Environmental sustainability in engineering education – Quo Vadis?

Abstract

It would be difficult to find an industry sector in which the management of environmental sustainability is not of significant relevance. It is unfortunate that engineering and cognate areas of education have, for the most part, ignored these vital issues. It is, therefore, essential that all facets of engineering, design and manufacturing take action on environmental sustainability concerns through appropriate strategies. They should endeavour to implement standards, such as the ISO 14001 environmental management systems or Eco-Management and Audit Scheme, as a foundation for sustainable engineering and manufacturing. It is vital that these issues are seriously addressed in engineering education. Most engineering degree programmes do not include a broad spectrum environmental sustainability module and many have little or no exposure to any facet of learning in this area. The environmental sustainability intervention at the University of Limerick has been two-pronged in that: (a) a number of self-paced tutorials have been designed, which are intended for use in a number of European Union Universities as well as for small to medium sized industries (SMEs) and (b) an undergraduate module entitled ‘Design for Environmental Sustainability’ has been devised and implemented in several engineering and cognate programmes. It is in the context of engineering education that this paper discusses: the strategies used; the initial impact of the introductory programme intended for SMEs and Universities; and the introduction and evaluation of the undergraduate sustainability module.

Keywords:

• sustainability
• engineering
• design
• manufacturing
• environmental management systems

1. Introduction

As the debate on global warming, climate change, fossil fuels and CO₂ emissions continues, it becomes necessary to take a measured and informed approach to sustainable engineering. A generally accepted definition of sustainability is: ‘meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ (UN 1987). The EU Millennium Development Goals report, defines environmental sustainability as: ‘…meeting current human needs without undermining the capacity of the environment to provide for those needs over the long term…’ (UN 2007). Over the past decade public concern about sustainable development has profoundly transformed the competitive field.

According to Mulder and Jansen (2005) ‘Sustainable development is a challenge for engineers’. A sustainable approach to design and engineering involves evaluating where a product or system has the greatest environmental impact and then focusing on ways to reduce that impact. ‘In the engineer's view, his responsibility is only the actual design/development. Therefore, he bears no responsibility for the non-quantifiable issues that are important in engineering’ (Mulder 1999) Engineering education needs to provide for these issues at the core of courses of study with specific tutorial intervention strategies aimed at providing the participants with an understanding of issues; case studies and possible best-practice solutions to environmental sustainability problems, ‘illustrative and inspiring examples about real life situations are essential to demonstrate the systemic context, the complexity and the effect of incorrect and correct engineering decisions’ (Mulder et al. 2005).

2. The Eu Interreg Iiic Dqe Modules

The environmental sustainability module in the University of Limerick was preceded by encouraging free access to a suite of tutorials, which was designed as a small to medium sized industries (SMEs) intervention in the INTERREG IIC design, quality and environment (DQE) modules. The 11 self-paced intervention units make up a suite of PowerPoint presentations and teaching notes, which were designed as a result of collaboration between four regions of the EU representing industrial development agencies and universities in each of the four countries. These included Ireland, Greece, Germany and Finland. The EU funded research project was entitled: ‘Towards a Sustainable Future – DQE’. As part of SME intervention, a comprehensive interregional study revealed where knowledge deficits existed. The study showed that SMEs in each of the participating countries were strong on quality but not so strong on design and very weak on environmental sustainability. As part of a strategy to redress this serious deficit, it was decided to design a suite of tutorial units. While the design and composition of these units was generally agreed by the participating regions, each region developed a number of units, according to the skill-sets of the academics involved. The modules from each region were combined to form a complete suite of instructional modules. These were primarily aimed at environmental managers and other key personnel. A standard template was agreed to ensure a common framework. Figure 1 shows a sample slide, on product life cycle (PLC); each slide has teaching notes attached. Table 1 shows the module titles/topics agreed by the design team. It was arranged that these would be tested initially in the home universities of the design team before being made available to other registered EU universities, as well as SMEs.

Figure 1 Typical tutorial slide from DQE project (PLC).

Table 1 The suite of tutorial units (DQE).

