Professional and Social Engineering (ENCE 355) — Year III / Part II

CHAPTER 2: ETHICS AND PROFESSIONALISM

IOE, Tribhuvan University • 8 Hours • 10 Marks
The Past Exam Questions below are mapped from the equivalent Engineering Professional Practice (EPP) board questions, since ENCE 355 is a new syllabus. Year tags show the original exam sitting.

2.1 ETHICS, MORALITY AND PROFESSIONALISM 2082 2081 2079 2078 2077 2074 2071 2070 2069

PAST EXAM QUESTIONS (mapped from EPP):

  1. Write short notes on Etiquette, Moral, Law and Ethics. [4] (2082 Baisakh)
  2. Define the term professionalism and discuss its key characteristics. [4] (2081 Reg)
  3. Explain engineering morals, ethics and professionalism. [8] (2074 Magh, Q2)
  4. Define moral and immoral actions. [2] (2081 Shrawan, Q2a)
  5. Why are ethics and morals necessary in the engineering profession? [4] (2079 Jestha, Q2)
  6. Define ethics. What is moral and non-moral action? [Part of 5] (2074 Bhadra, Q2b)
  7. How do you differentiate professional ethics from moral behaviour? [Part of 4] (2071 Magh, Q2b)
  8. Discuss ethical considerations related to extensive use of AI in engineering. [4] (2082 Baisakh)
Ethics vs Morals
Ethics is the science of morality — a set of external guidelines defining accepted behaviour for a group or profession (may change by nation, society, religion or profession). Morals are the internal principles of right and wrong held by an individual’s conscience, culture and religion.

Because ethics is external, breaking it invites peer/societal disapproval or loss of job; because morals are internal, breaking them brings personal guilt or remorse. Note that legal is not always ethical — the law sets a minimum, ethics sets a higher bar.

PROFESSIONALISM ETHICS MORALS (internal)
Figure 2.1: Morals (internal) → Ethics (external) → Professionalism (holistic conduct)
TermMeaningEnforced by
EtiquettePolite social conventionSocial approval
MoralPersonal sense of right/wrongConscience (guilt)
LawState-enforced rulesState (legal punishment)
EthicsGroup/professional guidelinesProfession/peers

Professionalism

Professionalism is the conduct, behaviour and attitude expected of a professional: competence, integrity, accountability, ethical conduct, discipline and continuous learning. Engineering ethics is studied to sensitize engineers before they meet real dilemmas.

Core ethical values: Honesty, Integrity, Fidelity, Charity, Responsibility and Self-Discipline. Non-moral actions (neither moral nor immoral) include natural calamities, animal actions, and acts of children, the mentally unsound, the intoxicated, or persons under compulsion.

Nepal context: Factors lowering a professional’s morale include inadequate salary, defective social norms (valuing money over dignity of labour), low self-morale, non-implementation of rules and lack of political commitment.

2.2 ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY AND SAFETY 2081 2079 2073 2072

PAST EXAM QUESTIONS (mapped from EPP):

  1. Describe safety, risk and benefit analysis in engineering practice. [Part of 10] (2072 Magh, Q4)
  2. Elucidate the objective of safety engineering. [Part of 4] (2073 Magh, Q4b)
  3. “Engineering profession always emphasizes safety first in engineering delivery.” Describe with typical examples. [8] (2072 Ashwin, Q4)
  4. Write short notes on: Safety, Risk and Benefit analysis. [4] (2079 Shrawan, Q5c)
  5. “Construction is Destruction to Environment.” Do you agree? Give reasons. [4] (2081 Shrawan, Q6b)

Safety Engineering

Safety Engineering
Ensuring that engineered systems provide acceptable levels of safety across their full life cycle — identifying hazards, assessing risks and preventing accidents.

Objectives: prevent accidents; manage risk to acceptable levels; ensure regulatory compliance; learn from failures; minimize human error through fail-safe and ergonomic design; and pursue continuous improvement. Safety must be integrated from the earliest design stage — never bolted on as an afterthought.

Risk and Benefit Analysis

Risk = Probability × Severity. Managed in five steps: Identify → Assess → Plan response (Avoid / Transfer / Mitigate / Accept) → Monitor & Control → Document lessons learned.

Cost–benefit analysis weighs direct, indirect, intangible and opportunity costs against benefits. A project is viable when NPV > 0 and BCR > 1, after discounting future values for the time value of money.

