�鶹��Ѱ�����

Land Acknowledgement & Positionality

As it will be discussed in this work, my embedded biases influence the approach I take to research, the perspectives I choose to include in my writing, the assumptions I make, and the way in which I draw connections. As such, I feel it is obligatory to disclose aspects of my perspective that may influence my writing.��

I’ve grown up in Colorado, and traveled very little out of the United States, although I have traveled most of the western US. My engagement with engineering has been through the �鶹��Ѱ����� in which I started as an Aerospace Engineer. Upon learning that most aerospace pathways are closely tied to the defense industry, I changed my major to Mechanical Engineering. A year later, I changed majors again to Environmental engineering and begun work in the Hannigan Air Quality & Technology Research (HAQ) Lab.

Working in the HAQ lab under my mentor Percy Smith was significantly different than my perception of research, and the schooling I had undergone in my engineering education prior to joining the lab. In the HAQ lab, undergraduates work directly with graduate students across different engineering majors. Work is flexible, and creativity is encouraged in design. Community outreach & education is a core part of the lab, many researchers working directly with communities. The ethics and implications of the engineering practice are openly discussed within the workplace, not just on the basis of case studies, but in relation to our work: something I had not experienced in any of my technical engineering courses prior to joining the lab. Because of this gap between my schooling, and the work environment within the HAQ lab, I felt something was missing from the way I was being taught engineering practice, motivating the research presented here.��

I also find it critical to acknowledge that the land I grew up (and now study) in is the ancestral homelands of Indigenous peoples including Di De’i (Apache), Hinono’eiteen (Arapaho), Tsétsėhéstȧhese (Cheyenne), Nʉmʉnʉʉ (Comanche), Caiugu (Kiowa), Čariks i Čariks (Pawnee), Sosonih (Shoshone), Oc'eti S'akowin (Sioux) and Núuchiu (Ute). Prior to the advent of colonialism, indigenous peoples, their oral histories, cultures, and spiritual connections were intimately tied to the land in which I now reside. No city or nation can undo the multifaceted, generational trauma and oppression that Indigenous peoples have endured and continue to endure. Acknowledgment of these wrongdoings is not enough; we must also work to understand how our current systems and culture continue to directly or indirectly harm Indigenous peoples today.

Introduction

As an environmental engineering student, I’ve become immersed in issues of anthropogenic environmental contamination present in the air, soil and water. I’ve also worked to assess how toxic contaminants can harm ecosystems, agriculture or pose health risks to humans. My degree has also provided insights into life cycle analysis and sustainability in the face of global warming and anthropogenic climate change. Exposure to these problems has facilitated my growing curiosity in engineering ethics and how the embedded perspectives we hold can influence the designs we create. It is precisely this intersection of technical knowledge and ethical responsibility that investigates how engineering as a profession approaches its role in the world.��

Engineers in all fields are increasingly working in global or local contexts [1] where engineering practices directly impact community and ecological health [2]. Despite this, many engineers in Western countries remain distanced from such contexts, often harming the very communities engineering designs should benefit [3]. While undesirable, this outcome is understandable given the current focus of western engineering ethics on the role of the engineer as a professional [1], and design solutions optimized for efficiency and technical validity [4], [5]. While important, neither of these approaches provides sufficient guidance for engineering work in diverse contexts, nor does it effectively equip engineers to address large-scale issues like those posed by global warming [6].��

Addressing these shortcomings in Western engineering ethics necessitates an examination of both��why the current paradigm fails, and��how to adequately redefine it in a more holistic manner that benefits communities, ecological systems,��and the engineer. To answer these questions, the Western engineering paradigm can look to diverse cultural design traditions whose critiques illuminate the assumptions embedded in Western engineering’s foundations. In this way, engineering ethics can become a dialogue between diverse perspectives; a practice that will constitute more creative, just, innovative, and ecologically responsible solutions.��

Identifying Borders within Engineering Ethics

Methodology

In order to understand the critiques of Western engineering ethics, and potential avenues of improvement, I aimed my investigation at how Indigenous (predominantly North or Central American) and Eastern (predominantly Taoist / Confucianist) philosophies of design differ from Western engineering, and their critiques of Western practice . As such, this investigation pulls from literature spanning philosophical critiques, indigenous knowledge & epistemology, cross-cultural ethics, decolonizing design, cognitive science of design, design practice, pedagogy, and planetary / environmental health. These works were then coded and examined for critiques of western engineering ethics across diverse perspectives with the intention of underscoring the prevalence of critiques from multiple subjects. However, I want to be upfront in articulating that while predominant, these critiques are formed on numerous social backgrounds and intimately contextual to each culture. This level of detail is not something which can be fully captured in one paper. With this in mind,��Figure 1 illustrates my approach to this work likened to a growing tree: embedded perspectives as the roots, the research direction as the trunk, the sources of information as branches, and individual data points as leaves.��

These critiques of the Western engineering paradigm can them be investigated to identify key segments of the border between Western and non-Western engineering and design ethics. In this way, Western engineering practice can begin to look at alternative ways to frame engineering ethics and understand the impact a reframing would have on engineering practitioners as well as those impacted by engineering designs. Three key segments of this border are environmental consideration, nonlinearity in design & time, and relationality.��

Environmental Consideration

The first (and perhaps most timely) differentiation between Western and American-Indigenous & Eastern philosophies of design ethics is how these perspectives frame the environment in the design process. Much of Western engineering is built on a cultural backbone based in extraction, materialism, and growth inherited from colonial practices and capitalist systems [3]. The culture that threads through engineering ethics thus frames the environment as a source of resources & capital that can be monetized; something to be contained or controlled. Left unacknowledged, this cultural underpinning perpetuates engineering practices that reinforces a disconnect between humans and the environment, perpetuating environmental degradation.

Perhaps the most immediate example of this underpinning’s impact on Western engineering design can be seen in our cities. In American cities, we’ve historically built energy-intensive buildings that utilize natural gas or fossil-fuels for heating and electricity. These cities combat the outdoor environment, while fenceline communities bear the brunt of pollution from the requisite industrial plants [8]. Our streets bisect natural ecosystems, redirecting or endangering local wildlife. Hostile architecture fights the nesting of birds, and building materials radiate heat so intensely they change local climates [9] impacting vegetation, weather patterns and the surrounding environment [10]. All of these phenomena are, in part, physical manifestations of engineering practice that positions the environment in opposition to humanity.

Yet, engineers today will be increasingly called on to find solutions to the problems of sea level rise, heat mitigation in cities, energy efficiency, decarbonization, food security, etc. as they are amplified by anthropogenic climate change [7]. In order to address these global, complex issues, engineering ethics can look to how Indigenous-American and Eastern design philosophies frame environmental obligation differently and their critiques of Western practice.

American-Indigenous and cultures have long embodied an integrated relationship with nature formed on a worldview that intimately connects humans and Country [11] through physical and spiritual pathways. As such, indigenous designs inherently incorporate the environment into designs as an active participant and provider of knowledge. Designs & their designers thus embody an overarching commitment to environmental stewardship [11], [12], [13], and connection to the earth. Compared to much of Western engineering practice which separates, and combats the environment, indigenous conceptions of design place the environment at the forefront of consideration.

Similarly, Taoist & Confucianist influences on culture in the East have emphasized the interconnectedness of all things as part of nature, acting in a critical balance that acknowledges the importance and value of all entities [14], [15]: a “microcosm, forming a triadic relationship with the Cosmos and Earth” [16]. Designs within this framework are thus realized in a process that aims to benefit all entities in mutual enrichment, including the environment [17]. As such, engineering ethics within many Eastern perspectives seek to preserve a harmony between humans, society, nature, and technology; acknowledging��both their complex interactions��and the unique needs and contributions of each player.

Together, Indigenous and Eastern philosophies point out a key shortcoming of traditional Western engineering ethics based on efficiency and professionalism: the detachment from, and irresponsibility towards the environment in design practice. If Western engineers are to uphold ethical standards, the environment��must become a key contributor in designs. Not only is this the ethical thing to do (as Eastern and Indigenous perspectives argue), but integrating natural knowledge through practices like biomimicry or biophilic design will create more meaningful, innovative, sustainable, and holistic solutions [19] to the complex challenges facing engineers today. Pyri's [20] low-cost wildfire alert device (Figure��3) illustrates this potential: designed around the heat-release mechanisms of pinecones, the sensor remains dormant until extreme wildfire heat triggers a chemical process, sending a signal to nearby communities. This decentralized sensor network can lie dormant across multiple fire seasons and is fully biodegradable. In this way, nature is not merely a backdrop for engineering work, but an active collaborator and stakeholder in the design itself.

