Step 2: Normative Requirements Pass (Facts Section)
Extract principles, obligations, constraints, and capabilities from the facts section
Sustainable Development and Resilient Infrastructure
Step 2 of 5
Facts Section
Section Content:
Facts: Engineer K, a licensed professional engineer, is hired by the City to design a new flood control system to protect a rapidly growing urban area that has experienced increasingly severe flooding. The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind. The project’s goal is to create a resilient infrastructure that balances immediate protection needs with long-term sustainability. During the initial design phase, Engineer K identifies two potential approaches, both of which could be successfully designed and implemented:Traditional Approach: Build a concrete floodwall system to provide immediate protection at a relatively low cost. While effective in the short term, the floodwall system has a high carbon footprint, is prone to deterioration, and may require significant repairs or upgrades within 15 years. Further, the system does not provide for expandability should future flooding risk expand or increase and would require complete demolition and rebuilding if the capacity proved insufficient in the future. Sustainable Approach: Develop a green infrastructure system incorporating wetland restoration and other biodynamic controls. This approach would mitigate flooding while enhancing local biodiversity and reducing carbon emissions. Further, the natural aspects of this approach could readily be expanded if additional capacity is necessary should future flooding risk expand or increase. However, the initial cost is significantly higher than the traditional approach and the system requires several years to fully mature before offering optimal protection. As part of the project development process, the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback on the project. During stakeholder meetings, some commentors expressed a preference for the Traditional Approach due to its lower upfront cost and faster implementation timeline. However, other community and environmental organizations advocated for the Sustainable Approach, citing its long-term environmental and social benefits. Engineer K personally believes the Sustainable Approach aligns better with both City policies and the engineer’s professional obligation to promote sustainability and resilience, but recognizes competing priorities of cost, urgency, and long-term impact. While working on the report and gathering necessary information, Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood under low-probability but high-volume conditions—particularly if the design capacity of the Traditional Approach is breached. Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach, including the risks and benefits of each approach to the City’s leadership during a City Council meeting. The City’s leadership decides not to address the identified floodwater issue with the Traditional Approach, ultimately concluding that any action to mitigate the impact on this community would delay the project further and reinforcing the low probability of such conditions occurring. The City approves the Traditional Approach and Engineer K proceeds to work on its implementation.
Principles Extraction
LLM Prompt
DUAL PRINCIPLE EXTRACTION - Ethical Principles Analysis
THEORETICAL CONTEXT (Chapter 2.2.2):
- Principles are ABSTRACT ethical foundations requiring extensional definition through cases
- They function like constitutional principles - open-textured and requiring interpretation
- Principles mediate moral ideals into concrete reality through context-specific application
- They cannot be applied deductively but require balancing and interpretation
EXISTING PRINCIPLE CLASSES IN ONTOLOGY:
- Competence Principle: Balances professional autonomy with recognition of limitations and need for collaboration.
- Confidentiality Principle: Must be balanced against public safety obligations and legal disclosure requirements.
- Domain-Specific Principle: Examples: Environmental Stewardship (engineering), Patient Autonomy (medicine), Academic Freedom (education). These address domain-specific ethical ch
- Environmental Stewardship Principle: Bridges engineering practice with broader environmental and societal responsibilities.
- Ethical Principle: Legacy synonym for Principle. Use :Principle for new concepts.
- Fundamental Ethical Principle: Examples: Public Welfare Paramount, Respect for Persons, Justice, Beneficence. These require extensive interpretation and balancing in specific contex
- Integrity Principle: Central to professional identity formation and trust maintenance in professional relationships.
- Principle: An information content entity representing ethical values and guidelines for conduct. This is the P component of the formal specification D=(R,P,O,S,R
- Principle Argument: An argument based on fundamental ethical principles or values.
- Principle Refinement: Capability to evolve principles as inconsistencies are resolved and new cases are added (GenEth system, Anderson & Anderson 2018)
- Professional Virtue Principle: Examples: Integrity, Competence, Honesty, Professional Courage, Accountability. These shape professional character and decision-making.
- Public Welfare Principle: Requires contextual interpretation to balance against client confidentiality and employer loyalty when public safety is at risk.
- Relational Principle: Examples: Confidentiality, Loyalty, Fairness, Transparency, Respect for Autonomy. These govern interpersonal professional dynamics.
- Transparency Principle: Essential for maintaining trust and enabling stakeholder participation in professional decisions.
=== TASK ===
From the following case text (facts section), extract information at TWO levels:
LEVEL 1 - NEW PRINCIPLE CLASSES: Identify ethical principles that appear to be NEW types not covered by existing classes above. Look for:
- Fundamental ethical values being invoked
- Abstract moral ideals guiding decisions
- Constitutional-like principles requiring interpretation
- Values that transcend specific rules or obligations
For each NEW principle class, provide:
- label: Clear principle name (e.g., "Environmental Stewardship", "Professional Autonomy")
- definition: What moral ideal this principle represents
- abstract_nature: The abstract ethical foundation (justice, welfare, autonomy, etc.)
- extensional_examples: Concrete cases/situations where this principle applies
- value_basis: Core moral value underlying the principle
- application_context: Professional domains or situations where relevant
- operationalization: How this abstract principle becomes concrete in practice
- balancing_requirements: What other principles it typically must be balanced against
- examples_from_case: How this principle appears in the case text
LEVEL 2 - PRINCIPLE INDIVIDUALS: Identify specific instances where principles are invoked or applied. For each instance:
- identifier: Unique identifier for this principle instance (e.g., "PublicSafety_Case8_Discussion")
- principle_class: Which principle class it instantiates (use existing classes when possible)
- concrete_expression: EXACT text showing how the principle is expressed
- invoked_by: Who invokes or appeals to this principle
- applied_to: What decision/situation/dilemma it applies to
- interpretation: How the principle is interpreted in this specific context
- balancing_with: Other principles that must be balanced against it
- tension_resolution: How conflicts between principles are resolved
- case_relevance: Why this principle matters in this specific case
IMPORTANT:
- Focus on ABSTRACT ethical foundations, not specific rules or procedures
- Principles are broader than obligations - they generate obligations in context
- Use EXACT quotes from case text where principles are expressed
- Distinguish between the abstract principle CLASS and its concrete APPLICATION
CASE TEXT:
Engineer K, a licensed professional engineer, is hired by the City to design a new flood control system to protect a rapidly growing urban area that has experienced increasingly severe flooding. The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind. The project’s goal is to create a resilient infrastructure that balances immediate protection needs with long-term sustainability.