Sustainability: Development vs Environment

Sustainable development meets present needs without compromising future generations. Every construction project embodies a tension — “construction is partly destruction” — which the engineer must manage through impact assessment and mitigation rather than denial.

IEE vs EIA (EPA 2053 / 1997, Clause 7)
IEE (Initial Environmental Examination) is a preliminary screening for smaller projects (Schedule 1). EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) is a detailed study with mitigation and extensive public consultation for large projects (Schedule 2), approved by the Ministry of Forests & Environment.
Screening Scoping Prediction & Mitigation Management & Monitoring Audit
Figure 2.2: The Five-Step EIA Process

2.3 CODE OF CONDUCT AND PROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOUR 2082 2079 2078 2076 2073 2072 2071 2070

PAST EXAM QUESTIONS (mapped from EPP):

  1. Why is it necessary for a professional to follow a code of conduct? [Part of 4] (2078 Chaitra, Q2a)
  2. What are the codes of ethics for engineers according to the Nepal Engineering Council? [4] (2071 Bhadra, Q2b)
  3. Describe the code of ethics for engineers. [Part of 8] (2072 Ashwin, Q2)
  4. List out the core ethical values used to develop a code of conduct for professionals. [Part of 4] (2073 Magh)
  5. Write down the professional code of conduct issued by the Nepal Engineering Council (NEC). [4] (2076 Bhadra, Q8)
  6. How do NEA and NEC contribute to keeping the profession ethical? [Part of 5] (2079 Chaitra, Q1b)
  7. What do you understand by professional practice? Describe the relation of the engineer with client, contractor and fellow engineers. [10] (2072 Magh, Q2)

NEC Code of Conduct (NEC Act 2055)

The Nepal Engineering Council’s code binds every registered engineer to eight duties:

  1. Maintain discipline and honesty.
  2. Be polite and preserve confidentiality (secrecy).
  3. Do not discriminate on grounds of religion, race, sex or caste.
  4. Work only within one’s area of competence.
  5. Do no harm to the profession and take no improper financial benefit.
  6. Accept personal responsibility for one’s own work.
  7. State credentials truthfully (name, designation, registration number).
  8. Avoid misleading publicity or advertisement.
NSPE Fundamental Canons (1977): hold paramount public safety, health and welfare; serve only in areas of competence; issue objective, truthful public statements; act as faithful agents/trustees; avoid deceptive acts; and conduct oneself honourably, responsibly, ethically and lawfully.

Professional Behaviour: Relations

Towards…Expected behaviour
PublicRegard for health/safety/welfare; oppose untrue statements; be modest, no self-laudatory advertisement.
Employer / ClientFaithful agent/trustee; disclose financial interests; maintain confidentiality; flag adverse consequences if judgment is overruled.
Fellow EngineersGive proper credit; no malicious injury to reputation; don’t supplant or unfairly compete.
ContractorFair, impartial dealing; clear specifications; no hidden payments or inducements.

Purpose and Limitations of Codes

Purpose
  • Expresses rights, duties and obligations
  • Framework for ethical judgment
  • Positive support under pressure
  • Basis for investigating misconduct
  • Puts society above personal gain
Limitations
  • Not a recipe for every situation
  • Not a legal code (no arrest)
  • Entries can conflict (dilemmas)
  • Not the final moral authority
  • Weak leverage against employers
NEA vs NEC: The NEC (Nepal Engineering Council, Act 2055 / 1999 AD) is the statutory regulator — it registers engineers (Categories A General, B Professional, C Non-Nepali) and enforces the code. The NEA (Nepal Engineers’ Association, 1968 AD, a WFEO member) is the professional association promoting welfare and development.

2.4 RESPONSIBILITY, LIABILITY AND NEGLIGENCE 2081 2080 2079 2078 2077 2074 2073 2072 2071 2070 2069

PAST EXAM QUESTIONS (mapped from EPP):

  1. Define negligence, tort and liability. [3] (2081 Shrawan, Q2b)
  2. Explain vicarious liability with examples. [0.5] (2080 Chaitra, Q2b)
  3. Differentiate tort liability from vicarious liability. What conditions are necessary to prove professional negligence in engineering practice? [4] (2079 Shrawan, Q2a)
  4. What do you understand by Negligence, Tort and Liability? What are the elements of negligence? [5] (2074 Bhadra, Q2a)
  5. Explain tort. What are the reasons behind introducing tort law in society? [1+1] (2069 Bhadra, Q4a)
  6. What kind of liability do engineers most suffer from? Explain. [5] (2070 Bhadra, Q3b)
  7. What are the duties and liabilities of an engineer and architect? [5] (2074 Bhadra, Q1b)
Negligence, Tort, Liability
Negligence = failure to meet the standard of care a reasonably prudent person would exercise. Tort = an act or omission causing loss/damage independent of contract (a civil wrong). Liability = the obligation to pay a penalty for failing to fulfil a duty — the consequence of negligence.