Another example of this environmentally conscious philosophy of engineering, and the impact has is embodied in Professor Kongjian Yu’s work surrounding integrated landscape architecture for ecology. Yu’s experience growing up in a small village in Zhejiang was intimately tied to monsoon season and flooding. Here, water was both a source of life and an enemy: an integral part of growing rice and a destructive force during summer flooding. In his engineering practice, Yu pulled on his experience and traditional agrarian Chinese knowledge to recast the view of water as destructive to a bringer of life. His��Sponge Cities (Figure 3 [47]) updated old infrastructure to manage urban water in a way that fostered sustainability, ecological health and public good, while simultaneously promoting public knowledge of contemporary ecological governance [48]. His holistic approach to water management mitigated flooding, also promoting biodiversity, water quality, and resilience [47].

Taken together, Pyri's sensor and Yu's Sponge Cities point toward the idea that when the environment is treated as a collaborator rather than a resource, engineering solutions become more resilient, innovative, and ecologically beneficial. This is the insight Indigenous and Eastern design ethics offer to the Western paradigm: not a rejection of engineering ambition, but a redirection of it toward designs that sustain the environmental systems they depend on.

Nonlinear Time & Design

Since industrialization swept across the West and the globe, linear-process thinking has dominated most of the Western engineering practice. Steps in a design are often organized and performed sequentially with the initial point defined by a�� problem, and the final point defined by the solution. Additionally, many design teams are�� organized hierarchically, and each individual is typically tasked developing a piece of the overall project. While this may not seem particularly��linear upon initial examination, the word linear is used to define action or thinking that is structured, hierarchical, segmented, and procedural. This conceptualization of linearity is one that Western engineering firms or contractors typically follow. While this type of linear thinking was efficient during the advent of industrialization, it is constricting the space engineering solutions can explore in the present [21], [22].

Many Western conceptions of time in the design process are also predominantly linear: a process starts with the problem and proceeds until the solution is defined and constructed [23], [24]. In this way, a lot of the engineering design process is centered around the present or near-present moment [25]. As a result, western design typically doesn’t explore reframing of the initial problem, and responsibility for designs does not extend considerably into the past or future [26]. One example of the latter is the practice of planned obsolescence, which perpetuates consumerism and unsustainable practices. While some argue that shorter product life cycles helps to control economic resources and avoid overdesign [28]. These shorter lifetimes produce more waste without adequate end-of-life material recycling. Once products or designs are deemed��outdated, few attempts are made to continually maintain, adapt, or integrate the��old design by manufactures or designers [27].��

Compared to Western engineering, many Indigenous and Eastern cultural traditions frame design and time��nonlinearly. In this work, nonlinear is defined as action or thinking that is relational, flexible, non-procedural, and holistic. These approaches shift the design focus so that both the��process and the end result are valued.��

Eastern engineering practice emphasizes��harmony within design practice. Individual components are inseparable from the whole, and the whole is more than the sum of its parts. In this way, designs cannot be wholly separated, classified, or divided without sacrificing harmony [29] and limiting design effectiveness. In this way, designs embody an integrated approach that considers the interaction between parts of a design and the design with its end user. Engineering through this lens seeks to uncover possible disharmony in the design, and is highly contextual, relying on outside information or situational specifics to innovate and inform design solutions rather than strictly adhering to pre-determined constraints [30], [31]. Nonlinearity is thus reflected in the organic synthesis of information both inside and outside the engineering environment [30], integrating knowledge in��parallel to arrive at a solution.