During the initial design phase, Engineer K identifies two potential approaches, both of which could be successfully designed and implemented:
Traditional Approach: Build a concrete floodwall system to provide immediate protection at a relatively low cost. While effective in the short term, the floodwall system has a high carbon footprint, is prone to deterioration, and may require significant repairs or upgrades within 15 years. Further, the system does not provide for expandability should future flooding risk expand or increase and would require complete demolition and rebuilding if the capacity proved insufficient in the future.
Sustainable Approach: Develop a green infrastructure system incorporating wetland restoration and other biodynamic controls. This approach would mitigate flooding while enhancing local biodiversity and reducing carbon emissions. Further, the natural aspects of this approach could readily be expanded if additional capacity is necessary should future flooding risk expand or increase. However, the initial cost is significantly higher than the traditional approach and the system requires several years to fully mature before offering optimal protection.
As part of the project development process, the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback on the project. During stakeholder meetings, some commentors expressed a preference for the Traditional Approach due to its lower upfront cost and faster implementation timeline. However, other community and environmental organizations advocated for the Sustainable Approach, citing its long-term environmental and social benefits. Engineer K personally believes the Sustainable Approach aligns better with both City policies and the engineer’s professional obligation to promote sustainability and resilience, but recognizes competing priorities of cost, urgency, and long-term impact.
While working on the report and gathering necessary information, Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood under low-probability but high-volume conditions—particularly if the design capacity of the Traditional Approach is breached. Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach, including the risks and benefits of each approach to the City’s leadership during a City Council meeting. The City’s leadership decides not to address the identified floodwater issue with the Traditional Approach, ultimately concluding that any action to mitigate the impact on this community would delay the project further and reinforcing the low probability of such conditions occurring. The City approves the Traditional Approach and Engineer K proceeds to work on its implementation.
Respond with valid JSON in this format:
{
"new_principle_classes": [
{
"label": "Sustainable Development",
"definition": "Principle that engineering solutions must balance current needs with long-term environmental and societal impacts",
"abstract_nature": "Intergenerational justice and environmental stewardship",
"extensional_examples": ["Green building design", "Renewable energy projects", "Resource conservation"],
"value_basis": "Responsibility to future generations",
"application_context": ["Infrastructure projects", "Environmental engineering", "Urban planning"],
"operationalization": "Through environmental impact assessments, lifecycle analysis, sustainable design criteria",
"balancing_requirements": ["Economic feasibility", "Immediate safety needs", "Client requirements"],
"examples_from_case": ["Engineer considered long-term environmental impacts", "balanced immediate needs with sustainability"],
"source_text": "Engineer considered long-term environmental impacts and balanced immediate needs with sustainability"
}
],
"principle_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "PublicSafety_Case8_Facts",
"principle_class": "Public Safety",
"concrete_expression": "the safety of the public must be held paramount",
"invoked_by": ["Engineer L"],
"applied_to": ["stormwater management system design"],
"interpretation": "Safety considerations override cost savings in drainage design",
"source_text": "the safety of the public must be held paramount",
"balancing_with": ["Cost Efficiency", "Client Interests"],
"tension_resolution": "Safety takes precedence even if it increases project costs",
"case_relevance": "Critical for evaluating adequacy of proposed drainage solution"
}
]
}
Saved: 2025-12-20 13:07
LLM Response
```json
{
"new_principle_classes": [
{
"label": "Climate Resilience Principle",
"definition": "Principle that infrastructure and engineering solutions must anticipate and adapt to changing climate conditions and future environmental uncertainties",
"abstract_nature": "Long-term adaptability and future-proofing against environmental change",
"extensional_examples": ["Flood control systems with expandable capacity", "Infrastructure that accounts for climate projections", "Adaptable urban planning"],
"value_basis": "Responsibility to create infrastructure that remains effective under changing conditions",
"application_context": ["Infrastructure design", "Urban planning", "Flood management", "Climate adaptation projects"],
"operationalization": "Through expandable designs, climate modeling, adaptive capacity assessments, resilience planning",
"balancing_requirements": ["Immediate protection needs", "Cost constraints", "Current vs. future risk assessments"],
"examples_from_case": ["City has policies to develop infrastructure with resiliency due to climate change in mind", "system does not provide for expandability should future flooding risk expand"],
"source_text": "The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind"
},
{
"label": "Environmental Justice Principle",
"definition": "Principle that environmental benefits and burdens must be distributed equitably across all communities, with particular attention to vulnerable populations",
"abstract_nature": "Distributive justice in environmental impacts and protection",
"extensional_examples": ["Equitable flood protection", "Fair distribution of environmental risks", "Protection of underserved communities"],
"value_basis": "Equal protection and fair treatment regardless of socioeconomic status",
"application_context": ["Infrastructure siting", "Environmental impact assessment", "Urban development", "Risk distribution"],
"operationalization": "Through impact assessments on vulnerable communities, equitable design alternatives, community engagement",
"balancing_requirements": ["Cost efficiency", "Technical feasibility", "Political pressures", "Timeline constraints"],
"examples_from_case": ["Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community", "diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood"],
"source_text": "the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood"
}
],
"principle_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "Sustainability_EngineerK_Belief",
"principle_class": "Environmental Stewardship Principle",
"concrete_expression": "Engineer K personally believes the Sustainable Approach aligns better with both City policies and the engineer's professional obligation to promote sustainability and resilience",
"invoked_by": ["Engineer K"],
"applied_to": ["Choice between Traditional and Sustainable flood control approaches"],
"interpretation": "Professional engineers have an obligation to promote sustainable solutions that align with long-term environmental stewardship",
"source_text": "Engineer K personally believes the Sustainable Approach aligns better with both City policies and the engineer's professional obligation to promote sustainability and resilience",
