Enhanced Temporal Review

Timeline Overview

Note: The timeline includes only actions and events with clear temporal markers that could be sequenced chronologically.

Timeline Elements: 8

Actions on Timeline: 4 (of 4 extracted)

Events on Timeline: 4 (of 4 extracted)

Temporal Markers

At least one year prior to project 1 elements
During design phase 1 elements
During plan review phase 1 elements
After flooding and complaints 1 elements
After plan approval, construction period completion 1 elements
After subdivision construction completion 1 elements
Following flooding occurrence 1 elements
Following independent review completion 1 elements

Temporal Consistency Check

Valid

Extracted Actions (4)

Volitional professional decisions with intentions and ethical context

Description: City Engineer J left Firm BWJ to join City C in a municipal engineering role. This created potential future conflicts when reviewing work from the former employer.

Temporal Marker: At least one year prior to project

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Career advancement in municipal role

Fulfills Obligations:

Professional mobility

Guided By Principles:

Career development
Public service

Required Capabilities:

Municipal engineering expertise

Within Competence: Yes

Scenario Metadata

Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Character Motivation: Career advancement and opportunity to serve the public in a municipal role with greater responsibility and impact

Ethical Tension: Personal career goals vs potential future conflicts with former employer relationships

Learning Significance: Engineers must anticipate and plan for potential conflicts of interest when changing roles, especially between private practice and regulatory positions

Stakes: Future objectivity in regulatory decisions, public trust in municipal oversight, professional integrity

Decision Point: Yes - Story can branch here

Alternative Actions:

Decline the municipal position
Accept but establish formal conflict management protocols
Negotiate role restrictions to avoid reviewing former employer's work

Narrative Role: inciting_incident

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Action_Career_Transition_Decision",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "proeth-scenario:alternativeActions": [
    "Decline the municipal position",
    "Accept but establish formal conflict management protocols",
    "Negotiate role restrictions to avoid reviewing former employer\u0027s work"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:characterMotivation": "Career advancement and opportunity to serve the public in a municipal role with greater responsibility and impact",
  "proeth-scenario:consequencesIfAlternative": [
    "Missed career opportunity but no conflicts",
    "Clear ethical framework but potential operational constraints",
    "Limited role scope but maintained integrity"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:decisionSignificance": "Engineers must anticipate and plan for potential conflicts of interest when changing roles, especially between private practice and regulatory positions",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalTension": "Personal career goals vs potential future conflicts with former employer relationships",
  "proeth-scenario:isDecisionPoint": true,
  "proeth-scenario:narrativeRole": "inciting_incident",
  "proeth-scenario:stakes": "Future objectivity in regulatory decisions, public trust in municipal oversight, professional integrity",
  "proeth:description": "City Engineer J left Firm BWJ to join City C in a municipal engineering role. This created potential future conflicts when reviewing work from the former employer.",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Potential future conflicts with former employer"
  ],
  "proeth:fulfillsObligation": [
    "Professional mobility"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Career development",
    "Public service"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "City Engineer J",
  "proeth:hasCompetingPriorities": {
    "@type": "proeth:CompetingPriorities",
    "proeth:priorityConflict": "Career opportunity vs future conflict potential",
    "proeth:resolutionReasoning": "Career opportunity prioritized with assumption conflicts could be managed"
  },
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Career advancement in municipal role",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Municipal engineering expertise"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "At least one year prior to project",
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Career Transition Decision"
}

Description: Principal Engineer R developed subdivision design and stormwater management calculations that later proved inadequate. The design failed to properly address runoff flows per regulations.

Temporal Marker: During design phase

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Deliverable subdivision design meeting requirements

Fulfills Obligations:

Client service

Guided By Principles:

Engineering standards
Public welfare

Required Capabilities:

Stormwater engineering Regulatory knowledge

Within Competence: Yes

Scenario Metadata

Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Character Motivation: Complete client project efficiently while meeting apparent regulatory requirements and maintaining firm profitability

Ethical Tension: Thorough engineering analysis vs project timeline and cost pressures, public safety vs client satisfaction

Learning Significance: Engineers must prioritize public safety and regulatory compliance over convenience, deadlines, or cost considerations

Stakes: Public safety from flooding, environmental protection, professional liability, firm reputation