The 11 DQE tutorial modules
Lecture 1: DQE and competitive advantage
Lecture 2: Environmental sustainability
Lecture 3: Territorial issues
Lecture 4: LCA and management
Lecture 5: DFS
Lecture 6: Concurrent product development
Lecture 7: DQE based marketing and customer trend analysis
Lecture 8: Integration of management systems 1
Lecture 9: Integration of management systems 2
Lecture 10: Strategy: sustainability through DQE
Lecture 11: What is DQE?

Each module contains an average of about 35 slides with accompanying teaching e-Notes. The objectives/learning outcomes for one of the learning units, ‘design for sustainability’ (DFS), are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 The learning outcomes for the ‘design for sustainability’ DQE unit.

The units were initially designed for presentation by expert tutors from an international work group, but it was later decided to add teaching notes to the slides, so that they could provide a fundamental understanding of the areas addressed, in a self-teach context. While the modules were not designed for an e-Learning environment, they could, nevertheless, with the attached e-Notes, be used in a self-paced, self-teach environment. The 11 learning units/modules that comprised the tutorial suite are shown in Table 1.

Each learning module was initially reviewed and criticised by the design peers and refined until all of those involved were happy with the overall suite of tutorials. This suite was then tested by a number of potential users using an agreed set of evaluation criteria contained in a questionnaire. Table 2 shows the resulting scores for each module from one of the test centres. Modifications were made on the basis of these scores and on specific written recommendations from the evaluators. Some of the evaluators had previous expert knowledge in the areas; while for the others, who were complete beginners, the modules were treated as induction modules. The results from the evaluation were colour coded to prevent identification and Table 2 reflects the evaluations of four individual users.

Table 2 Evaluation matrix from one centre.

	Poor	Satisfactory	Good	Excellent
Material fits with DQE aims	–	1,2,3,4	5,6,7,10	8,9,11
	–	10	3,6	1,2,4,5,7,8,9,11
	–	2,3,5,6,8,9	1,4,7,10	11
	–	3	1,5,6,7,8,9,10	2,4,11
Appropriateness of objectives	–	11	1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9	5,10
	–	10	1,3,6,10	2,4,5,7,8,9,11
	–	2,3,5,6,8,9	1,4,10	11,7
	–	10	2,3,8,9,11	1,2,4,5,6
Are learning outcomes clear?	8,11	3,7,9	5	1,2,4,6,10
	–	–	1,3,6,10	2,4,5,7,8,9,11
	5,6	3,8,9	1,2,10,11	4,7
	–	9,10	1,2,3,4,6,8,11	5,7
Is the level pitched appropriately?	–	3	1,4,5,7,8,10,11	2,6,9
	–	–	2,3,6,7,9,10	1,4,5,8,11
	–	1,3,5,6,8,9	2,7,10	4
	–	9,10	1,3,4,6,7,11	2,5,8
Is the unit cohesive?	–	3,5,8,9	1,2,4,5,7,8,10,11	6
	–	–	2,3,6,7,9,10	1,4,5,8,11
	3,6	2,5,8,10	1,4,7,9	11
	–	10	3,8,9,11	1,2,4,5,6,7
Is the unit fluent?	–	3,8,9	2,4,5,7,10,11	1,6
	–	–	2,3,6,7,9,10	1,4,5,8,11
	3,6	2,5,8,10,11	1,4,7,9	–
	–	8,9,10	1,3,5,11	2,4,6,7
Volume of material in the unit	3	11	1,4,6,8	2,5,7,9,10
	–	2,3,5,7,9	4,8,10	6,11
	8	2,3,5,6,8,11	1,4,7,9,10	–
	–	–	1,2,3,6,7,8,10	4,5,8,9,11
Are the teaching notes effective?	3	11	6,7,10	1,2,4,5,8,9
	–	5	2,3,7,8,9,10,11	1,4,6
	3,6	2,5,8,10	1,7,9	4,11
	3,7,9	6	2,10,11	1,4,5,8
Additional reference material	3,11	4	1,5,6,8,9	2,7,10
	–	3,10	2,4,6,8,9,11	1,5,7
	3,11	–	1,2,5,6,7,8,10	4,9
	3	2,6,9	1,4,5,7,11	8,10
Quality of individual slides	–	9	1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,10,11	6
	–	–	2,3,5,7,10,11	1,4,6,8
	5,6	1,3,8	7,9,10,11	2,4
	–	8	1,3,5,7,9,10	2,4,6,11
Overall quality of the unit	–	3,11	1,2,4,6,7,8,9,10	–
	–	–	2,3,6,7,9,10	1,4,5,8,11
	6	3,5,8	1,7,9,10,11	2,4
	–	3	2,7,8,10	1,4,5,6,9,11