"balancing_with": ["Cost efficiency", "Implementation timeline", "Immediate protection needs"],
"tension_resolution": "Engineer presents both options despite personal belief in sustainable approach",
"case_relevance": "Demonstrates professional obligation to sustainability while respecting client decision-making"
},
{
"identifier": "ClimateResilience_CityPolicy",
"principle_class": "Climate Resilience Principle",
"concrete_expression": "The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind",
"invoked_by": ["City"],
"applied_to": ["Infrastructure development policy", "Flood control system design"],
"interpretation": "Infrastructure must be designed to withstand and adapt to climate change impacts",
"source_text": "The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind",
"balancing_with": ["Upfront costs", "Implementation timeline"],
"tension_resolution": "City ultimately prioritizes immediate cost savings over long-term resilience",
"case_relevance": "Establishes policy context that conflicts with final decision"
},
{
"identifier": "EnvironmentalJustice_Flooding",
"principle_class": "Environmental Justice Principle",
"concrete_expression": "Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood",
"invoked_by": ["Engineer K (through discovery and reporting)"],
"applied_to": ["Impact assessment of Traditional Approach"],
"interpretation": "Engineering solutions should not unfairly burden vulnerable communities with environmental risks",
"source_text": "Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood",
"balancing_with": ["Project timeline", "Cost considerations", "Probability assessments"],
"tension_resolution": "City dismisses concern based on low probability despite disproportionate impact",
"case_relevance": "Highlights ethical tension between efficiency and equitable protection"
},
{
"identifier": "Transparency_StakeholderEngagement",
"principle_class": "Transparency Principle",
"concrete_expression": "Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach, including the risks and benefits of each approach",
"invoked_by": ["Engineer K"],
"applied_to": ["City Council meeting presentation"],
"interpretation": "Full disclosure of all relevant information including risks enables informed decision-making",
"source_text": "Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach, including the risks and benefits of each approach",
"balancing_with": ["Client preferences", "Professional judgment"],
"tension_resolution": "Engineer fulfills transparency obligation despite personal preference for sustainable approach",
"case_relevance": "Demonstrates professional commitment to informed consent and transparency"
},
{
"identifier": "PublicWelfare_FloodProtection",
"principle_class": "Public Welfare Principle",
"concrete_expression": "create a resilient infrastructure that balances immediate protection needs with long-term sustainability",
"invoked_by": ["Project goals as stated"],
"applied_to": ["Overall flood control system design objectives"],
"interpretation": "Public welfare requires both immediate safety and long-term community resilience",
"source_text": "create a resilient infrastructure that balances immediate protection needs with long-term sustainability",
"balancing_with": ["Cost constraints", "Timeline pressures", "Stakeholder preferences"],
"tension_resolution": "Immediate protection prioritized over long-term resilience in final decision",
"case_relevance": "Frames the fundamental ethical challenge of the case"
}
]
}
```
Obligations Extraction
LLM Prompt
You are an expert in professional ethics analyzing a case for obligations (professional duties and requirements).
Based on the literature:
- Obligations are CONCRETE PROFESSIONAL DUTIES derived from abstract principles (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022)
- They specify what professionals MUST, SHOULD, or MUST NOT do (Dennis et al. 2016)
- Obligations have deontic force and are enforceable (Wooldridge & Jennings 1995)
- They operationalize principles in specific contexts (Kong et al. 2020)
Your task is to:
1. Identify NEW OBLIGATION CLASSES not in the existing ontology
2. Extract SPECIFIC OBLIGATION INDIVIDUALS from the case
EXISTING OBLIGATIONS IN ONTOLOGY (check if your identified obligations match these before creating new classes):
- Attribution Obligation: Duty to properly cite and acknowledge all sources, tools, and methods used in creating professional deliverables
- Collegial Obligation: Duties toward professional peers including respect, fairness, and credit for work
- Competence Obligation: Requirement to perform services only in areas of competence (NSPE II.2)
- Conditional Obligation: Obligations that apply only when specific conditions are met
- Confidentiality Obligation: Duty to protect confidential information of clients or employers (NSPE III.4)
- Defeasible Obligation: Obligations that admit justified exceptions under specified conditions (Ganascia 2007)
- Disclosure Obligation: Requirement to inform stakeholders about conflicts, limitations, or risks (NSPE II.3.a)
- Ethical Obligation: Obligations arising from ethical principles beyond legal requirements
- Legal Obligation: Obligations arising from legal requirements and regulations
- Mandatory Obligation: Obligations that MUST be fulfilled (deontic force: mandatory)
- Obligation: An information content entity expressing required actions or behaviors in professional contexts. This is the O component of the formal specification D=(R,P,O,S,Rs,A,E,Ca,Cs).
- Prima Facie Obligation: Obligations that hold at first appearance but may be overridden by stronger duties (Anderson & Anderson)
- Professional Obligation: A duty or responsibility arising from professional role or standards
- Quality Assurance Obligation: Requirement to implement appropriate review and verification processes for all professional deliverables before submission
- Reporting Obligation: Duty to report violations or unsafe conditions to appropriate authorities
- Responsible Charge Obligation: Duty to maintain active engagement and personal decision-making authority throughout engineering process from conception to completion
- Safety Obligation: Duty to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public (NSPE I.1)
- Technology Competence Obligation: Requirement to understand and verify the capabilities, limitations, and risks of technological tools used in professional practice
- Technology Verification Obligation: Requirement to thoroughly verify and validate outputs from technological tools including AI before incorporating them into professional work
Analyze this facts section:
Engineer K, a licensed professional engineer, is hired by the City to design a new flood control system to protect a rapidly growing urban area that has experienced increasingly severe flooding. The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind. The project’s goal is to create a resilient infrastructure that balances immediate protection needs with long-term sustainability.
During the initial design phase, Engineer K identifies two potential approaches, both of which could be successfully designed and implemented:
Traditional Approach: Build a concrete floodwall system to provide immediate protection at a relatively low cost. While effective in the short term, the floodwall system has a high carbon footprint, is prone to deterioration, and may require significant repairs or upgrades within 15 years. Further, the system does not provide for expandability should future flooding risk expand or increase and would require complete demolition and rebuilding if the capacity proved insufficient in the future.