Three Elements of Negligence

1. Duty of Care 2. Breach of Duty 3. Resulting Damage
Figure 2.3: All three elements must be present to establish negligence

Tort objectives: compensate the victim, transfer the cost of injury to the responsible party, prevent repetition and defend the victim’s rights. Types of liability: under contract (work below spec), in tort (injury via negligence) and under statute (law violations).

Vicarious liability makes an employer liable for an employee’s tort committed in the course of employment (the employee acts as the employer’s agent). It extends to partners — each partner is an agent of the others.

Engineers most suffer from tort/negligence liability because their work affects public safety, carries an inherent duty of care, and is judged against a higher “reasonable professional” standard. Protection: professional indemnity insurance, documentation, peer review and code adherence.

Duties of an Engineer / Architect

Fitness for purpose; avoid negligent misstatement; comply with statutes and building regulations; examine the site (above and below ground); protect public and private rights; produce accurate drawings and specifications; select appropriate materials; exercise judgment on novel/risky design and resist improper employer interference; and revise the design when needed.

2.5 CONFLICT OF INTEREST, CORRUPTION AND WHISTLEBLOWING 2081 2079 2078 2077

PAST EXAM QUESTIONS (mapped from EPP):

  1. Write short notes on: Conflict of interest in profession. [5] (2079 Chaitra, Q5c)
  2. Define professional ethics. Why do engineers behave unethically? Explain the role of the Nepal Engineering Council to control the immoral acts of engineers in Nepal. [1+1+2] (2078 Kartik, Q3a)
  3. A factory’s hazardous chemical-waste tank has a leak. The boss asks engineer ‘A’ to stay silent, hinting he may lose his job otherwise. If you were ‘A’, what would you do? Discuss. [5] (2079 Chaitra, Q2a)
  4. An engineer as a political leader pressures a contractor for low-quality construction and bargains for unwanted payment. Write for and against it. [4] (2077 Chaitra, Q7)
Conflict of Interest (COI)
A situation in which a professional’s personal interests (financial, familial or political) compete with or undermine their professional duty to clients, employers or the public.

Types: financial (owning shares in a recommended firm), familial (favouring relatives), professional (serving two competing firms), client-vs-public (cost-cutting on safety) and employer-vs-judgment (pressure to approve substandard work).

Handling COI — Disclose → Recuse → Escalate/Report: disclose the interest, withdraw (recuse) from the decision, prioritize public safety, follow NEC/NSPE codes, seek advice from an ethics committee and document decisions.

Why Engineers Behave Unethically

Financial pressure or greed; pressure from superiors; political interference; weak enforcement; peer pressure (“everyone does it”); inadequate salary; ignorance of codes; lack of ethics education; absence of whistleblower protection; and corruption-normalizing social norms. In Nepal this appears as commission-taking, inflated estimates, substandard materials and collusion between engineers and contractors.

Whistleblowing

Engineering is a form of social experimentation where public safety outranks personal job security. In the chemical-leak case the ethical response is to report and document the evidence (photos, samples, records) — be prepared to quit the job, but never stay silent. Silence is complicity, punishable by the NEC.

Role of NEC: it enforces the code of conduct and holds disciplinary powers up to removal from registration. The chief weakness in Nepal is the absence of whistleblower protection, which breeds fear of retaliation.

2.6 ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING AND CASE STUDIES 2081 2080 2079 2078 2075 2074 2071 2069

PAST EXAM QUESTIONS (mapped from EPP):

  1. Explain moral dilemma with examples. Write and explain the priority while making an ethical decision. [0.5+3] (2080 Chaitra, Q2b)
  2. Write and explain the bases of making an ethical decision. [6] (2079 Jestha, Q2)
  3. How does a moral dilemma occur? What are the bases to solve a moral dilemma? [4] (2071 Bhadra, Q2a)
  4. An RCC bridge developed cracks six months after operation; untested steel, poor workmanship, overloading (>20 t on 20 t design), and consultant–contractor friendship. As a probe-team member, give your judgment. [8/10] (2078 Kartik, Q5 / 2074 Bhadra, Q4)
  5. A dam in a pristine ecosystem will provide irrigation, water and power but flood habitats and displace indigenous communities. Discuss and recommend. [6] (2080 Chaitra, Q7)
  6. Samsung was ordered to pay Apple billions over design/IP. What do you know about this case? Are you satisfied with the verdict? [10] (2069 Bhadra, Q5 OR)

Moral Dilemma and the Laws of Ethics

Moral Dilemma
A choice between two alternatives where every option involves some loss; the decision must be made on morally correct grounds.

