Skip to content

What can I say?

This year's NSF EEC PI meeting was so energizing to me it made me resurrect the informal blog on my webpage just to be able to talk about it!

For me, the highlight was the interactive keynote by President Lesia Crumpton-Young of Texas Southern University. Her talk was titled, "Reflecting to Re-Envision", and she really challenged us to think about how we can make engineering *better* in every facet. Look, you're not going to understand her energy if you've never heard her speak, and I'm not going to do justice, so let me just share a few of the ideas that stood out to me...

It's time to rethink higher education... "What if our goal was to create social impact and not preserving the status quo?"

President Young 9/23/2022 quoting Brian Rosenberg in the Chronicle of Higher Education, 3/23/2021

Reflecting to re-envision requires that we: i) abandon ego-centric decisions; ii) prevent proliferation of improper ideas; iii) sharpen critical thinking; and, iv) cultivate enlightened decision makers.

My paraphrase of President Young's "Reflecting to Re-Envision" theme

At Texas Southern, our mission statement is now two words: "Transform Lives"... That's it.

President Lesia Crumpton-Young, 9/23/2022

Because, as engineers, we are problem-driven, we so often focus on the problems or deficits in our current experience. This is fair enough--the places where we are most dissatisfied are often where the most important opportunities are found. However, this makes us vulnerable to operating with a deficit mindset, and we can unwittingly promulgate a deficit mindset to other areas. When this deficit mindset meets with other cultural, institutional, or social factors and intersects with pre-conceived judgments about faculty, students, staff, or administrators in a range of people groups, the deficit mindset can result in suppressing and not supporting the excellent ideas of others.

Sometimes it is just good to be reminded to share or explore even a small idea.

It is also good to remember that you hold some unspoken assumptions that, if unexplored, could end up placing a wet blanket on the fires of innovation and collaboration.

President Young shared with us a number of questions, but I'd like to repeat one of them to you: How will you innovate, transform, or disrupt your thinking, your department, your institution, or your community? Where will you infuse innovation or challenge the traditional thinking, populations, stereotypes, and performance myths that dominate your context?

How will you intend to transform lives?

For this week's TWIST (This week in infrastructure systems) post, I want to do things just a bit differently and focus on a topic that is crucial for any infrastructure system: uncertainty framing.

Of course, it is very difficult to agree on how to define uncertainty, and once it's defined, it can be difficult to select robust tools for managing the types of uncertainties we see in infrastructure systems. Since infrastructures are characterized by long life cycles, large geographic and demographic scope, and substantial interconnections within and between lifeline systems, one wonders how any problems are selected for analysis. The web of intricacies faced by analysts and policy makers can be intractable, and the ways that the unknowns influence the likelihoods of the possible consequences makes every choice high-stakes. Some professionals call these problems "wicked," and prefer to "muddle-through" them, take a garbage can approach, or just admit that optimal solutions are probably not possible and accept the best feasible option--to our knowledge--at the time. Others call these "deep uncertainties" and even wonder whether resilience analysis is more appropriate than risk analysis for infrastructure systems.

However you choose to sort all that out, this issue is of critical importance to infrastructure enthusiasts today. In the US, we face a crisis of governance, in which the public trusts neither government nor experts, the center no longer holds--making it impossible to provide legislative/political stability for public engagement over the scientific debates, and our most important issues are fraught with uncertainties that make it impossible to provide an unequivocally recommended course of action. Of course, infrastructure is impossible without both strong governance and strong science (or trans-science, if you prefer). With that in mind, two articles stood out from Water Resources Research this week:

  • Rival Framings: A Framework for Discovering how Problem Formulation Uncertainties Shape Risk Management Tradeoffs in Water Resources Systems. In this paper, Quinn et al. explore how rival problem (read: uncertainty) framing could lead to unintended consequences as a result of inherent bias in the selected formulation. Of course, this is unavoidable for even modest problems in critical infrastructure systems, and so they provide some guidance for carefully exploring the possible consequences that can be foreseen under alternative problem formulations.
  • Towards best practice framing of uncertainty in scientific publications: a review of Water Resources Research abstracts. In this paper, Guillaume et al. describe how awareness of uncertainty is addressed within WRR abstracts/papers. They develop an uncertainty framing taxonomy that is responsive to five core questions: "Is the conclusion ready to be used?"; "What limitations are there on how the conclusion can be used?"; "How certain is the author that the conclusion is true?"; "How thoroughly has the issue been examined?"; and, "Is the conclusion consistent with the reader’s prior knowledge?". Of course, as the authors acknowledge, the study of uncertainty framing is inter-disciplinary, and achieving an uncertainty framing that is responsive to these questions is an art in itself.

Uncertainty, to me, is both fearsome and beautiful. I hope these two articles, or some of the other links shared, provide some useful thoughts for managing uncertainty in your own study or management of infrastructure systems.

This week in infrastructure systems:

  • New Jersey Transit is a commuter mass transit system with surging ridership, increased fares, and record numbers of passenger trips to NYC. Despite this, NJT is not enjoying a period of success. NJT is suffering reductions in state support, and the consequences of long-term maintenance neglect and overlooked infrastructure investment needs. The NYT has published an extended article on this issue in light of the recent accident at Hoboken Terminal.
  • As the US Presidential Election of 2016 winds down to a close, the candidates are frantically fighting off sordid ghosts of time past. However one might feel about these accusations, one of the main party presidential candidates will become US President, and we must know where they stand on infrastructure development. Both campaigns have been tight-lipped on their plans for infrastructure spending, but ConstructionDIVE reports what we know about the candidates' current commitments. The few details the campaigns report: Clinton will establish an infrastructure bank and send a budget request to Congress of $275 Billion USD in the first 100 days of her administration. They report that Trump, on the other hand, indicates he will spend "at least double" what Clinton spends.

This past weekend, Panama celebrated the new Canal, accommodating larger Neo-Panamax vessels that greatly reduce shipping costs while increasing its efficiency. This project, and others facilitating the transit of such large vessels will have wide-ranging impacts on infrastructure systems. Please take the opportunity to listen to Tom Ashbrook's "On Point" Podcast titled "Global Trade and the New Panama Canal", as a creative primer on the topic. I, personally, am fascinated to see what preparations we are making here in Baltimore to try and steal back some of the West Coast traffic that may be available if we can get our railway infrastructure, especially the tunnels, ready for Panamax container traffic.

I thought it might be a good idea to start sharing some of the things I read or hear across several great news sources on infrastructure systems. We all are affected by our infrastructure systems daily. With this in mind, we are starting a series called #TWIST-This Week in Infrastructure Systems. Today, I'm sharing four items from my week's reading for our first issue.

  1. The Guardian asks "Is City Living Bad for Your Health?" This is a crucial question that deserves our attention, as our society is becoming increasingly urban and resource intensive. As we come together in greater geographic densities, we have the opportunity to improve our economic and environmental efficiency--but we have to make sure we don't do so at the expense of our health.
  2. Govtech.com shows us how we can use robots to perform sewer structural monitoring. Arlington, TX, USA recently has developed a 42-inch robot using technology created by Red Zone Robotics to revolutionize the way they conduct sewer system to scan large-diameter concrete sewer pipes--the pipes that would lead to most catastrophic failures--and evaluate data on their system.
  3. ASME is encouraging engineers to engage with the literature of their profession. They have a list of 3 books all engineers should read, including Petroski's "To Engineer is Human", Pirsig's "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", and Norman's "The Design of Everyday Things." These could provide some great ideas for engineers not only to engage one another across disciplines, but also to engage the general public in issues engineers face when designing systems or technologies.
  4. While we in DC are suffering through the long-overdue WMATA SafeTracks initiative, NYC has recently released their Mobility Report. In their own words, the NYC Mobility Report "...presents data on the primary drivers of transportation demand in New York City— population, tourism, employment—side-by-side with transportation indicators related to vehicle use and transit ridership dating back to 1910..." Their goal is to examine how they have relied on their transportation systems to achieve such vibrancy, and to determine what is necessary to keep moving forward.