Decision Point: Yes - Story can branch here

Alternative Actions:

Conduct more comprehensive stormwater analysis
Seek peer review of calculations
Request additional site studies before finalizing design

Narrative Role: rising_action

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Action_Design_Development_Decision",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "proeth-scenario:alternativeActions": [
    "Conduct more comprehensive stormwater analysis",
    "Seek peer review of calculations",
    "Request additional site studies before finalizing design"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:characterMotivation": "Complete client project efficiently while meeting apparent regulatory requirements and maintaining firm profitability",
  "proeth-scenario:consequencesIfAlternative": [
    "Higher costs but safer design",
    "Delayed timeline but verified accuracy",
    "Extended schedule but better risk management"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:decisionSignificance": "Engineers must prioritize public safety and regulatory compliance over convenience, deadlines, or cost considerations",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalTension": "Thorough engineering analysis vs project timeline and cost pressures, public safety vs client satisfaction",
  "proeth-scenario:isDecisionPoint": true,
  "proeth-scenario:narrativeRole": "rising_action",
  "proeth-scenario:stakes": "Public safety from flooding, environmental protection, professional liability, firm reputation",
  "proeth:description": "Principal Engineer R developed subdivision design and stormwater management calculations that later proved inadequate. The design failed to properly address runoff flows per regulations.",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Unknown - design deficiencies not apparent"
  ],
  "proeth:fulfillsObligation": [
    "Client service"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Engineering standards",
    "Public welfare"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "Principal Engineer R (Firm BWJ)",
  "proeth:hasCompetingPriorities": {
    "@type": "proeth:CompetingPriorities",
    "proeth:priorityConflict": "Design efficiency vs comprehensive analysis",
    "proeth:resolutionReasoning": "Insufficient analysis led to regulatory non-compliance"
  },
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Deliverable subdivision design meeting requirements",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Stormwater engineering",
    "Regulatory knowledge"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "During design phase",
  "proeth:violatesObligation": [
    "Public safety",
    "Professional competence",
    "Regulatory compliance"
  ],
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Design Development Decision"
}

Description: City Engineer J reviewed and approved subdivision plans prepared by former employer Firm BWJ despite the potential conflict of interest. This approval enabled construction that later caused flooding.

Temporal Marker: During plan review phase

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Fulfill municipal review duties

Fulfills Obligations:

Municipal duties

Guided By Principles:

Municipal responsibility
Public safety

Required Capabilities:

Plan review expertise Regulatory knowledge

Within Competence: Yes

Scenario Metadata

Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Character Motivation: Demonstrate competence in new municipal role while maintaining positive relationships and avoiding appearance of bias against former employer

Ethical Tension: Duty to provide objective regulatory oversight vs loyalty to former colleagues and desire to avoid conflict

Learning Significance: Engineers in regulatory roles must recuse themselves from decisions involving conflicts of interest, regardless of personal or professional discomfort

Stakes: Public safety, municipal liability, professional credibility, public trust in regulatory process

Decision Point: Yes - Story can branch here

Alternative Actions:

Recuse self and assign review to colleague
Declare conflict but proceed with enhanced scrutiny
Engage independent third-party reviewer before approval

Narrative Role: climax

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Action_Plan_Approval_Decision",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "proeth-scenario:alternativeActions": [
    "Recuse self and assign review to colleague",
    "Declare conflict but proceed with enhanced scrutiny",
    "Engage independent third-party reviewer before approval"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:characterMotivation": "Demonstrate competence in new municipal role while maintaining positive relationships and avoiding appearance of bias against former employer",
  "proeth-scenario:consequencesIfAlternative": [
    "Clear ethical stance but potential operational delays",
    "Transparency but still compromised objectivity",
    "Independent validation but increased costs and timeline"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:decisionSignificance": "Engineers in regulatory roles must recuse themselves from decisions involving conflicts of interest, regardless of personal or professional discomfort",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalTension": "Duty to provide objective regulatory oversight vs loyalty to former colleagues and desire to avoid conflict",
  "proeth-scenario:isDecisionPoint": true,
  "proeth-scenario:narrativeRole": "climax",
  "proeth-scenario:stakes": "Public safety, municipal liability, professional credibility, public trust in regulatory process",
  "proeth:description": "City Engineer J reviewed and approved subdivision plans prepared by former employer Firm BWJ despite the potential conflict of interest. This approval enabled construction that later caused flooding.",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Potential perception of conflict bias"
  ],
  "proeth:fulfillsObligation": [
    "Municipal duties"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Municipal responsibility",
    "Public safety"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "City Engineer J",
  "proeth:hasCompetingPriorities": {
    "@type": "proeth:CompetingPriorities",
    "proeth:priorityConflict": "Municipal duty vs conflict of interest",
    "proeth:resolutionReasoning": "Prioritized municipal duties over conflict disclosure/recusal"
  },
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Fulfill municipal review duties",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Plan review expertise",
    "Regulatory knowledge"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "During plan review phase",
  "proeth:violatesObligation": [
    "Conflict of interest avoidance",
    "Public trust",
    "Independent review"
  ],
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Plan Approval Decision"
}