As can be seen from Table 2, there is a clustering of scores in the good and excellent scoring categories. While a few elements were seen to be poor, these have since been corrected and other suggested elements for improvements were incorporated. From the scores shown one of the four evaluators was less favourable overall; however, this is to be expected because of individual differences, and previous technical knowledge. All four evaluators found the modules to be interesting and learnable, but not entirely suitable for self-paced learning, i.e. they found the presentations very good but full benefit could only be achieved when presented by an expert tutor. The tutorial suite was not evaluated as an e-Learning instrument. The numbers in the table refer to the individual units, numbered 1–11.

One unit, ‘Territorial Issues’, i.e. issues relating to state-specific legislation, etc. appeared too often in the poor and satisfactory score categories, and this in particular required reworking. This was not because this unit lacked quality but because of the complexity of the subject matter. It addresses the implementation strategies in the context of regional legislation, policy and culture.

The teaching/explanatory notes were found to be quite beneficial, but for some modules these needed to be expanded. Overall the modules received very positive evaluations from across the four EU regions. These were made available to those SMEs and universities across the EU that wished to access them, together with the other supporting elements and documented outcomes of the project.

Just over half the module units were applicable to sustainability in the context of engineering, technology, product design and manufacturing undergraduates. These were made available, on the public folders, to the entire community of universities in each of the participating EU regions. They were used as support material for the taught undergraduate module on ‘Design for Environmental Sustainability’ at the University of Limerick, in Ireland.

On examination of the case studies of SMEs with environmental good practice it was interesting to note, in the context of companies that had implemented an environmental management system (EMS) and qualified for ISO 14001 certification, the impact that this had on the workforce within the company. Earlier work by Burke and Gaughran (2007) showed that employees took ‘ownership’ of the initiative and continually worked hard to improve its effectiveness. They also displayed increased motivation and job satisfaction, a sense of pride in the achievements, and a willingness to aim for constant refinements and improvements. The workforce in such companies felt a sense of achievement and satisfaction in their involvement. While the impact of this new-found pride was not measured against improved productivity, it does nevertheless indicate that a more satisfied workforce is likely to be much more productive, ‘Job satisfaction and employee attitudes are likely to be associated with better organisational performance on the basis that satisfied workers are likely to work harder than dissatisfied ones’ (Patterson et al. 1999). The implication therefore for educating SMEs on eco-design/EMS approaches is that they may not just improve their environmental performance, but obtain a more satisfied and productive workforce. This potential benefit provides an additional incentive for including eco/environmental studies in undergraduate programmes.

3. The undergraduate teaching module

3.1 Rationale and module aims/objectives

It is interesting to note that the most educated of nations have the higher per capita rates of consumption and leave the deepest footprints on the Earth. In the USA, for example, 85.2% of persons over 25 have achieved the level of educational attainment of a high school graduate or more (US Census Bureau 2007) and yet the per capita energy use and waste generation in the USA is one of the highest in the world. Each person in the USA has a ecological footprint of approximately 9.6 gha (global hectares; Living Planet Report 2006). It is quite clear that general education alone has not led to environmental sustainability. Receiving education at a higher level is not sufficient for the attainment of sustainable societies; designers of learning systems must look at reorienting existing education to support sustainability. The depletion and pollution of the planet is not the work of ignorant people. Rather, it is largely the result of work by people with BAs, BScs, LLBs, MBAs and PhDs (Orr 1994, p. 7). If people are not educated in eco/environmental sustainability issues, responsibilities and strategies, they will be unable to react or to positively impact on the energy, pollution and climate change problems of the future. Neither can they become informed consumers.