Sustainable Approach: Develop a green infrastructure system incorporating wetland restoration and other biodynamic controls. This approach would mitigate flooding while enhancing local biodiversity and reducing carbon emissions. Further, the natural aspects of this approach could readily be expanded if additional capacity is necessary should future flooding risk expand or increase. However, the initial cost is significantly higher than the traditional approach and the system requires several years to fully mature before offering optimal protection.
As part of the project development process, the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback on the project. During stakeholder meetings, some commentors expressed a preference for the Traditional Approach due to its lower upfront cost and faster implementation timeline. However, other community and environmental organizations advocated for the Sustainable Approach, citing its long-term environmental and social benefits. Engineer K personally believes the Sustainable Approach aligns better with both City policies and the engineer’s professional obligation to promote sustainability and resilience, but recognizes competing priorities of cost, urgency, and long-term impact.
While working on the report and gathering necessary information, Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood under low-probability but high-volume conditions—particularly if the design capacity of the Traditional Approach is breached. Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach, including the risks and benefits of each approach to the City’s leadership during a City Council meeting. The City’s leadership decides not to address the identified floodwater issue with the Traditional Approach, ultimately concluding that any action to mitigate the impact on this community would delay the project further and reinforcing the low probability of such conditions occurring. The City approves the Traditional Approach and Engineer K proceeds to work on its implementation.
Extract obligations following this JSON structure:
{
"new_obligation_classes": [
{
"label": "Clear, specific obligation class name",
"definition": "What this type of obligation requires professionals to do",
"derived_from_principle": "Which principle this operationalizes (e.g., 'Public Safety', 'Honesty')",
"duty_type": "professional|legal|ethical|societal",
"enforcement_mechanism": "How this obligation is typically enforced",
"violation_consequences": "What happens when this obligation is violated",
"examples_from_case": ["Example 1 from the case", "Example 2"],
"source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this obligation is identified (max 200 characters)",
"confidence": 0.0-1.0,
"reasoning": "Why this is a new class not in existing ontology"
}
],
"obligation_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "Unique name for this specific obligation instance",
"obligation_class": "Name of the obligation class (new or existing)",
"obligated_party": "Who has this obligation (e.g., 'Engineer L', 'All Licensed PEs')",
"obligation_statement": "The specific duty statement (e.g., 'Report safety risks to authorities')",
"derived_from": "Source principle or law (e.g., 'NSPE Code', 'State Law')",
"enforcement_context": "How enforced in this case",
"temporal_scope": "When this obligation applies",
"compliance_status": "met|unmet|unclear|pending",
"case_context": "How this obligation manifests in the specific case",
"source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this obligation is mentioned (max 200 characters)",
"is_existing_class": true/false,
"confidence": 0.0-1.0
}
]
}
Focus on:
1. NEW obligation types that represent novel professional duties
2. Specific obligation instances showing how duties apply in this case
3. The relationship between obligations and the principles they operationalize
4. Enforcement mechanisms and compliance status
Return ONLY the JSON structure, no additional text.
Saved: 2025-12-20 13:08
LLM Response
```json
{
"new_obligation_classes": [
{
"label": "Stakeholder Engagement Obligation",
"definition": "Requirement to actively engage with and gather feedback from affected stakeholders during project development and to meaningfully consider their input in professional recommendations",
"derived_from_principle": "Democratic Participation and Transparency",
"duty_type": "professional",
"enforcement_mechanism": "Professional review boards, public accountability mechanisms, project approval processes",
"violation_consequences": "Loss of public trust, project rejection, professional sanctions for inadequate consultation",
"examples_from_case": ["Hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback", "Consider community preferences in design recommendations"],
"source_text": "the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback on the project",
"confidence": 0.85,
"reasoning": "This represents a distinct duty to engage stakeholders that goes beyond disclosure obligations - it requires active solicitation and consideration of input"
},
{
"label": "Environmental Justice Obligation",
"definition": "Duty to identify and address disproportionate environmental impacts on underserved or vulnerable communities in professional work",
"derived_from_principle": "Equity and Social Justice",
"duty_type": "ethical",
"enforcement_mechanism": "Environmental justice reviews, civil rights compliance, professional ethics boards",
"violation_consequences": "Civil rights violations, professional sanctions, project injunctions, harm to vulnerable populations",
"examples_from_case": ["Identifying disproportionate impacts on underserved community", "Reporting equity concerns to decision-makers"],
"source_text": "the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood",
"confidence": 0.9,
"reasoning": "Distinct from general safety obligations - specifically addresses duty to prevent disproportionate harm to vulnerable populations"
},
{
"label": "Climate Resilience Obligation",
"definition": "Requirement to consider long-term climate change impacts and design for future resilience in infrastructure projects",
"derived_from_principle": "Sustainability and Future Generations",
"duty_type": "professional",
"enforcement_mechanism": "Climate policy compliance, sustainability standards, professional guidelines",
"violation_consequences": "Infrastructure failure, increased future costs, professional liability for inadequate future planning",
"examples_from_case": ["Design with climate change in mind", "Consider expandability for future flooding risks"],
"source_text": "The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind",
"confidence": 0.8,
"reasoning": "Goes beyond general competence to specifically address climate adaptation duties not covered in existing ontology"
}
],
"obligation_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_StakeholderEngagement_001",
"obligation_class": "Stakeholder Engagement Obligation",
"obligated_party": "Engineer K",
"obligation_statement": "Hold stakeholder meetings and gather feedback on flood control project approaches",
"derived_from": "City directive and professional practice standards",
"enforcement_context": "City project development process requirements",
"temporal_scope": "During project development phase",
"compliance_status": "met",
"case_context": "Engineer K conducted stakeholder meetings where community members and organizations provided input on design approaches",
"source_text": "As part of the project development process, the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.95
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_EnvironmentalJustice_001",
"obligation_class": "Environmental Justice Obligation",
"obligated_party": "Engineer K",
"obligation_statement": "Identify and report disproportionate impacts on underserved communities from flood control designs",
"derived_from": "Professional ethics and equity principles",
"enforcement_context": "Professional ethical standards",