Description: City C engaged third-party Firm IBM to conduct independent review of the subdivision design after flooding complaints and conflict concerns arose. This revealed the original design failures.

Temporal Marker: After flooding and complaints

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Independent technical assessment and conflict resolution

Fulfills Obligations:

Due diligence
Public accountability
Independent verification

Guided By Principles:

Transparency
Public safety
Municipal responsibility

Required Capabilities:

Procurement authority Technical review coordination

Within Competence: Yes

Scenario Metadata

Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Character Motivation: Protect municipal interests, restore public confidence, and determine extent of design failures objectively

Ethical Tension: Transparency and accountability vs protecting municipal and staff reputation from criticism

Learning Significance: When conflicts of interest lead to problems, organizations must prioritize independent investigation and public accountability over self-protection

Stakes: Municipal liability, public trust restoration, future regulatory credibility, legal exposure

Narrative Role: resolution

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Action_Independent_Review_Decision",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "proeth-scenario:alternativeActions": [
    "Conduct internal review only",
    "Engage legal counsel to minimize exposure",
    "Commission comprehensive review of all projects involving similar conflicts"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:characterMotivation": "Protect municipal interests, restore public confidence, and determine extent of design failures objectively",
  "proeth-scenario:consequencesIfAlternative": [
    "Potential bias and continued public distrust",
    "Focus on legal protection over problem-solving",
    "Broader scope but higher costs and potential for more revelations"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:decisionSignificance": "When conflicts of interest lead to problems, organizations must prioritize independent investigation and public accountability over self-protection",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalTension": "Transparency and accountability vs protecting municipal and staff reputation from criticism",
  "proeth-scenario:isDecisionPoint": false,
  "proeth-scenario:narrativeRole": "resolution",
  "proeth-scenario:stakes": "Municipal liability, public trust restoration, future regulatory credibility, legal exposure",
  "proeth:description": "City C engaged third-party Firm IBM to conduct independent review of the subdivision design after flooding complaints and conflict concerns arose. This revealed the original design failures.",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Potential liability exposure",
    "Public scrutiny"
  ],
  "proeth:fulfillsObligation": [
    "Due diligence",
    "Public accountability",
    "Independent verification"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Transparency",
    "Public safety",
    "Municipal responsibility"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "City C (municipal authority)",
  "proeth:hasCompetingPriorities": {
    "@type": "proeth:CompetingPriorities",
    "proeth:priorityConflict": "Cost containment vs independent verification",
    "proeth:resolutionReasoning": "Public accountability and technical verification prioritized over cost concerns"
  },
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Independent technical assessment and conflict resolution",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Procurement authority",
    "Technical review coordination"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "After flooding and complaints",
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Independent Review Decision"
}

Extracted Events (4)

Occurrences that trigger ethical considerations and state changes

Description: The subdivision construction is finished and properties become occupied by homeowners.

Temporal Marker: After plan approval, construction period completion

Activates Constraints:

Ongoing_Maintenance_Standards
Post_Construction_Monitoring

Scenario Metadata

Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Emotional Impact: Satisfaction for developer and city officials; anticipation and excitement for new homeowners; professional pride for engineers

Stakeholder Consequences:

developer: Project milestone achieved, revenue generation begins
city_engineer: Professional responsibility shifts to monitoring performance
homeowners: Major life investment and relocation
city: Tax base expansion, infrastructure responsibility

Learning Moment: Shows how engineering decisions materialize into real-world consequences affecting people's lives and investments

Ethical Implications: Highlights engineer's continuing responsibility for public welfare even after project handoff

Discussion Prompts:

What ongoing responsibilities do engineers have after project completion?
How should post-construction monitoring be structured?
What expectations should homeowners have about engineering quality?

