ETHICS IN BUILT ENVIRONMENT PRACTICE

Learning Objectives

1. To reflect on the ethical responsibility of built environment professionals in working with groups and individuals who may be in vulnerable situations.

2. To consider the notion of sustainable development and what this means in light of the nexus between ecological, economic, and social sustainability.

3. To understand the role of built environment professionals as enablers of processes, rather than providers of solutions.

CHALLENGING PRACTICE: MODULE HANDBOOK

Ethics in Built Environment Practice

Ethics are a set of principles that govern behaviour or how an activity is conducted. In his recent review of the ethical codes of architecture, ‘Reflect Critically, Act Fearlessly’, David Roberts argues that “perhaps more than other professions the process of conceiving, making, using and transforming the built environment is aligned to ecological, social and material conditions” (Roberts, 2019). In architecture and the built environment professions, there are basic duties and principles that are often associated with professional practice. These include being honest and acting with integrity; avoiding conflicts of interest; promoting your services honestly; and being competent in the work you carry out (ARB, 1997). Within such codes, each participant is required to act according to universally applied standards. Whilst such principles can be understood as a baseline for professional conduct, it is important to note that this is a mode that often privileges the client (as commissioner). It also can present decision-making as judging between competing rights where one becomes the ‘winner’; and limit to an ‘advisory role’ wider societal and ecological concerns.

To engage in inclusive or sustainable urban development is often to work with communities who are in precarious or vulnerable situations, and to struggle to alleviate inequality and environmental degradation. You will need to consider, with others, where the effective points of intervention may be: at what scales and in what ways you can act to create positive change. This may require challenging the limits and sites for action beyond those you would usually engage with, to include economics, organisation, and politics. To seek such transformative change requires questioning and acting against dominant ideologies and systems. It requires advocating for and working with those who are not currently in positions of power, or who may be subject to exclusions. The personal and professional responsibilities in this context, in terms of considering who and what matters in any given situation, are therefore much wider and more complex, as your role might be.

Feminist scholar Carol Gilligan developed an ethic of care that invites a more responsive and active approach, both in terms of positioning and practices (Gilligan, 1982). Critical of abstract and predetermined rules, she suggests that ethics should be developed with reference to a particular context and set of relations that support their positive continuation. What is ‘right’ in a particular situation is to take into account the impact that a course of action will have upon those with whom you are working and the wider communities. It also requires an acknowledgement of the need for self-care; to avoid self-exploitation or disregard for those beyond your immediate associations. This demands honesty with yourself and those with whom you work about your capacities, skills, motivation, emotional responses and commitment to a context. Donna Haraway speaks of cultivating ‘respons-ability’, as a sensitivity to the experiences of others, through doing things together. (Haraway, 2016)

Power imbalances will exist within groups and communities, and whilst they cannot be eradicated, they should be understood as shaping relations and agencies. Strategies should be developed to take these into account. For example, the risks, labours and impact of a project will not bear evenly upon all participants; therefore questions of what is at stake, and what is gained by each participant should be openly discussed. It may be politically and/or socially risky for some to visibly take a particular position or carry out certain work.

Working with an international organisation confers privileges and status in terms of access to meetings, resources, information, and support. This may not necessarily be afforded to those who have been working on the ground for years, or those affected by the proposals. When joining a particular context, it is important to understand that often people will have worked to develop the possibility for action and the capacities of local people to join in. Whilst the work you do can be visible, celebrated, and have an important impact, it may only have been possible because of the hidden or invisible labours of others. The organisation and management of collaborative and co-designed work is crucial, and it is good to establish protocols and modes of decision making early to ensure everyone is aware of how things will happen.

It is important to recognise structural discrimination across race, class, physical or mental ability, and gender. Identities are usually socially constituted, multiple and often unchosen. Identity categories intersect to create overlapping and interdependent oppressions, relating to the institutions and structures that hold them in place. (Crenshaw, 1998) [See module 3. Social Exclusion] As a built environment professional seeking to support democratic processes, opening up, listening to and amplifying voices can be crucial ethical practices. Although familiar, even ‘everyday’ notions, proficiency in these skills should not be assumed, and often takes time to refine, particularly in relation to unfamiliar social or cultural situations. Those who ‘shout the loudest’ in a context may not be representative of those they claim to speak for. They may simply be more used to speaking and being heard. Often community representatives are cultivated by those in power to simplify contexts and issues, or to suppress certain voices or concerns.

It is important to recognise the heterogeneity of groups, and not to assume community agreement as this can lead to domination or the erasure of experiences and perspectives. It is useful to consider who may be absent from the table, who has advocates, and also the relevance of ecological systems, or non-human species, that may not ‘speak’ in the same terms, or fit within certain dominant narratives. To pay attention to the experiences and knowledge of others does not imply that all opinions are necessarily equally valid within a particular context, or disallow that some may have a better viewpoint than others. Nor does it deny the value of particular skills and understandings that you or others may have developed in professional contexts. Rather, it foregrounds the ethical responsibility of being aware of the limitations and partiality of your knowledge and experiences, and to work in a situated way (Haraway, 2003) [See module 11. Participation].

You may be asked or need to engage in ethical decisions in cultural, religious and political contexts very different from those with which you are familiar. How do you avoid making decisions based on the value judgements, histories and experiences of a dominant single group (such as the Global North) whilst being able to challenge the systemic injustices and oppression you encounter? Uma Narayan argues that we are replicating colonial traditions if we portray some cultures and traditions as natural and unchanging, and groups and communities as homogenous and bounded. (Narayan, 1998) She offers instead an anti-essentialist position which proposes the need to build ethical practice together, in order to understand the complexities and histories that matter in a context or to engage in a concern