"temporal_scope": "During design evaluation phase",
"compliance_status": "met",
"case_context": "Engineer K discovered and reported that Traditional Approach could divert floodwaters to underserved neighborhood",
"source_text": "Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.9
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_Disclosure_001",
"obligation_class": "Disclosure Obligation",
"obligated_party": "Engineer K",
"obligation_statement": "Present all available information about risks and benefits of both design approaches to City leadership",
"derived_from": "NSPE II.3.a - duty to inform stakeholders",
"enforcement_context": "Professional engineering standards",
"temporal_scope": "During City Council meeting",
"compliance_status": "met",
"case_context": "Engineer K presented complete information about both approaches including identified risks at City Council meeting",
"source_text": "Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.95
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_ClimateResilience_001",
"obligation_class": "Climate Resilience Obligation",
"obligated_party": "Engineer K",
"obligation_statement": "Design flood control infrastructure with climate change resilience and future expandability in mind",
"derived_from": "City climate policies",
"enforcement_context": "City infrastructure development policies",
"temporal_scope": "Throughout design process",
"compliance_status": "met",
"case_context": "Engineer K evaluated both approaches for climate resilience and future expandability per City policies",
"source_text": "The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.85
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_Safety_001",
"obligation_class": "Safety Obligation",
"obligated_party": "Engineer K",
"obligation_statement": "Hold paramount the safety of the public including protection from flooding risks",
"derived_from": "NSPE I.1 - paramount duty to public safety",
"enforcement_context": "Professional engineering code enforcement",
"temporal_scope": "Throughout project lifecycle",
"compliance_status": "met",
"case_context": "Engineer K designed flood control system to protect urban area from severe flooding",
"source_text": "design a new flood control system to protect a rapidly growing urban area that has experienced increasingly severe flooding",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.95
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_Competence_001",
"obligation_class": "Competence Obligation",
"obligated_party": "Engineer K",
"obligation_statement": "Design flood control systems only within area of professional competence",
"derived_from": "NSPE II.2 - competence requirement",
"enforcement_context": "Professional licensing requirements",
"temporal_scope": "Throughout design and implementation",
"compliance_status": "met",
"case_context": "Engineer K as licensed PE designed flood control system within expertise",
"source_text": "Engineer K, a licensed professional engineer, is hired by the City to design a new flood control system",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.9
}
]
}
```
Constraints Extraction
LLM Prompt
You are an expert in professional ethics analyzing a case for constraints (boundaries, limitations, and restrictions).
Based on the literature:
- Constraints are INVIOLABLE BOUNDARIES that limit acceptable actions (Dennis et al. 2016)
- They differ from obligations by being restrictions rather than requirements
- Constraints can be legal, physical, resource-based, or procedural
- They define the space within which ethical decisions must be made
Your task is to:
1. Identify NEW CONSTRAINT CLASSES not in the existing ontology
2. Extract SPECIFIC CONSTRAINT INDIVIDUALS from the case
EXISTING CONSTRAINTS IN ONTOLOGY (check if your identified constraints match these before creating new classes):
- Attribution Constraint: Requirements and limitations regarding the disclosure and citation of tools, methods, or sources used in professional work products
- Competence Constraint: Boundaries defined by agent capabilities and technical limitations (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022)
- Confidentiality Constraint: Boundaries on information disclosure and privacy (Dennis et al. 2016)
- Constraint: An information content entity expressing limitations or restrictions on professional actions or decisions. This is the Cs component of the formal specification D=(R,P,O,S,Rs,A,E,Ca,Cs).
- Defeasible Constraint: Constraints that admit justified exceptions under specified conditions (Ganascia 2007)
- Ethical Constraint: Professional ethical boundaries beyond legal requirements (Benzmüller et al. 2020)
- Inviolable Constraint: Absolute constraints that cannot be overridden under any circumstances (Dennis et al. 2016)
- Jurisdictional Constraint: Boundaries of authority and geographical or organizational scope (Dennis et al. 2016)
- Legal Constraint: Constraints arising from legal requirements and statutes that establish inviolable boundaries (Kroll 2020, Stenseke 2024)
- Priority Constraint: Constraints establishing precedence when multiple requirements conflict (Scheutz & Malle 2014)
- Procedural Constraint: Requirements for following specific processes or protocols (Furbach et al. 2014)
- Regulatory Constraint: Constraints from regulatory bodies and professional standards organizations (Taddeo et al. 2024)
- Resource Constraint: Limitations on available time, budget, materials, or human resources (Ganascia 2007)
- Safety Constraint: Constraints ensuring safety requirements are met (Arkin 2008)
- Technology Substitution Constraint: Boundaries preventing technology from replacing professional judgment and human oversight in critical decision-making
Analyze this facts section:
Engineer K, a licensed professional engineer, is hired by the City to design a new flood control system to protect a rapidly growing urban area that has experienced increasingly severe flooding. The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind. The project’s goal is to create a resilient infrastructure that balances immediate protection needs with long-term sustainability.
During the initial design phase, Engineer K identifies two potential approaches, both of which could be successfully designed and implemented:
Traditional Approach: Build a concrete floodwall system to provide immediate protection at a relatively low cost. While effective in the short term, the floodwall system has a high carbon footprint, is prone to deterioration, and may require significant repairs or upgrades within 15 years. Further, the system does not provide for expandability should future flooding risk expand or increase and would require complete demolition and rebuilding if the capacity proved insufficient in the future.
Sustainable Approach: Develop a green infrastructure system incorporating wetland restoration and other biodynamic controls. This approach would mitigate flooding while enhancing local biodiversity and reducing carbon emissions. Further, the natural aspects of this approach could readily be expanded if additional capacity is necessary should future flooding risk expand or increase. However, the initial cost is significantly higher than the traditional approach and the system requires several years to fully mature before offering optimal protection.
As part of the project development process, the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback on the project. During stakeholder meetings, some commentors expressed a preference for the Traditional Approach due to its lower upfront cost and faster implementation timeline. However, other community and environmental organizations advocated for the Sustainable Approach, citing its long-term environmental and social benefits. Engineer K personally believes the Sustainable Approach aligns better with both City policies and the engineer’s professional obligation to promote sustainability and resilience, but recognizes competing priorities of cost, urgency, and long-term impact.
