan, the Chek Lap Kok Airport in Hong Kong, the Three Gorges Dam in China, an open copper mine dam in Argentina, a major container port in the Netherlands, and a major dam construction in India are some examples of significant civil engineering projects with little or no American engineering involvement. You can also see this trend closer to home, where foreign firms are successfully “out bidding” America's firms for design and construction projects in the United States. With our society taking engineering for granted, U.S. civil engineers must retool or become obsolete, except as technical processors—using the computer to meet the requirements of codes, standards, and regulations.

The engineering profession must embrace the ethic of sustainability in engineering education, in continuing professional development, and in practice. The current scene from a United Kingdom perspective is presented, including developments elsewhere. The results of surveys into the environmental content in undergraduate curricula are given. Changing requirements of the Engineering Council and the Joint Board of Moderators are presented. Initiatives from the Royal Academy of Engineering are highlighted as are those of young engineers of the Commonwealth. An overview is presented of the linkages between business and the environment. The work of the World Federation of Engineering Organisations in the area of environmental education is highlighted, as is the work of the Institution of Civil Engineers and Institution of Chemical Engineers in learned society and continuing professional development matters. The engineering profession stands at a fork in the road; will it continue in the existing paradigm or will it change direction along the path marked “the liberated and civilized engineer”? People matter, but their attitudes to the natural world and to each other matter most of all.