Letter to the Editor pubs.acs.org/est
Crossing Researcher-Public Boundaries he editorial “Crossing the Imaginary Line” (http://pubs. acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.6b04432) stimulated widespread discussion within the environmental science and engineering community on a question that has long been and will always be a difficult one for researchers in our field: what is the appropriate type and level of public engagement on environmental and human health topics in which we possess expertise? Several high-profile cases were discussed in which researchers have gotten very involved in such situations, resulting in perceptions by some to have crossed a line. The editorial addresses norms and ethics governing professional behavior in researcher-public line crossing. In professional practice (including research), one encounters numerous kinds of boundaries that engage issues of ethics and professional responsibility−this is the reason for codes of ethics in professions. Engineering curricula include education about the Code of Ethics for Engineers. There are codes of ethics for science as well, including the Chemical Professional’s Code of Conduct. As one learns in studying ethics and in practice, boundaries involving ethics and related professional responsibilities are often hard to define and traverse. Two of the four case examples cited in the editorial involved actions taken by researchers to bring to public awareness acts of willful deception and the breaking of laws on matters of direct importance to human health. The responsibility to act was clear in those cases, though by no means a simple undertaking for the professionals involved. The other two cases discussed did not involve situations with crimes, but rather proactive efforts on the part of individual scientists to make the public aware of new kinds of environmental contamination. The responsibility for individual action perhaps was less clear in those two cases, depending on one’s interpretation of professional codes of ethics. While not garnering the visibility and intensity of interest as the four cases cited in the editorial, day-to-day ethical boundary encounters possess many of the same characteristics. What should one do about the government agency research partner that does not want to release data; the research-sponsor company that wants to ignore or downplay a problem; or the NGO partner that pushes for stronger conclusions? These are challenging situations: the first canon of the Code of Ethics for Engineershold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the publicmust be considered along with the fourth canon act for each employer or client as a faithful agent or trustee. As our field brings most of us into regular contact with affected organizations and communities, we frequently bump into boundaries that involve issues of ethics and professional responsibility, and we need to be aware when we are encountering such boundaries. Some progress across the boundaries for specific purposes after careful consideration of the issues involved, while others just wander across. It is the wandering across boundaries that can cause problems for a researcher; for example, becoming part of an advocacy operation based on inadequate science without intention to do so.
T
© XXXX American Chemical Society
Considering the high level of public interest in environmental science and engineering research, and the desire of the public to be consulted, engaged, and educated about the topics we investigate, there is a lot of crossing of researcher-public boundaries. There is a lot of goodincluding enhancement of research impact, improved public understanding, and righting of injusticethat has and will come from this activity. The boundaries often involve issues of ethics and professional responsibilities, however, which need to be carefully considered before starting to cross a particular boundary.
David A. Dzombak*
■
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890, United States
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
David A. Dzombak: 0000-0002-0865-1946 Notes
The author declares no competing financial interest. Biography David Dzombak is the Hamerschlag University Professor and Head of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University, and a former Associate Editor of Environmental Science & Technology.
Received: November 27, 2016 Revised: December 14, 2016 Accepted: December 18, 2016
A
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b05988 Environ. Sci. Technol. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