Tension: low Pacing: slow_burn

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Event_Subdivision_Construction_Completion",
  "@type": "proeth:Event",
  "proeth-scenario:crisisIdentification": false,
  "proeth-scenario:discussionPrompts": [
    "What ongoing responsibilities do engineers have after project completion?",
    "How should post-construction monitoring be structured?",
    "What expectations should homeowners have about engineering quality?"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:dramaticTension": "low",
  "proeth-scenario:emotionalImpact": "Satisfaction for developer and city officials; anticipation and excitement for new homeowners; professional pride for engineers",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalImplications": "Highlights engineer\u0027s continuing responsibility for public welfare even after project handoff",
  "proeth-scenario:learningMoment": "Shows how engineering decisions materialize into real-world consequences affecting people\u0027s lives and investments",
  "proeth-scenario:narrativePacing": "slow_burn",
  "proeth-scenario:stakeholderConsequences": {
    "city": "Tax base expansion, infrastructure responsibility",
    "city_engineer": "Professional responsibility shifts to monitoring performance",
    "developer": "Project milestone achieved, revenue generation begins",
    "homeowners": "Major life investment and relocation"
  },
  "proeth:activatesConstraint": [
    "Ongoing_Maintenance_Standards",
    "Post_Construction_Monitoring"
  ],
  "proeth:causedByAction": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Action_Plan_Approval_Decision",
  "proeth:causesStateChange": "Project moves from construction to operational phase; homeowners take occupancy",
  "proeth:createsObligation": [
    "Monitor_Performance",
    "Respond_To_Issues"
  ],
  "proeth:description": "The subdivision construction is finished and properties become occupied by homeowners.",
  "proeth:emergencyStatus": "routine",
  "proeth:eventType": "outcome",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "After plan approval, construction period completion",
  "proeth:urgencyLevel": "low",
  "rdfs:label": "Subdivision Construction Completion"
}

Description: Multiple properties in the subdivision experience flooding, causing damage to homes and revealing design inadequacies.

Temporal Marker: After subdivision construction completion

Activates Constraints:

Emergency_Response_Required
Public_Safety_Investigation

Scenario Metadata

Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Emotional Impact: Panic and anger from affected homeowners; guilt and anxiety for Engineer J; concern and defensiveness from Principal Engineer R; alarm for city officials

Stakeholder Consequences:

homeowners: Property damage, financial loss, displacement, loss of trust
city_engineer_j: Professional reputation damaged, potential legal liability, ethical violations exposed
firm_bwj: Professional liability, potential lawsuits, reputation damage
city_c: Public safety responsibility, potential legal exposure, need for emergency response

Learning Moment: Demonstrates how professional conflicts of interest and design failures can result in concrete harm to vulnerable populations

Ethical Implications: Reveals consequences of compromised professional judgment; shows how conflicts of interest can lead to inadequate technical review and public harm

Discussion Prompts:

How do conflicts of interest compromise engineering judgment?
What is the engineer's responsibility when design failures cause property damage?
How should emergency response prioritize immediate safety versus long-term solutions?