While working on the report and gathering necessary information, Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood under low-probability but high-volume conditions—particularly if the design capacity of the Traditional Approach is breached. Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach, including the risks and benefits of each approach to the City’s leadership during a City Council meeting. The City’s leadership decides not to address the identified floodwater issue with the Traditional Approach, ultimately concluding that any action to mitigate the impact on this community would delay the project further and reinforcing the low probability of such conditions occurring. The City approves the Traditional Approach and Engineer K proceeds to work on its implementation.
Extract constraints following this JSON structure:
{
"new_constraint_classes": [
{
"label": "Clear, specific constraint class name",
"definition": "What this type of constraint limits or restricts",
"constraint_type": "legal|physical|resource|temporal|procedural",
"flexibility": "hard|soft|negotiable",
"violation_impact": "What happens if this constraint is violated",
"mitigation_possible": "Whether and how this constraint can be mitigated",
"examples_from_case": ["Example 1 from the case", "Example 2"],
"source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this constraint is identified (max 200 characters)",
"confidence": 0.0-1.0,
"reasoning": "Why this is a new class not in existing ontology"
}
],
"constraint_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "Unique name for this specific constraint instance",
"constraint_class": "Name of the constraint class (new or existing)",
"constrained_entity": "What or who is constrained (e.g., 'Engineer L', 'Project')",
"constraint_statement": "The specific limitation (e.g., 'Cannot exceed budget of $X')",
"source": "Origin of constraint (e.g., 'Client budget', 'Environmental law')",
"enforcement_mechanism": "How this constraint is enforced",
"temporal_scope": "When this constraint applies",
"severity": "critical|major|minor",
"case_context": "How this constraint manifests in the specific case",
"source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this constraint is mentioned (max 200 characters)",
"is_existing_class": true/false,
"confidence": 0.0-1.0
}
]
}
Focus on:
1. NEW constraint types that represent novel limitations or boundaries
2. Specific constraint instances showing how limitations apply in this case
3. The difference between constraints (boundaries) and obligations (duties)
4. Impact and severity of constraints on decision-making
Return ONLY the JSON structure, no additional text.
Saved: 2025-12-20 13:08
LLM Response
```json
{
"new_constraint_classes": [
{
"label": "Climate Policy Constraint",
"definition": "Limitations imposed by organizational climate change and sustainability policies that restrict infrastructure design choices",
"constraint_type": "procedural",
"flexibility": "soft",
"violation_impact": "Non-compliance with organizational sustainability goals and potential policy violations",
"mitigation_possible": "Can be balanced against other priorities through formal approval processes",
"examples_from_case": ["City policies to develop infrastructure with climate resilience", "Requirement to consider long-term sustainability"],
"source_text": "The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind",
"confidence": 0.85,
"reasoning": "Distinct from regulatory constraints as these are internal organizational policies specifically addressing climate adaptation, not covered by existing environmental or regulatory constraint classes"
},
{
"label": "Community Impact Constraint",
"definition": "Boundaries on actions that could disproportionately harm specific populations or communities",
"constraint_type": "procedural",
"flexibility": "negotiable",
"violation_impact": "Environmental injustice and potential legal challenges from affected communities",
"mitigation_possible": "Can be addressed through design modifications or compensatory measures",
"examples_from_case": ["Traditional approach diverting floodwaters to underserved community", "Disproportionate impact considerations"],
"source_text": "the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood",
"confidence": 0.80,
"reasoning": "Goes beyond safety constraints to specifically address equity and environmental justice boundaries not captured in existing constraint classes"
}
],
"constraint_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "City_Budget_Limitation",
"constraint_class": "Resource Constraint",
"constrained_entity": "Engineer K",
"constraint_statement": "Cannot exceed available budget for flood control system implementation",
"source": "City budget allocation",
"enforcement_mechanism": "City approval process and budget controls",
"temporal_scope": "Project duration",
"severity": "major",
"case_context": "Sustainable approach has significantly higher initial cost than traditional approach",
"source_text": "the initial cost is significantly higher than the traditional approach",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.90
},
{
"identifier": "Implementation_Timeline_Constraint",
"constraint_class": "Resource Constraint",
"constrained_entity": "Flood control project",
"constraint_statement": "System must provide flood protection within acceptable timeframe",
"source": "City urgency requirements",
"enforcement_mechanism": "Project deadlines and community protection needs",
"temporal_scope": "Several years for green infrastructure to mature",
"severity": "major",
"case_context": "Green infrastructure requires several years to fully mature before optimal protection",
"source_text": "the system requires several years to fully mature before offering optimal protection",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.85
},
{
"identifier": "Climate_Resilience_Policy",
"constraint_class": "Climate Policy Constraint",
"constrained_entity": "Infrastructure design",
"constraint_statement": "New infrastructure must incorporate climate change resilience",
"source": "City climate policies",
"enforcement_mechanism": "City policy compliance review",
"temporal_scope": "Design and implementation phases",
"severity": "major",
"case_context": "City requires infrastructure projects to consider climate change impacts",
"source_text": "The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.85
},
{
"identifier": "Stakeholder_Consultation_Requirement",
"constraint_class": "Procedural Constraint",
"constrained_entity": "Engineer K",
"constraint_statement": "Must conduct stakeholder meetings and gather community feedback",
"source": "City project development process",
"enforcement_mechanism": "City procedural requirements",
"temporal_scope": "Project development phase",
"severity": "critical",
"case_context": "City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings for feedback",
"source_text": "the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback on the project",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.95
},
{
"identifier": "Underserved_Community_Impact",
"constraint_class": "Community Impact Constraint",
"constrained_entity": "Traditional Approach design",
"constraint_statement": "Design should not disproportionately impact underserved communities with flood risk",
"source": "Environmental justice principles",
"enforcement_mechanism": "Community advocacy and potential legal action",
"temporal_scope": "Design and operational phases",
"severity": "major",
"case_context": "Traditional approach could divert floodwaters to underserved neighborhood",
"source_text": "could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.80
},
{
"identifier": "Professional_Engineering_License",
"constraint_class": "Competence Constraint",
"constrained_entity": "Engineer K",
"constraint_statement": "Must maintain professional engineering license and work within scope of expertise",
"source": "Professional licensing requirements",
"enforcement_mechanism": "Professional licensing board",
"temporal_scope": "Entire project duration",
"severity": "critical",
"case_context": "Engineer K is a licensed professional engineer",
"source_text": "Engineer K, a licensed professional engineer",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.95
}
]
}
```
Capabilities Extraction
LLM Prompt
You are an expert in professional ethics analyzing a case for capabilities (competencies and skills required for professional practice).