Indigenous design differs from traditional Western engineering practice in its conception and integration of time. First, time is not secular and sequential: past and future��coexist in the present in a nonlinear fashion. This spiraling, dialectical view of time naturally emphasizes past and future perspectives in the engineering process. One example of such emphasis is seen in the concept of the seven generation design timeline which is considered a method of serving life far in the future [12]. Engineering design through this lens emphasizes building on the foundations of past knowledge and��experience while integrating present and personal insight in a process that considers and serves future beings.��

Both Indigenous and Eastern embodiments of nonlinearity constitute a more unstructured process of design where problems and solutions are interrelated and contextual [32], holistic approaches catalyze innovation, and integrated time shifts emphasis away from the present; building on past knowledge and emphasizing long-term flourishing (Figure 4). These framings of design offer insights into more integrated, creative approaches to design; designs that are invaluable as engineers work in increasingly complex, challenging and unpredictable contexts [1].

In order to better grasp one way nonlinearity may look in engineering practice, we can examine at the restoration of the Ōngātoro/Maketū Estuary in New Zealand. This project sought to restore the Kaituna River’s natural path which was redirected in 1956 by engineers in attempt to mitigate flood control (Figure 5), a decision made with narrow temporal score and without community consultation. With the removal of the Estuary, Local Māori lost traditional harvest areas and sources of food and the river lost its��mauri [51]. In 2009 efforts to re-establish the Ōngātoro/Maketū Estuary rooted in community advocacy sought developer, governmental, and local knowledge to assess the best approach to restoration. This synthesis of perspectives fostered a common vision for the project; balancing the needs of diverse stakeholders while drawing on place-based knowledge that no single discipline could have provided alone [52]. Although construction was completed in 2020 by consulting company WSP, a local iwi environmental group among others continually monitors the river’s recovery; embodying the long-term responsibility nonlinear design demands [53]. The 1956 diversion and its 2020 restoration together span nearly a century: a reminder that engineering decisions��extend far beyond the moment of construction. Where linear thinking produced an engineering solution that unraveled over generations, the nonlinear practice of integrated knowledge and long-term design responsibility exhibited in the restoration project offers a more innovative and beneficial solution that will endure.

Relationality

Much of Western engineering practice is motivated by individual interest. Whether it be an individual company, outcome, person or methodology, engineering separates individual components of a design and treats each separately. While this increases the efficiency of achieving an individual interest, it divorces components of an interconnected design system, hindering adoption or functionality of a design, and limiting the scope of solutions a design can explore. Furthermore, focusing on individual interest draws a veil across the impact a design may have on the intricate web of relations inseparable from engineering [18], [33].��

In contrast, ethical engineering within Indigenous and Eastern perspectives frames problem definitions and designs within the broader social, economic, environmental, political and cultural networks they effect [34]; acknowledging the deeply interconnected system in which the engineering practice resides [11]. Indigenous design emphasizes the relationality between material, immaterial, human, and natural aspects to motivate the intentions, methodology, and frameworks solutions are conceived within [35]. Engineering practice that embodies this perspective focuses on collaboration pulling from�� both technical��and non-technical knowledge to best integrate designs with the local or global community, ecosystems and diverse perspectives contextual to the design [17].��

The influences of Confucianism and Taoism in Eastern culture broaden the��responsibility of engineers to encompass interests greater than just the individual [34]. One example of this is the Confucian circles of responsibility which depict the responsibility of an individual as radiating outward to include, at the largest scale, responsibility to the world (Figure 4 [34]). Design is then embodied as a process of continual negotiation and harmonization of the relationships interwoven into engineering, balancing of the needs of each player in the web of interconnection [17],��[36]. Like Indigenous design, engineering practice from an Eastern perspective integrates the diversity and complexity of knowledge these relationships provide to create holistic and innovative solutions; accounting for a wider range of consequences than conventional Western engineering approaches [17], [37].��

Engaging with Indigenous and Eastern conceptions of relationality in engineering would emphasize methods�� such as co-design where stakeholders’ input is directly considered��and valued in the engineering process; with non-technical knowledge bolstering uniqueness and innovation in design outcomes [5]. This shift away from individual focus would not weaken the authority of individuals but rather integrate the authority of many individual interests in a manner that grounds itself in collective knowledge, while also building community and ensuring engineering designs are ethical and unifying [38] [22].