Crisis / Turning Point Tension: high Pacing: crisis

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Event_Property_Flooding_Occurrence",
  "@type": "proeth:Event",
  "proeth-scenario:crisisIdentification": true,
  "proeth-scenario:discussionPrompts": [
    "How do conflicts of interest compromise engineering judgment?",
    "What is the engineer\u0027s responsibility when design failures cause property damage?",
    "How should emergency response prioritize immediate safety versus long-term solutions?"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:dramaticTension": "high",
  "proeth-scenario:emotionalImpact": "Panic and anger from affected homeowners; guilt and anxiety for Engineer J; concern and defensiveness from Principal Engineer R; alarm for city officials",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalImplications": "Reveals consequences of compromised professional judgment; shows how conflicts of interest can lead to inadequate technical review and public harm",
  "proeth-scenario:learningMoment": "Demonstrates how professional conflicts of interest and design failures can result in concrete harm to vulnerable populations",
  "proeth-scenario:narrativePacing": "crisis",
  "proeth-scenario:stakeholderConsequences": {
    "city_c": "Public safety responsibility, potential legal exposure, need for emergency response",
    "city_engineer_j": "Professional reputation damaged, potential legal liability, ethical violations exposed",
    "firm_bwj": "Professional liability, potential lawsuits, reputation damage",
    "homeowners": "Property damage, financial loss, displacement, loss of trust"
  },
  "proeth:activatesConstraint": [
    "Emergency_Response_Required",
    "Public_Safety_Investigation"
  ],
  "proeth:causedByAction": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Action_Design_Development_Decision",
  "proeth:causesStateChange": "Crisis mode activated; emergency response needed; investigation triggered; public safety concerns raised",
  "proeth:createsObligation": [
    "Investigate_Cause",
    "Provide_Emergency_Response",
    "Determine_Liability",
    "Implement_Corrections"
  ],
  "proeth:description": "Multiple properties in the subdivision experience flooding, causing damage to homes and revealing design inadequacies.",
  "proeth:emergencyStatus": "high",
  "proeth:eventType": "outcome",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "After subdivision construction completion",
  "proeth:urgencyLevel": "high",
  "rdfs:label": "Property Flooding Occurrence"
}

Description: Property owners formally complain about both flood damage and City Engineer J's potential conflict of interest in approving plans from former employer.

Temporal Marker: Following flooding occurrence

Activates Constraints:

Ethics_Investigation_Required
Transparency_Obligation

Scenario Metadata

Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Emotional Impact: Betrayal and anger from homeowners; shame and defensive anxiety for Engineer J; concern for city officials about public trust; professional community alarm about ethics

Stakeholder Consequences:

homeowners: Loss of trust in municipal oversight, demands for accountability and compensation
city_engineer_j: Career jeopardy, potential disciplinary action, loss of professional credibility
city_c: Public trust damaged, need to demonstrate accountability, potential legal exposure
engineering_profession: Reputation impact, need to demonstrate ethical standards

Learning Moment: Illustrates how conflicts of interest undermine public trust and why disclosure and recusal are essential professional obligations

Ethical Implications: Demonstrates intersection of technical competence and ethical integrity; shows how undisclosed conflicts compromise professional judgment and harm public trust

Discussion Prompts:

What disclosure and recusal procedures should have been followed?
How do conflicts of interest compromise both technical judgment and public trust?
What remedial actions can restore public confidence after ethical violations?

Crisis / Turning Point Tension: high Pacing: escalation

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Event_Homeowner_Conflict_Allegations",
  "@type": "proeth:Event",
  "proeth-scenario:crisisIdentification": true,
  "proeth-scenario:discussionPrompts": [
    "What disclosure and recusal procedures should have been followed?",
    "How do conflicts of interest compromise both technical judgment and public trust?",
    "What remedial actions can restore public confidence after ethical violations?"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:dramaticTension": "high",
  "proeth-scenario:emotionalImpact": "Betrayal and anger from homeowners; shame and defensive anxiety for Engineer J; concern for city officials about public trust; professional community alarm about ethics",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalImplications": "Demonstrates intersection of technical competence and ethical integrity; shows how undisclosed conflicts compromise professional judgment and harm public trust",
  "proeth-scenario:learningMoment": "Illustrates how conflicts of interest undermine public trust and why disclosure and recusal are essential professional obligations",
  "proeth-scenario:narrativePacing": "escalation",
  "proeth-scenario:stakeholderConsequences": {
    "city_c": "Public trust damaged, need to demonstrate accountability, potential legal exposure",
    "city_engineer_j": "Career jeopardy, potential disciplinary action, loss of professional credibility",
    "engineering_profession": "Reputation impact, need to demonstrate ethical standards",
    "homeowners": "Loss of trust in municipal oversight, demands for accountability and compensation"
  },
  "proeth:activatesConstraint": [
    "Ethics_Investigation_Required",
    "Transparency_Obligation"
  ],
  "proeth:causedByAction": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Action_Plan_Approval_Decision",
  "proeth:causesStateChange": "Ethics investigation initiated; public trust compromised; transparency and accountability required",
  "proeth:createsObligation": [
    "Conduct_Ethics_Review",
    "Investigate_Decision_Process",
    "Assess_Conflict_Impact",
    "Determine_Remedial_Action"
  ],
  "proeth:description": "Property owners formally complain about both flood damage and City Engineer J\u0027s potential conflict of interest in approving plans from former employer.",
  "proeth:emergencyStatus": "high",
  "proeth:eventType": "outcome",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "Following flooding occurrence",
  "proeth:urgencyLevel": "high",
  "rdfs:label": "Homeowner Conflict Allegations"
}

Description: Firm IBM's independent technical review confirms design failures and regulatory violations, documenting increased runoff flows contrary to established regulations.