Resulting from the DQE experience, the module ‘Design for Environmental Sustainability’ was initially designed for a cohort of product design and technology undergraduates. While the issues relating to environmental sustainability were to some extent permeating a number of the taught modules on the course and across the Engineering Faculty, it was felt that as its importance grew, it merited a full and separate module. This would allow students to explore in greater depth the issues relating to environmental sustainability. In the process of moving through the academic structures, a number of other Course Directors felt that this module would be of particular benefit to their students. As a result several additional programmes, with the agreement of their Course Teams, requested inclusion in the delivery of the module. These courses included engineering science, two courses in technology education, architecture and a course in enterprise engineering. The delivery of the course had to accommodate these variations and care for individual and group needs.

The lecture series was designed with an inductive approach so as to contain a blend of concrete information (fact and phenomena) and abstract concepts (principles and models; Felder and Silverman 1988); the rationale behind this is ‘by progressing from applications to governing rules, the lectures can be made more accessible to students who are not previously acquainted with all subjects’ (Boelman 2005). The lecture series was also designed and structured to always use illustrative and inspiring examples about real life situations as this was seen as being ‘essential to demonstrate the systemic context, the complexity and the effect of incorrect and correct engineering decisions’ (Mulder et al. 2005).

The existing literature also shows that inductive methods encourage students to adopt a deep approach to learning (Coles 1985, Norman and Schmidt 1992, Ramsden 2003) and that the challenges provided by inductive methods serve as precursors to intellectual development (Felder and Brent 2004). In consideration of the learning styles of the student cohort, resulting from the work of Seery et al. (2003) on the preferential learning styles of the engineering and technology undergraduate students, an active/visual learning approach was also employed.

The complete cohort would benefit from the lecture series (two per week), and the follow-on tutorials which would address specific applications and concerns of the groups. These tutorials utilised such tools as discovery learning, inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, project-based learning, case-based teaching and just-in-time teaching, all of which complemented the inductive approach taken. The specific interests of the different groups would also find expression through module assignments. The syllabus for the module endeavours to broadly address the principle issues of environmental sustainability. The aims and objectives of the module are described in the following sections:

Aims

•	To provide students with an understanding of how the principles of sustainability must be considered at all stages of design activity, production processes and throughout the life cycle of any product.
•	To encourage creativity and innovation in the context of DFS, as well as creative problem-solving and to apply ‘first principles’ strategies to design problem definitions and solutions.
•	Familiarise engineering/technology/and design students with environmental sustainability and tools.

The learning experience results in participants becoming more familiar with issues such as energy consumption, resource depletion, waste generation and management, obsolescence, ‘disposables’ and over-consumption. Students will also be equipped with appropriate tools, such as environmental assessment and analysis tools; with the ability to critically appraise contemporary trends and practises in design and engineering. Students also develop the abilities necessary to perform environmental evaluation on products and processes (life cycle analysis), to identify relevant, related legislative requirements. Participants discover how sustainable design considerations and strategies must be inherent at the concept design stages of a product as well as throughout its life cycle.

Learning outcomes

Students will be able to:

•	Explain the impacts of products and processes in the context of environmental sustainability.
•	Display an understanding of issues relating to sustainable design and production practices.
•	Use evaluation tools relating to design and manufacture of sustainable products.
•	Produce a core study report on the environmental sustainability of a selected product.
•	Explain the role of the designer and or engineer in sustainable practices and development
•	Reflect through prescribed project activity, an understanding of materials selection, processes, embodied energy, waste minimisation, reuse and recycling.
•	Understand and apply EMS implementation strategies and EMS audits

3.2 The syllabus

Table 3 shows the lecture series. For some elements, an expert practitioner was invited to deliver the lectures. An example of this was in the area of environmental legislation, a sample slide relating to this area is shown in Figure 3. Where there was a choice of using a person from the Law Faculty in University of Limerick or a practitioner in the field, it was decided to use a practitioner in the form of the advisor to companies in the Limerick area. The tutorials/workshops were set in a laboratory environment, were of 2 h duration and were conducted by individuals with specific, related expertise. The laboratory sessions were structured as follow-on sessions from the lectures, to explore, expand, discuss and address, through practical experiments and practice, topics such as: LCA; environmental auditing; design for manufacture and DFS; as well as a range of other critical issues.

Table 3 Lecture series (PD4024).

