How does ASCE define environmental stewardship?

As part of ASCE’s Code of Ethics, civil engineers adhere to the principles of sustainable development. They consider and balance societal, environmental, and economic impacts, along with opportunities for improvement, in their work; mitigate adverse societal, environmental, and economic effects; and use resources wisely while minimizing resource depletion.

Civil engineers are responsible for designing infrastructure systems to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. ASCE recommends national, state, and local governments develop and implement policies and plans for environmental stewardship with a comprehensive multisource, (e.g., air, soil, water, and biotic) and holistic perspective consistent with the principles of sustainable development.

Related ASCE policy statements

Talking points

ASCE encourages the planning, development, retrofitting, operations, and decommissioning of safe, resilient, and sustainable infrastructure. Additionally, ASCE supports forward-thinking environmental regulations that protect the environment from damage for current and future generations. Specifically, ASCE supports:

  1. The primary purpose and goals of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) be based on the best available science.
  2. A balanced approach to the NEPA process characterized by quality science, objective determinations of potential project impacts on the environment, and streamlining the permitting and approval process for infrastructure projects.
  3. Reducing delays in the permitting process for infrastructure projects, helping our nation achieve infrastructure appropriate for the 21st century.
  4. Passing legislation limiting the amount of packaging used in various industries, setting standards for the recyclability of materials (e.g., single-use plastics), and addressing the true cost of waste by implementing deposits on bottles and fees on plastic bags.
  5. Strengthening domestic markets for recycled materials in the U.S. by supporting companies looking to build domestic reprocessing plastic facilities and reusing plastics.
  6. Research and investment in alternatives for the use of waste as resources, such as aerobic digesters and plasma gasification.
  7. Opposing federal legislation that would ban the interstate movement of municipal solid waste (MSW) to regional solid waste facilities designed in accordance with state and federal regulations, recognizing that such transport may be appropriate and beneficial in regional solid waste planning efforts.
  8. Listing polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as hazardous substances in Superfund.
  9. Increasing funding for Superfund to a level sufficient to eliminate the backlog of unfunded remedial actions within a three-year period, while also accelerating the implementation of positive program reforms identified by EPA’s Superfund Task Force.
  10. Addressing staff shortages, training gaps, and contracting delays in the Superfund program.
  11. Focusing on Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action sites located near historically disadvantaged, low-income communities, as these communities have been disproportionally harmed by exposure to contamination from these sites.
  12. Increasing funding to state and tribal RCRA programs to address shortfalls resulting in staff shortages, limited compliance oversight, and slowed permitting.
  13. Addressing funding shortfalls for state and tribal brownfields agencies and expand brownfields competitive grant programs to fund a larger percentage of Brownfields grant applications, to support investment in post-assessment and post-clean-up planning and project implementation activities, increasing leverage and stimulating greater investment from state, regional, local, and private funding sources.

ASCE staff contacts

Martin Hight - Senior Manager, Government Relations
Matthew McGinn - Senior Manager, Government Relations