Abstract
The effects of large-scale systems are often not immediately visible, yet they shape both the environment people experience and the opportunities available to them. This dynamic is central to both the technical and STS components of this thesis. The technical work focuses on the long-term impacts of historical redlining policies in Richmond, Virginia, while the STS research examines how funding instability influences decision-making in university research laboratories. Although these topics differ in subject matter, both point to the same underlying pattern in which external structures, whether policy decisions or funding systems, influence what choices are possible and what outcomes emerge over time. This perspective highlights the importance of Science, Technology, and Society (STS) in engineering, as technical work develops within broader systems that shape both its process and its impact.
Building on this perspective, the technical portion of this project resulted in a web-based platform called RichmondRedlined that uses augmented reality, timeline comparisons, and community storytelling to help users understand how redlining continues to influence present-day environmental, economic, health, and social conditions. The platform allows users to explore historically redlined neighborhoods in Richmond through an augmented reality interface that overlays contextual information onto physical environments. It also includes a timeline comparison tool that connects historical housing classifications to present-day environmental, health, and demographic data, as well as a storytelling feature that enables users to share personal experiences related to displacement and neighborhood change. What distinguishes this work is its ability to move beyond static maps and reports by placing users directly within the spaces shaped by these policies, making the connection between past decisions and present conditions more immediate and easier to understand.
In parallel with the technical work, the STS research examined how the 2025 disruption to federal research funding influenced decision-making in university laboratories using Resource Dependence Theory. This framework focuses on how organizations respond when they rely on external resources that are essential, controlled by a limited number of actors, and difficult to replace. The analysis draws on laboratory accounts, national reports, and survey-based evidence to understand how research environments respond to funding instability. The findings indicate that laboratories shift research priorities, increase the time spent securing funding, and make operational adjustments, such as delaying projects or reducing staff, to maintain access to resources. Early-career researchers are particularly affected, often facing uncertainty in employment and long-term career prospects. These results demonstrate that funding does more than provide support, as it plays a central role in shaping the direction of research and who can continue participating in it.
Reflecting on both of these projects together made me more aware of how much the outcomes we see are shaped by decisions made at a much broader scale. In Richmond, policies from decades ago still shape the conditions people experience today. In my STS research, I observed a similar pattern in how funding structures shape which research is pursued and who can remain in the field. From the perspective of an engineering student, this experience changed how I think about my own work. It is not enough to focus only on the design itself or whether a component functions as intended. The choices made during design exist within larger systems that can shape who benefits, who is overlooked, and how long those effects last. Recognizing this responsibility has made me more intentional in my technical work, especially in considering the wider impacts of the systems I help build.