Lecture series ‘Design for Environmental Sustainability’
1. The earth is one system	12. Design for disassembly and reuse
2. Mankind's impact – eco foot-printing	13. Sustainability tools and instruments
3. Rainforest ecology	14. Cultivating sustainability cultures
4. Climate change/global warming	15. Product case studies – lessons learned
5. Fossil energy – oil and coal	16. Stake holders and behavioural
6. Fossil energy – gas and atomic	17. Environmental legislation in the EU
7. Alternative energy sources and strategies	18. Environmental legislation in practice
8. Fresh water sustainability	19. ISO 14001 and environmental audits
9. Company case studies – lessons learned	20. Manufacturing made miniature
10. DFS 1	21. Sustainability and reverse logistics
11. DFS 2	22. Sustainability – Quo Vadis?

Figure 3 Sample slide on environmental legislation – invited speaker.

3.3 Early cohort evaluation – knowledge and attitudes

In the lead-in to the module, it was decided to evaluate the attitudes and eco-literacy of the entire cohort. Earlier research, by Quinn and Gaughran (2007) had indicated that age and education were factors in both attitudes and eco-literacy; and that there was also a link between the individual's eco-literacy and the level of formal education they had received, although this had not always found expression in their behaviour.

Figure 4 shows the eco-literacy scores for undergraduates at the beginning of the module and these scores demonstrated a low level of general ecological knowledge. In 2006, only 2.4% scored an A1 grade (>85%) in an eco-literacy questionnaire; this improved to 16.3% by the last quarter of the module. Results were similar for the 2007 and 2008 cohorts. There is a distinct lack of environmental awareness and related knowledge by the student cohort before engaging with this module. This is interesting and somewhat surprising, in the context of the widespread publicity about global warming, in particular, and other environmental concerns.

Figure 4 Eco-literacy test scores at the beginning of the module.

The eco-footprint of the undergraduate cohort was calculated as part of a laboratory exercise during their course work in 2006. The average footprint recorded was 9.59 gha, females fared better than the males with an average footprint of 7.39 gha compared to male result of 9.91 gha. In 2008, the recorded footprints were similar to those of 2006, with an average of 9.58 gha; showing that overall consumption has not decreased significantly over the past two years. The current ‘fair earth share’ is 1.8 gha per person, whereas the current average Irish footprint is 5.4 gha (Living Planet Report 2006).

It was obvious from the student cohort survey that there was considerable scope for improvement. A general survey of the participants, conducted after completion of the module, revealed that the majority of participants had changed their thinking and behaviour as consumers of goods and services, in energy management and in waste reduction and recycling.

3.4 Coursework assignments and evaluation

The evaluation of the module initially consisted of a terminal test and two coursework assignments, with each assignment having a weighting of 25%. Course evaluation methodology and assignment specifications were published to the students at the first lecture. The two assignments were timed to follow the appropriate lecture series, all elements of the coursework were compulsory.

In 2007/2008, the weighting in the examination was increased and a single assignment, with a marks weighting of 40%, was given to all participants; this structure also prevailed for the 2008/2009 module. The exam weighting was 50% and the final 10% was based on the student's laboratory participation. The assignment was aimed at designing a strategy to implement and develop 10 sustainability principles (of their choice and rank), in a workplace/company and to design guidance packages which would be motivational and user friendly. The participants were also required to devise a strategy for the integration of ‘these principles into their specific everyday practice and identify the direct impact they will have on their “professional” lives’. This approach worked quite successfully and will inform the assessment of the module in the next academic year.

The terminal examination is divided in two parts. Part one is compulsory and designed to examine the students' knowledge across the module, so as to allow them to demonstrate their understanding of the broader issues, practices and strategies: students are required to answer 12 out of 16 questions. The first examination question had 16 sub elements and students had to attempt 12. Examples of this type of ‘short answer’ question are:

•	‘In the context of Hubbert's Peak predictions, discuss the peak oil concept and it's implications for future energy usage’.
•	‘Describe the stages of a life cycle assessment method (qualitative or quantitative)’.

Students could then choose two from five in-depth questions, an example of one of these questions, which always attempted to be topical, was:

•

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently published ‘Climate change 2007’ – summary report for policy makers. It stated: ‘Warming of the climate system is now unequivocal, as it is now evident from observations of increase in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global mean sea level.’ In Ireland, in the context of ‘picking the low apples first’, if you were advising the policy-makers, which three areas would you suggest should be addressed first and why? And what do you see as their likely impacts.