Architect Diébédo Francis Kéré's Gando Primary School in Burkina Faso provides a compelling example of relationality embedded in engineering practice. Drawing on his own childhood experience attending a far away, poorly built school, Kéré’s approach to building the primary school integrated local climate strategies and architecture with locally sourced materials, promoting environmental and social justice in the community [49]. The school received the Aga Khan Award for Architecture, and Kéré was later awarded the Pritzker Prize for his sustained commitment to community centered design [50]. What distinguishes Kéré's work is not technical sophistication alone, but the relational foundation from which it emerges. In the design of the school, community was placed at the forefront of consideration, and actively participated in shaping the design outcome. This is what the concept of relationality demands of engineers: not the abandonment of expertise, but its expansion into a broader web of knowledge and accountability. Where much of Western engineering has historically narrowed its scope to the individual interest, relationality asks engineers to widen their gaze: to see not just the problem in front of them, but the integrated web of relationships surrounding the problem and its solution.

Self-Knowledge & Perspective

While engineers can look towards other perspectives for guidance in the reframing of engineering ethics, they cannot effectively converse and learn from their unique viewpoints until first acknowledging their��own embedded perspective and its biases. Engineers must open their minds to the input, knowledge, and validity of perspectives different than their own. This requires a deep examination of the contextual nature in which engineering practices are developed, and how different individual or collective cultures can change how a design is realized [11], [37].��

Science and engineering are typically conceived as being neutral: an embodiment of��truth and��objectivity. However, embedded cultural, social or political perspectives dictate��how discovery or design is approached,��which solutions are sought,��what problems are addressed, and��who the process includes [40]. If Western engineers are to approach their practice ethically, they must first come to understand how these perspectives can influence design [12]. Only through this self-reflection and realization of bias can alternative perspectives be integrated, understood, and adequately represented within engineering [18], [41], [42].

While acknowledging personal or cultural influence on practice is the first step towards integrating cultural dialogue, including��and valuing diverse perspectives must be practiced in Western engineering. Not only is this ethical by the same arguments of relationality, but diverse perspectives also broaden the range of solutions that are viable within a deign scenario (Figure 5). Fixation on a particular methodology or solution definition can stunt the innovative nature of engineering solutions: while considering��many viewpoints in engineering informs unique and innovative designs [6], [43].��

Let’s take for example the utilization of reframing in in mathematics as a proxy for how a different perspective can reframe solutions. A coordinate system is a way of defining and viewing mathematical relationships, much like how a perspective is a way of viewing and interpreting experience. If we re-define our coordinate system, many relationships are easier to understand than in the ordinary construction of X, Y and Z axes; one example being imaginary numbers and complex analysis. However, to employ strategies like complex analysis we have to re-define our previous understanding of mathematical principles to include something that��seems unintuitive, and realize the validity of the information it provides. In this way, complex analysis, and the solutions it provides, can be likened to the insights provided by a perspective different than our own (Figure 6).

Ethical engineering thus begins not with the question of "what is the right answer?" but "from where am I asking?" and “what perspectives am I not considering?” Like in complex analysis, only by interrogating the framework engineering assumptions are built on and the personal / cultural biases engineers hold, can engineers begin to design with and for, the communities they serve.

��

��

Responsibility & Duty

Western engineering ethics must undergo a paradigm shift to ensure engineers and designers practice responsibly in postmodern society. This means a shift towards a paradigm that recognizes the scale and complexity of the problems engineers face today along with engineers’ responsibilities within the context of these problems [1], [45].��

Engineering holds an incredible potential to find solutions to some of the most pressing issues of the 21st century: problems like global warming, renewable energy, energy infrastructure, carbon capture, climate adaptation, poverty, disaster aid, food security, disease, and more [7]. Yet solutions to these problems cannot be found within a single discipline or perspective, and approaching them demands engagement with interrelated ethical questions that cannot be studied in isolation [43]. Indigenous and Eastern design philosophies illuminate what Western engineering has historically overlooked: environmental consideration, community input, and nonlinear thinking. Drawing on these perspectives will allow Western engineers to meaningfully expand their ethical frameworks to the extent demanded by modern contexts.

