Introduction
A call was made by Prince Charles in his sustainability lecture (NCE, 2012) to revisit the definition of civil engineering especially as he saw the profession playing a crucial (quyet dinh, chu yeu) role in tackling future challenges such as climate change. It is now timely for professional civil engineers to not be afraid to say what they really think to government, clients and employers. The Profession firstly serves mankind and everything we do needs to take a global perspective. However, personal fears may be inhibiting an ethical stance for many.
Economic constraints and local interests have made it much more difficult for many civil engineering professionals to adhere to the clear ethical principles of formulation and adherence to a set of values or beliefs; a core component of social and technical progress (Hodgkinson & Sohail, 2003). In this the individual needs to subscribe to the corporate ethic, i.e. for the purposes of this discussion the rules, principles and codes which are built around and define the ethics of the Institution of Civil Engineers, irrespective of the individuals’ employment or professional practice position. All professionals should regularly consider the ethics of their position and the work they are involved in (Fan, 2003). Professional challenges, disagreements, dichotomies and dilemmas are inevitable and taking an ethical view can help inform decision-making and be the source of technological development rather than a constraint (van den Hoven et al, 2012).
The Civil Engineers’ work is defined by boundaries. Nowadays the two most important of these boundaries are: (i) the working boundary, as an employee or self-employed professional practitioner, and; (ii) the job boundary, where the scope, scale and overall physical and temporal boundaries of the work in hand are set. In the working context, the professional, however engaged, has a