Temporal Marker: Following independent review completion

Activates Constraints:

Immediate_Corrective_Action
Regulatory_Compliance_Required

Scenario Metadata

Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Emotional Impact: Vindication and continued anger for homeowners; devastation and panic for Engineer J; professional concern for Principal Engineer R; relief and determination for city officials

Stakeholder Consequences:

homeowners: Official validation of claims, stronger legal position for compensation
city_engineer_j: Professional liability confirmed, career likely ended, potential legal consequences
firm_bwj: Professional liability exposure, potential license actions, insurance claims
city_c: Clear direction for remedial action, basis for personnel decisions
engineering_profession: Need to demonstrate accountability and learning

Learning Moment: Shows importance of independent professional review in confirming technical failures and demonstrates how objective analysis reveals both technical and ethical failures

Ethical Implications: Confirms intersection of technical incompetence and ethical violations; demonstrates need for independent oversight and accountability mechanisms in professional practice

Discussion Prompts:

How should the engineering profession respond to confirmed technical and ethical failures?
What systemic changes could prevent similar failures in municipal approval processes?
How should remediation balance immediate safety with long-term accountability?

Crisis / Turning Point Tension: high Pacing: crisis

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Event_Independent_Review_Findings",
  "@type": "proeth:Event",
  "proeth-scenario:crisisIdentification": true,
  "proeth-scenario:discussionPrompts": [
    "How should the engineering profession respond to confirmed technical and ethical failures?",
    "What systemic changes could prevent similar failures in municipal approval processes?",
    "How should remediation balance immediate safety with long-term accountability?"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:dramaticTension": "high",
  "proeth-scenario:emotionalImpact": "Vindication and continued anger for homeowners; devastation and panic for Engineer J; professional concern for Principal Engineer R; relief and determination for city officials",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalImplications": "Confirms intersection of technical incompetence and ethical violations; demonstrates need for independent oversight and accountability mechanisms in professional practice",
  "proeth-scenario:learningMoment": "Shows importance of independent professional review in confirming technical failures and demonstrates how objective analysis reveals both technical and ethical failures",
  "proeth-scenario:narrativePacing": "crisis",
  "proeth-scenario:stakeholderConsequences": {
    "city_c": "Clear direction for remedial action, basis for personnel decisions",
    "city_engineer_j": "Professional liability confirmed, career likely ended, potential legal consequences",
    "engineering_profession": "Need to demonstrate accountability and learning",
    "firm_bwj": "Professional liability exposure, potential license actions, insurance claims",
    "homeowners": "Official validation of claims, stronger legal position for compensation"
  },
  "proeth:activatesConstraint": [
    "Immediate_Corrective_Action",
    "Regulatory_Compliance_Required"
  ],
  "proeth:causedByAction": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#Action_Independent_Review_Decision",
  "proeth:causesStateChange": "Technical failures officially confirmed; regulatory violations documented; corrective action required; professional accountability triggered",
  "proeth:createsObligation": [
    "Immediate_Remediation",
    "Regulatory_Reporting",
    "Professional_Discipline_Review",
    "Public_Safety_Protection"
  ],
  "proeth:description": "Firm IBM\u0027s independent technical review confirms design failures and regulatory violations, documenting increased runoff flows contrary to established regulations.",
  "proeth:emergencyStatus": "critical",
  "proeth:eventType": "outcome",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "Following independent review completion",
  "proeth:urgencyLevel": "critical",
  "rdfs:label": "Independent Review Findings"
}

Causal Chains (3)

NESS test analysis: Necessary Element of Sufficient Set

Causal Language: Principal Engineer R developed subdivision design and stormwater management calculations that later failed, leading to flooding of multiple properties