While engineers may be insightful into their embedded perspectives, and actively seek alternative perspectives to include in the design process, this new understanding of Western engineering ethics enforces a��responsibility towards these aims. Not only is it��ethical for engineers to actively seek and give��power to perspectives outside of Western engineering, but it is also their obligation. The current emphasis on professional ethics must be expanded to include duty to the environment, duty to community, and duty to inclusive design within Western codes of ethics [7]. This means more opportunities for women, people of color and people from historically underrepresented communities to practice and engage with engineering. It means increasing the role of “soft” sciences like psychology, art, sociology, communications, etc. in design, while��equally valuing technical and non-technical knowledge [46]. It constitutes an expansion of interest to include ecological systems, the needs of the public and local communities, and the needs of future generations. Only in this way can engineers continue to practice ethically, and create innovative solutions in a time of growing uncertainty and complexity.��

Kongjian Yu’s sponge cities, Diébédo Francis Kéré’s schools, and the Ōngātoro/Maketū Estuary project all emphasize the power of drawing on cultural or non-technical knowledge to create powerful engineering designs that reflect environmental stewardship, community integration, and sustainability in a practice that is ethical and holistic. Western engineering ethics��must learn from these examples and expand its framework through internal examination and cultural dialogue to effectively design within the intricate web of relationships surrounding engineering practice. Engineering's purpose has always been to benefit humanity, and fulfilling that purpose in the 21st century demands that Western engineers approach their practice with authenticity, an open mind, and an ethical groundwork that enforces responsibility to communities, and the environment.��

References

[1] Q. Zhu and B. K. Jesiek, “Practicing Engineering Ethics in Global Context: A Comparative Study of Expert and Novice Approaches to Cross-Cultural Ethical Situations,”��Sci. Eng. Ethics, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 2097–2120, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11948-019-00154-8.

[2] L. Winner, “Do Artifacts Have Politics?”.

[3] S. Moon, “Engineering and the Postcolonial: Historical Perspectives and Ethical Practices,” in��Philosophy of Engineering, East and West, vol. 330, C. Mitcham, B. Li, B. Newberry, and B. Zhang, Eds., in Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol. 330. , Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 187–200. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-62450-1_16.

[4] G. Teschner, A. Tomasi, and Philosophy Documentation Center, “Technological Paradigm in Ancient Taoism,”��Techné Res. Philos. Technol., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 190–205, 2009, doi: 10.5840/techne200913322.

[5] D. Damian, B. Ghimire, and Z. S. Li, “REConnect: Participatory RE that Matters,” Aug. 31, 2025,��arXiv: arXiv:2509.01006. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.01006.

[6] R. Forrest and J. Seniuk Cicek, “Rethinking the Engineering Design Process: Advantages of Incorporating Indigenous Knowledges, Perspectives, and Methodologies,”��Proc. Can. Eng. Educ. Assoc. CEEA, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.24908/pceea.vi0.14911.

[7] G. D. Catalano,��Engineering Ethics: Peace, Justice, and the Earth. in Synthesis Lectures on Engineers, Technology, & Society. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-85672-3.

[8] M. A. Aubourg��et al., “Community-driven research and capacity building to address environmental justice concerns with industrial air pollution in Curtis Bay, South Baltimore,”��Front. Epidemiol., vol. 3, p. 1198321, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.3389/fepid.2023.1198321.

[9] L. Yang, F. Qian, D.-X. Song, and K.-J. Zheng, “Research on Urban Heat-Island Effect,”��Procedia Eng., vol. 169, pp. 11–18, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.10.002.

[10] S. Islam, A. Karipot, R. Bhawar, P. Sinha, S. Kedia, and M. Khare, “Urban heat island effect in India: a review of current status, impact and mitigation strategies,”��Discov. Cities, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 34, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s44327-024-00033-3.

[11] D. Hernandez Ibinarriaga,��Decolonising and Indigenising Design: Theory, Methodologies, Storytelling, and Creative Practice, 1st ed. London: Routledge, 2025. doi: 10.4324/9781032645681.

[12] M. R. Friesen and R. Herrmann, “Indigenous Knowledge, Perspectives, and Design Principles in the Engineering Curriculum,”��Proc. Can. Eng. Educ. Assoc. CEEA, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.24908/pceea.v0i0.12964.

[13] W. Anderson, “Toward Planetary Health Ethics? Refiguring Bios in Bioethics,”��J. Bioethical Inq., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 695–702, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11673-023-10285-0.

[14] W. Jenkins, Ed.,��The spirit of sustainability. in Berkshire encyclopedia of sustainability / ed.: Willis Jenkins, no. Vol. 1. Great Barrington, Mass: Berkshire Publ. Group, 2010.