Based on the literature:
- Capabilities are COMPETENCIES that enable norm compliance (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022)
- They represent the skills needed to fulfill professional obligations (Dennis et al. 2016)
- Capabilities include technical, ethical, communicative, and analytical competencies
- They constitute "norm competence" - the ability to act ethically (Kong et al. 2020)
Your task is to:
1. Identify NEW CAPABILITY CLASSES not in the existing ontology
2. Extract SPECIFIC CAPABILITY INDIVIDUALS from the case
EXISTING CAPABILITIES IN ONTOLOGY (check if your identified capabilities match these before creating new classes):
- AI Tool Evaluation Capability: The competency to assess, validate, and appropriately use AI-generated content in professional work
- Capability: A realizable entity that can be realized by specific types of actions or processes in professional contexts. This is the Ca component of the formal specification D=(R,P,O,S,Rs,A,E,Ca,Cs).
- Capability Type: Meta-class for specific capability types recognized by the ProEthica system
- Data Privacy Protection Capability: The competency to safeguard confidential client information when using digital tools and platforms
- Justification Capability: Capability to trace reasoning paths connecting decisions to authoritative sources (McLaren 2003, Anderson & Anderson 2018)
- Regulatory Compliance Capability: The competency to ensure designs and documents meet local regulations and safety standards
- Responsible Charge Capability: The competency to maintain active engagement and supervisory control from conception to completion of engineering work
- Technical Capability: A specialized technical skill or competency in a professional domain
- Technical Writing Capability: The competency to produce clear, accurate, and professional technical documentation and reports
- Technology Integration Capability: The competency to appropriately integrate new technologies while maintaining professional judgment
Analyze this facts section:
Engineer K, a licensed professional engineer, is hired by the City to design a new flood control system to protect a rapidly growing urban area that has experienced increasingly severe flooding. The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind. The project’s goal is to create a resilient infrastructure that balances immediate protection needs with long-term sustainability.
During the initial design phase, Engineer K identifies two potential approaches, both of which could be successfully designed and implemented:
Traditional Approach: Build a concrete floodwall system to provide immediate protection at a relatively low cost. While effective in the short term, the floodwall system has a high carbon footprint, is prone to deterioration, and may require significant repairs or upgrades within 15 years. Further, the system does not provide for expandability should future flooding risk expand or increase and would require complete demolition and rebuilding if the capacity proved insufficient in the future.
Sustainable Approach: Develop a green infrastructure system incorporating wetland restoration and other biodynamic controls. This approach would mitigate flooding while enhancing local biodiversity and reducing carbon emissions. Further, the natural aspects of this approach could readily be expanded if additional capacity is necessary should future flooding risk expand or increase. However, the initial cost is significantly higher than the traditional approach and the system requires several years to fully mature before offering optimal protection.
As part of the project development process, the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback on the project. During stakeholder meetings, some commentors expressed a preference for the Traditional Approach due to its lower upfront cost and faster implementation timeline. However, other community and environmental organizations advocated for the Sustainable Approach, citing its long-term environmental and social benefits. Engineer K personally believes the Sustainable Approach aligns better with both City policies and the engineer’s professional obligation to promote sustainability and resilience, but recognizes competing priorities of cost, urgency, and long-term impact.
While working on the report and gathering necessary information, Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood under low-probability but high-volume conditions—particularly if the design capacity of the Traditional Approach is breached. Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach, including the risks and benefits of each approach to the City’s leadership during a City Council meeting. The City’s leadership decides not to address the identified floodwater issue with the Traditional Approach, ultimately concluding that any action to mitigate the impact on this community would delay the project further and reinforcing the low probability of such conditions occurring. The City approves the Traditional Approach and Engineer K proceeds to work on its implementation.
Extract capabilities following this JSON structure:
{
"new_capability_classes": [
{
"label": "Clear, specific capability class name",
"definition": "What competency or skill this capability represents",
"capability_type": "technical|ethical|communicative|analytical",
"norm_competence_related": "Which professional obligations this capability enables",
"skill_level": "basic|intermediate|advanced|expert",
"acquisition_method": "How this capability is typically acquired (education, training, experience)",
"examples_from_case": ["Example 1 from the case", "Example 2"],
"source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this capability is identified (max 200 characters)",
"confidence": 0.0-1.0,
"reasoning": "Why this is a new class not in existing ontology"
}
],
"capability_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "Unique name for this specific capability instance",
"capability_class": "Name of the capability class (new or existing)",
"possessed_by": "Who has this capability (e.g., 'Engineer L', 'All Licensed PEs')",
"capability_statement": "The specific competency (e.g., 'Design stormwater systems')",
"demonstrated_through": "How shown in the case (e.g., 'Years of experience', 'Professional license')",
"proficiency_level": "basic|intermediate|advanced|expert",
"enables_obligations": "Which obligations this capability enables",
"temporal_aspect": "When this capability is relevant",
"case_context": "How this capability manifests in the specific case",
"source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this capability is mentioned (max 200 characters)",
"is_existing_class": true/false,
"confidence": 0.0-1.0
}
]
}
Focus on:
1. NEW capability types that represent novel competencies
2. Specific capability instances showing professional competencies in this case
3. The relationship between capabilities and norm competence
4. How capabilities enable fulfillment of professional obligations
Return ONLY the JSON structure, no additional text.