Five laws of ethics to resolve dilemmas: (1) Eternal law; (2) Utilitarianism — the greatest good for the greatest number; (3) Universalism; (4) Distributive justice; (5) Personal liberty. Priority order: public safety/welfare first → utilitarianism → universalism → distributive justice → personal liberty.

Case-Study Framework (6 Steps)

Identify issues Identify stakeholders Apply ethical principles Apply legal framework Judgment Corrective measures Quote NSPE/NEC principles and legal concepts (tort, negligence, liability, contract) at steps 3–4
Figure 2.4: Six-Step Framework for Answering Ethics Case Studies

Representative Case Studies

CASE 1 — RCC Bridge Cracks (Joint Responsibility)
Judgment: Responsibility is shared. The contractor used untested steel and delivered workmanship below specification; the consultant failed in supervision and had a conflict of interest (friendship with the contractor); the road department permitted overloading beyond the 20-ton design load. Apply professional negligence, vicarious liability and breach of contract. Corrective measures: mandatory material testing, independent supervision, load control and disclosure of relationships.
CASE 2 — Dam in a Pristine Ecosystem (Development vs Environment)
Recommendation: This is a classic moral dilemma. Do not reject the project outright, but conduct a full EIA, explore alternative sites, hold genuine stakeholder consultation with indigenous communities, design mitigation (fish ladders, reforestation, cultural-site protection) and provide fair compensation and resettlement. Weigh utilitarian benefit against distributive justice for those displaced.
CASE 3 — Dinner Invitation from a Contractor Friend (COI)
Response: Politely decline the recurring hospitality and shared accommodation. Friendship is not itself unethical, but accepting favours from a party you supervise creates a conflict of interest and the appearance of impropriety. Maintain professional distance and objective judgment; disclose the relationship to your firm.
CASE 4 — Samsung vs Apple (Intellectual Property)
Discussion: The case concerned infringement of patented design and utility features. Copying protected designs is both unethical and illegal; respect for intellectual property rights rewards innovation. A balanced answer acknowledges the need to protect original design while cautioning against over-broad patents that stifle competition.
Other cases to know: Chemical-waste whistleblowing; Bheri River Bridge collapse (2007, faulty bulldog grips); cement-ratio manipulation; WAN/LAN negligent installation (vicarious liability); Shashikala road-alignment (misuse of authority + COI); fake engineering degrees (fraud); and the unpaid-labourers payment chain (contract/tort/labour law).

QUICK REFERENCE: KEY FACTS

  • Ethics = external (society/profession); Morals = internal (conscience).
  • NEC code: 8 duties (discipline, confidentiality, non-discrimination, competence, no harm, personal responsibility, true credentials, no misleading ads).
  • Negligence = Duty of care + Breach + Damage (all three).
  • Vicarious liability: employer liable for employee’s tort in course of employment.
  • Risk = Probability × Severity; project viable if NPV > 0 and BCR > 1.
  • EIA steps: Screening → Scoping → Prediction/Mitigation → Management/Monitoring → Audit.
  • 5 laws of ethics: Eternal, Utilitarian, Universalism, Distributive justice, Personal liberty.
  • NEC = regulator (Act 2055); NEA = association (1968 AD, WFEO member).

PAST QUESTION FREQUENCY SUMMARY

TopicFrequencyTypical Marks
Negligence, tort & liability (2.4)★★★★★ Very High2–5
Case studies / moral dilemma (2.6)★★★★★ Very High4–10
Ethics, morals & professionalism (2.1)★★★★ High2–8
Code of conduct (2.3)★★★★ High4–10
Safety, risk & sustainability (2.2)★★★ Medium4–8
Conflict of interest / whistleblowing (2.5)★★★ Medium4–5
Exam Tip: Case studies are the highest-value questions. Always use the 6-step framework, name the stakeholders, and cite specific NEC/NSPE canons plus the legal concept (tort, negligence, vicarious liability). Put public safety first in every judgment.

My Mnemonics