Necessary Factors (NESS):

Inadequate stormwater management design
Technical calculations errors or oversights
Design approval and construction implementation

Sufficient Factors:

Combination of flawed design + approval + construction + storm events

Counterfactual Test: With proper stormwater design, flooding would likely have been prevented or significantly reduced

Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Principal Engineer R (Firm BWJ)
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:

Design Development Decision
Principal Engineer R creates flawed subdivision design with inadequate stormwater management
Plan Approval Decision
City Engineer J approves the deficient design despite conflict of interest
Subdivision Construction Completion
Construction proceeds based on approved but flawed design
Property Flooding Occurrence
Design failures manifest as flooding damage to homeowner properties

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#CausalChain_83e2eaf3",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "Principal Engineer R developed subdivision design and stormwater management calculations that later failed, leading to flooding of multiple properties",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Principal Engineer R creates flawed subdivision design with inadequate stormwater management",
      "proeth:element": "Design Development Decision",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "City Engineer J approves the deficient design despite conflict of interest",
      "proeth:element": "Plan Approval Decision",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Construction proceeds based on approved but flawed design",
      "proeth:element": "Subdivision Construction Completion",
      "proeth:step": 3
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Design failures manifest as flooding damage to homeowner properties",
      "proeth:element": "Property Flooding Occurrence",
      "proeth:step": 4
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Design Development Decision",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "With proper stormwater design, flooding would likely have been prevented or significantly reduced",
  "proeth:effect": "Property Flooding Occurrence",
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Inadequate stormwater management design",
    "Technical calculations errors or oversights",
    "Design approval and construction implementation"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Principal Engineer R (Firm BWJ)",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Combination of flawed design + approval + construction + storm events"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: City Engineer J left Firm BWJ to join City C, creating potential conflict of interest when reviewing plans from former employer

Necessary Factors (NESS):

Employment transition from design firm to regulatory role
Review assignment of former employer's work
Lack of conflict of interest management

Sufficient Factors:

Career transition + plan review assignment + inadequate conflict protocols

Counterfactual Test: Without the employment relationship, conflict of interest would not have existed

Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: City Engineer J and City C management
Type: shared
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:

Career Transition Decision
Engineer J moves from Firm BWJ to City C regulatory position
Plan Approval Decision
Engineer J reviews and approves subdivision plans from former employer despite conflict
Homeowner Conflict Allegations
Property owners formally complain about conflict of interest in approval process

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#CausalChain_9b9ac215",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "City Engineer J left Firm BWJ to join City C, creating potential conflict of interest when reviewing plans from former employer",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer J moves from Firm BWJ to City C regulatory position",
      "proeth:element": "Career Transition Decision",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer J reviews and approves subdivision plans from former employer despite conflict",
      "proeth:element": "Plan Approval Decision",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Property owners formally complain about conflict of interest in approval process",
      "proeth:element": "Homeowner Conflict Allegations",
      "proeth:step": 3
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Career Transition Decision",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Without the employment relationship, conflict of interest would not have existed",
  "proeth:effect": "Plan Approval Decision",
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Employment transition from design firm to regulatory role",
    "Review assignment of former employer\u0027s work",
    "Lack of conflict of interest management"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "shared",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "City Engineer J and City C management",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Career transition + plan review assignment + inadequate conflict protocols"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: City Engineer J's approval of subdivision plans despite conflict of interest enabled construction to proceed with flawed design

Necessary Factors (NESS):

Official municipal approval of subdivision plans
Regulatory clearance for construction permits
Failure to identify design deficiencies during review

Sufficient Factors:

Plan approval + construction permits + contractor implementation

Counterfactual Test: Without plan approval, construction could not have legally proceeded

Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: City Engineer J
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:

Plan Approval Decision
City Engineer J approves BWJ's subdivision plans despite conflict and design flaws
Subdivision Construction Completion
Construction proceeds and is completed based on approved flawed design
Property Flooding Occurrence
Design deficiencies manifest as flooding damage to completed homes
Independent Review Decision
City engages third-party firm to investigate flooding and approval process
Independent Review Findings
External review confirms both design failures and regulatory violations