[15] K. L. Lai, “Conceptual Foundations for Environmental Ethics: A Daoist Perspective,” in��Environmental Philosophy in Asian Traditions of Thought, J. B. Callicott and J. McRae, Eds., SUNY Press, 2014, pp. 173–195. doi: 10.1515/9781438452029-012.

[16] E. C. Ip, “Planetary health ethics: A Confucian alternative,”��J. Clim. Change Health, vol. 22, p. 100404, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.joclim.2024.100404.

[17] P.-H. Wong, “Dao, Harmony and Personhood: Towards a Confucian Ethics of Technology,”��Philos. Technol., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 67–86, Mar. 2012, doi: 10.1007/s13347-011-0021-z.

[18] S. Jing and N. Doorn, “Engineers’ Moral Responsibility: A Confucian Perspective,”��Sci. Eng. Ethics, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 233–253, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11948-019-00093-4.

[19] J. L. Barnes, S. K. Barnes, and M. J. Dyrenfurth, “A Biomimetic Approach to Complex Global Problems,” in��Philosophy of Engineering, East and West, vol. 330, C. Mitcham, B. Li, B. Newberry, and B. Zhang, Eds., in Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol. 330. , Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 95–102. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-62450-1_9.

[20] “pyri — Early Wildfire Detection.” Accessed: Jun. 19, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://pyri.io/

[21] M. Ames and M. A. Runco, “Predicting Entrepreneurship From Ideation and Divergent Thinking,”��Creat. Innov. Manag., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 311–315, Sep. 2005, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2004.00349.x.

[22] L. Murphy, S. Daly, C. Seifert, and S. Clancy, “Divergent thinking in engineering: Diverse exploration is key to successful project outcomes,” in��2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, Minneapolis, MN: ASEE Conferences, Aug. 2022, p. 41921. doi: 10.18260/1-2--41921.

[23] K. P. Whyte, “Indigenous science (fiction) for the Anthropocene: Ancestral dystopias and fantasies of climate change crises,”��Environ. Plan. E Nat. Space, vol. 1, no. 1–2, pp. 224–242, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1177/2514848618777621.

[24] J. Eschrich, C. McMullen, and S. Sterman, “Speculative Design in Spiraling Time: Methods and Indigenous HCI,” Jun. 11, 2025,��arXiv: arXiv:2506.10229. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.10229.

[25] J. Voros, “A generic foresight process framework,”��Foresight, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 10–21, Jun. 2003, doi: 10.1108/14636680310698379.

[26] K. Gericke and L. Blessing, “AN ANALYSIS OF DESIGN PROCESS MODELS ACROSS DISCIPLINES”.

[27] J. L. Rivera and A. Lallmahomed, “Environmental implications of planned obsolescence and product lifetime: a literature review,”��Int. J. Sustain. Eng., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 119–129, Mar. 2016, doi: 10.1080/19397038.2015.1099757.

[28] R. G. D. Oliveira, “Planned Obsolescence,”��E E R H P N M N G E M E N T N E N G N E E R N G, 2013.

[29] X. Pan, R. Valerdi, and R. Kang, “Systems Thinking: A Comparison between Chinese and Western Approaches,”��Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 16, pp. 1027–1035, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2013.01.108.

[30] Q. Wang and Q. Zhu, “Traditional Chinese Thinking and Its Influence on Modern Engineering and Social Development,” in��Engineering, Development and Philosophy, vol. 11, S. H. Christensen, C. Mitcham, B. Li, and Y. An, Eds., in Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol. 11. , Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2012, pp. 37–46. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-5282-5_3.

[31] H. Zou and Q. Liang, “Establishing distinctive theories and methods of design science rooted in Chinese traditional culture,”��Front. Mech. Eng., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 430–437, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11465-019-0583-5.

[32] B. Lawson,��How designers think: the design process demystified, Reprint. Amsterdam Heidelberg: Elsevier Architectural Press, 2010.

[33] P. Slattery��et al., “The AI risk repository: A meta-review, database, and taxonomy of risks from artificial intelligence,”��Patterns, vol. 7, no. 5, p. 101517, May 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.patter.2026.101517.