4. Student progress

The students achieved a ‘B’ grade average in the coursework; some of the project responses were excellent to the level of ‘exemplary’. They are now in a position to make informed decisions on ecological and environmental issues. This applies to whichever discipline the students belong. The popularity/importance/impact of this area of study is such that many of the participants are opting to explore sustainability topics further, through major final year projects. These projects can have a weighting of between two and eight modules, depending on the course. The latter being the weighting for the product design and technology cohort – (two-thirds of the final year marks). Others are in the process of pursuing postgraduate studies in this or cognate areas of study.

Student's attitudes towards the environment were measured at the start of the module in 2006/2007, when it was found that students had a low positive score towards the environment; by the end of the module this had increased by 40%. Surprisingly, in the context of continuing environmental publicity, the 2008/2009 cohort had an equally low score at the start of their module, however, by the end of the module their score had improved by nearly 80%. This indicates a very positive attitudinal change as a result of engaging with the module.

Students were also more aware about environmental issues and had a better understanding of them. Students were asked at the start of the module to explain the ‘greenhouse effect’, 75% answered this question poorly. However, when asked again at the end of the module only 38% answered the question poorly; the number that provided excellent answers to the question had also doubled. Students were also much more aware of the human causes of greenhouse gases and understood the strategies that might be employed to reduce the problem.

Students were also asked to select, from a list of eight environmental concerns (recycling, global warming, pollution, ozone layer, etc.) that which they thought was the single most important concern. At the start of the module, 65% of students chose global warming; a similar result (63%) was obtained when the selection was repeated at the end of the module. The summary of the students' concerns at the end of the module is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5 Student's environmental concerns.

5. Discussion

In the context of various reports, such as that by the IPCC and in seeing our own responsibility to the planet, we can see that it is imperative that this area of study should be incorporated into all engineering and cognate areas of education. If we expect corporate responsibility and environmental sustainability, should we not ensure that we educate our future engineers and designers to promote and support this expectation? After all, ‘While industry used to be a main reason for environmental degradation, it is increasingly becoming part of the solution to environmental problems’ – Brundtland (1995) ‘The ultimate goal of integrating sustainable development is that environmental and societal aspects are taken into account in each stage of the design cycle. In other words, from problem solving and goal formulating to evaluation of the new design’ (Bras-Klapwijk et al. 1998). It is recognised that 80% of the impact on energy usage, and product life cycle, including environmental impacts, is decided upon at the design stage of any product. As the educators of engineers, we should design our undergraduate courses to educate our engineers so that they understand this impact of design on the environment. We have the opportunity to change the mindset and attitudes of future engineers to the benefit of Society.

Intelligent engineering requires professionals who can cater for the problems which arise now, but need to be able to see the impact of their engineering decisions on environmental and ecological systems into the future. Sustainable engineering is no longer the preserve of a few specialist-trained professionals, but needs to be at the core of all engineering education courses. The series of lectures, laboratories and associated activities at the University of Limerick, appear to benefit the participants a great deal both in increasing their knowledge of environmental issues and in influencing their attitude to the environment. There is evidence that it has a positive influence in their approach to other subjects and course tasks. Many students who completed this module have looked to now undertake major final year projects in sustainable development. Influencing the entire cohort of the engineering students internationally may be seen as an enormous task. However, each individual can play a part, as in the spirit of the Chinese proverb: ‘It is better to light a candle than to sit and curse the dark’.

The undergraduate module was run for the third time in the 2008/2009 academic year with some refinements, resulting from the experience the previous year, from student feedback, observations and contemporary issues and developments. More time was devoted to environmental auditing and to case studies in engineering manufacturing companies.

At the University of Limerick, the module on ‘Design for Environmental Sustainability’ is now offered to five different courses in the Faculty of Engineering and other course directors are requesting that it be included in their programmes. It is envisaged that this will become a module taken by all students at the University of Limerick in the near future. Further sustainability modules are also being devised, and a Masters course is under consideration by the Science and Engineering Faculty, in collaboration with the Business Faculty.