RDF JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/11#CausalChain_7bbbb95a",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "City Engineer J\u0027s approval of subdivision plans despite conflict of interest enabled construction to proceed with flawed design",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "City Engineer J approves BWJ\u0027s subdivision plans despite conflict and design flaws",
      "proeth:element": "Plan Approval Decision",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Construction proceeds and is completed based on approved flawed design",
      "proeth:element": "Subdivision Construction Completion",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Design deficiencies manifest as flooding damage to completed homes",
      "proeth:element": "Property Flooding Occurrence",
      "proeth:step": 3
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "City engages third-party firm to investigate flooding and approval process",
      "proeth:element": "Independent Review Decision",
      "proeth:step": 4
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "External review confirms both design failures and regulatory violations",
      "proeth:element": "Independent Review Findings",
      "proeth:step": 5
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Plan Approval Decision",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Without plan approval, construction could not have legally proceeded",
  "proeth:effect": "Subdivision Construction Completion",
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Official municipal approval of subdivision plans",
    "Regulatory clearance for construction permits",
    "Failure to identify design deficiencies during review"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "City Engineer J",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Plan approval + construction permits + contractor implementation"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Allen Temporal Relations (9)

Interval algebra relationships with OWL-Time standard properties

From Entity	Allen Relation	To Entity	OWL-Time Property	Evidence
flooding complaints	before Entity1 is before Entity2	third-party review	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	because of these complaints, City C engaged a third-party engineering firm (IBM) to review
administrative review	before Entity1 is before Entity2	approval	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	The plans were administratively reviewed for conformance with City C policy and approved by City Eng...
approval	before Entity1 is before Entity2	construction	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	approved by City Engineer J and are released for bidding and construction
no flooding	before Entity1 is before Entity2	construction	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	Prior to construction, adjacent property has not flooded
subdivision completion	before Entity1 is before Entity2	flooding complaints	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	After the subdivision is completed, properties in the vicinity of the subdivision experience floodin...
J's employment at BWJ	before Entity1 is before Entity2	J's employment at City C	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	City Engineer J was formerly a principal at Firm BWJ
J's transition to City C	before Entity1 is before Entity2	subdivision planning	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	the transition is implied to have been earlier
plan development	before Entity1 is before Entity2	administrative review	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	Developer G retains Firm BWJ...to develop plans for the subdivision. The plans were administratively...
construction	before Entity1 is before Entity2	increased runoff	`time:before` http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before	stormwater runoff flows are larger after construction

About Allen Relations & OWL-Time

Allen's Interval Algebra provides 13 basic temporal relations between intervals. These relations are mapped to OWL-Time standard properties for interoperability with Semantic Web temporal reasoning systems and SPARQL queries.

Each relation includes both a ProEthica custom property and a time:* OWL-Time property for maximum compatibility.

PASS 3: Temporal Dynamics

Extraction Complete

Timeline Overview

Temporal Markers

Temporal Consistency Check

Extracted Actions (4)

Career Transition Decision City Engineer J

Fulfills Obligations:

Guided By Principles:

Required Capabilities:

Scenario Metadata

Design Development Decision Principal Engineer R (Firm BWJ)

Fulfills Obligations:

Guided By Principles:

Required Capabilities:

Scenario Metadata

Plan Approval Decision City Engineer J

Fulfills Obligations:

Guided By Principles:

Required Capabilities:

Scenario Metadata

Independent Review Decision City C (municipal authority)

Fulfills Obligations:

Guided By Principles:

Required Capabilities:

Scenario Metadata

Extracted Events (4)

Subdivision Construction Completion

Activates Constraints:

Scenario Metadata

Property Flooding Occurrence

Activates Constraints:

Scenario Metadata

Homeowner Conflict Allegations

Activates Constraints:

Scenario Metadata

Independent Review Findings

Activates Constraints:

Scenario Metadata

Causal Chains (3)

Design Development Decision Property Flooding Occurrence

Necessary Factors (NESS):

Sufficient Factors:

Responsibility Attribution:

Causal Sequence:

Career Transition Decision Plan Approval Decision

Necessary Factors (NESS):

Sufficient Factors:

Responsibility Attribution:

Causal Sequence:

Plan Approval Decision Subdivision Construction Completion

Necessary Factors (NESS):

Sufficient Factors:

Responsibility Attribution:

Causal Sequence:

Allen Temporal Relations (9)

About Allen Relations & OWL-Time