Saved: 2025-12-20 13:09
LLM Response
```json
{
"new_capability_classes": [
{
"label": "Climate Resilience Design Capability",
"definition": "The competency to design infrastructure that accounts for climate change impacts and long-term environmental sustainability",
"capability_type": "technical",
"norm_competence_related": "Enables fulfillment of obligations to design sustainable and resilient infrastructure for future generations",
"skill_level": "advanced",
"acquisition_method": "Specialized training in climate science, sustainable engineering practices, and environmental impact assessment",
"examples_from_case": ["Designing flood control with climate change in mind", "Evaluating long-term sustainability of infrastructure"],
"source_text": "The City has policies in place to develop new infrastructure projects with resiliency due to climate change in mind",
"confidence": 0.9,
"reasoning": "Distinct from general technical capability - specifically addresses climate adaptation and resilience design not covered in existing ontology"
},
{
"label": "Stakeholder Engagement Capability",
"definition": "The competency to facilitate, conduct, and synthesize feedback from diverse stakeholder groups in infrastructure projects",
"capability_type": "communicative",
"norm_competence_related": "Enables fulfillment of obligations to consider public input and community needs in engineering decisions",
"skill_level": "intermediate",
"acquisition_method": "Training in public engagement, facilitation skills, and conflict resolution",
"examples_from_case": ["Holding stakeholder meetings", "Gathering and presenting community feedback"],
"source_text": "the City directed Engineer K to hold stakeholder meetings to gather feedback on the project",
"confidence": 0.85,
"reasoning": "Goes beyond technical writing - involves active facilitation and synthesis of diverse community perspectives"
},
{
"label": "Environmental Justice Assessment Capability",
"definition": "The competency to identify and evaluate disproportionate environmental impacts on underserved communities",
"capability_type": "ethical",
"norm_competence_related": "Enables fulfillment of obligations to protect vulnerable populations and ensure equitable distribution of environmental risks",
"skill_level": "advanced",
"acquisition_method": "Training in environmental justice principles, demographic analysis, and social impact assessment",
"examples_from_case": ["Identifying disproportionate impacts on underserved community", "Analyzing flood diversion effects"],
"source_text": "Engineer K discovers that the Traditional Approach could disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community",
"confidence": 0.95,
"reasoning": "Unique ethical competency focusing on equity and justice considerations not covered by existing capabilities"
},
{
"label": "Multi-Criteria Infrastructure Analysis Capability",
"definition": "The competency to evaluate infrastructure alternatives across multiple dimensions including cost, time, environmental impact, and social factors",
"capability_type": "analytical",
"norm_competence_related": "Enables fulfillment of obligations to provide comprehensive analysis of engineering alternatives",
"skill_level": "advanced",
"acquisition_method": "Education in systems analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and multi-objective decision making",
"examples_from_case": ["Comparing traditional vs sustainable approaches", "Balancing cost, urgency, and long-term impact"],
"source_text": "recognizes competing priorities of cost, urgency, and long-term impact",
"confidence": 0.8,
"reasoning": "Specific analytical capability for complex trade-off analysis beyond general technical capability"
}
],
"capability_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_FloodControlDesign",
"capability_class": "Technical Capability",
"possessed_by": "Engineer K",
"capability_statement": "Design flood control systems for urban areas",
"demonstrated_through": "Licensed professional engineer status and project assignment",
"proficiency_level": "expert",
"enables_obligations": "Design safe and effective flood protection infrastructure",
"temporal_aspect": "Throughout project duration",
"case_context": "Hired specifically to design new flood control system",
"source_text": "Engineer K, a licensed professional engineer, is hired by the City to design a new flood control system",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 1.0
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_ClimateResilience",
"capability_class": "Climate Resilience Design Capability",
"possessed_by": "Engineer K",
"capability_statement": "Design infrastructure with climate change resilience",
"demonstrated_through": "Identification of sustainable approach incorporating climate considerations",
"proficiency_level": "advanced",
"enables_obligations": "Create resilient infrastructure balancing immediate and long-term needs",
"temporal_aspect": "During design phase",
"case_context": "Developing solutions that account for climate change impacts",
"source_text": "create a resilient infrastructure that balances immediate protection needs with long-term sustainability",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.9
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_StakeholderEngagement",
"capability_class": "Stakeholder Engagement Capability",
"possessed_by": "Engineer K",
"capability_statement": "Facilitate and synthesize stakeholder feedback",
"demonstrated_through": "Conducting stakeholder meetings and gathering feedback",
"proficiency_level": "intermediate",
"enables_obligations": "Incorporate community input into engineering decisions",
"temporal_aspect": "During project development process",
"case_context": "Held meetings with community and environmental organizations",
"source_text": "During stakeholder meetings, some commentors expressed a preference for the Traditional Approach",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.85
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_EnvironmentalJustice",
"capability_class": "Environmental Justice Assessment Capability",
"possessed_by": "Engineer K",
"capability_statement": "Identify disproportionate impacts on vulnerable communities",
"demonstrated_through": "Discovery and analysis of flood diversion impacts",
"proficiency_level": "advanced",
"enables_obligations": "Protect underserved communities from disproportionate environmental harm",
"temporal_aspect": "During information gathering phase",
"case_context": "Discovered potential impacts on underserved community",
"source_text": "disproportionately impact a nearby underserved community by diverting floodwaters to their neighborhood",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.95
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_MultiCriteriaAnalysis",
"capability_class": "Multi-Criteria Infrastructure Analysis Capability",
"possessed_by": "Engineer K",
"capability_statement": "Analyze infrastructure alternatives across multiple dimensions",
"demonstrated_through": "Comprehensive comparison of traditional and sustainable approaches",
"proficiency_level": "advanced",
"enables_obligations": "Provide comprehensive analysis for informed decision-making",
"temporal_aspect": "During initial design phase",
"case_context": "Evaluated two approaches considering multiple factors",
"source_text": "Engineer K identifies two potential approaches, both of which could be successfully designed",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.8
},
{
"identifier": "EngineerK_TechnicalWriting",
"capability_class": "Technical Writing Capability",
"possessed_by": "Engineer K",
"capability_statement": "Prepare comprehensive technical reports and presentations",
"demonstrated_through": "Presenting information to City Council",
"proficiency_level": "advanced",
"enables_obligations": "Communicate technical information to decision-makers",
"temporal_aspect": "During City Council meeting",
"case_context": "Presented risks and benefits of both approaches",
"source_text": "Engineer K presents all available information about both the Traditional Approach and the Sustainable Approach",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.95
}
]
}
```