[34] M. E. Tucker, Ed.,��Religion and ecology: can the climate change? in Dædalus, no. 130.2001,4. Cambridge, Mass: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2001.

[35] L. Cameron, D. Courchene, S. Ijaz, and I. Mauro, “‘A change of heart’: Indigenous perspectives from the Onjisay Aki Summit on climate change,”��Clim. Change, vol. 164, no. 3–4, p. 43, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10584-021-03000-8.

[36] Z. Wang, “The Multiple Dimensions of Confucian Relational Ethics and the ‘Way of Being With,’”��Religions, vol. 13, no. 10, p. 922, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.3390/rel13100922.

[37] Y. Nesterova, “Rethinking Environmental Education with the Help of Indigenous Ways of Knowing and Traditional Ecological Knowledge,”��J. Philos. Educ., vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 1047–1052, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1111/1467-9752.12471.

[38] R. Mukerji��et al., “Co-design as participation: Creating meaningful pathways for collaboration in flood risk adaptation in Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo,”��Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., vol. 113, p. 104843, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104843.

[39] C. Li, “Confucian Perspectives on Science and Technology”.

[40] E. A. Cech, “Culture of Disengagement in Engineering Education?,”��Sci. Technol. Hum. Values, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 42–72, Jan. 2014, doi: 10.1177/0162243913504305.

[41] Y. Wang, E. Dogan, and X. Lin, “The effect of multiple-perspective thinking on problem solving”.

[42] M. Merleau-Ponty and C. Smith,��Phenomenology of perception: an introduction, Repr. in Routledge classics. London: Routledge, 2006.

[43] J. K. Murray, J. A. Studer, S. R. Daly, S. McKilligan, and C. M. Seifert, “Design by taking perspectives: How engineers explore problems,”��J. Eng. Educ., vol. 108, no. 2, pp. 248–275, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1002/jee.20263.

[44] L. Winner,��Autonomous technology: technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought, 9. printing. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Pr, 2001.

[45] A. Bustamante-Mora, M. Diéguez-Rebolledo, Y. Hormazábal, L. Millar, and R. Cadena, “Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Engineering: Products, Services, Technologies, and Social Inclusivity with a Gender Approach,”��Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 5, p. 1888, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16051888.

[46] C. A. Le Dantec and S. Fox, “Strangers at the Gate: Gaining Access, Building Rapport, and Co-Constructing Community-Based Research,” in��Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, Vancouver BC Canada: ACM, Feb. 2015, pp. 1348–1358. doi: 10.1145/2675133.2675147.

[47] “A Conversation with Dr. Kongjian Yu on Restoring Our ‘Sponge Planet,’” CWR. Accessed: May 18, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://cwrrr.org/interviews/kongjian-yu-on-restoring-our-sponge-planet/

[48] “Bio-In memory of Professor Kongjian Yu.” Accessed: Mar. 20, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.cala.pku.edu.cn/dnykj_en/Bio.htm

[49] “The Gando School Library by Francis Kéré – EARTH ARCHITECTURE.” Accessed: May 15, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://eartharchitecture.org/?p=1837

[50] S. Charles, “Kere’s Gando Primary School was the most significant building of 2001,” Dezeen. Accessed: May 15, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.dezeen.com/2025/01/07/francis-kere-gando-primary-school-25-buildings/

[51] “Working together to restore the Ōngātoro/Maketū Estuary,” Science Learning Hub. Accessed: May 15, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/2700-working-together-to-restore-the-ongatoro-maketu-estuary

[52] P. Barrett, P. Kurian, N. Simmonds, and R. Cretney, “Community participation in the development of the Ōngātoro/Maketū Estuary project: The socio‐ecological dimensions of restoring an interconnected ecosystem,”��Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst., vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 1547–1560, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.1002/aqc.3048.

[53] “Mana Ōngātoro, Mana Tangata,” Te Arawai Ki Tai. Accessed: May 15, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.takt.org.nz/current-projects-1/mana-%C5%8Dng%C4%81toro%2C-mana-tangata

[54] “Marrying indigenous knowledge and modern science | Engineering New Zealand.” Accessed: Mar. 20, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.engineeringnz.org/news-insights/marrying-indigenous-knowledge-and-modern-science/