Abstract
The technical and STS components of my thesis converge around a shared premise: that infrastructure is never neutral—it is always shaped by who designs it, for whom, and under what constraints. While the two projects differ in scope and geography, both interrogate how engineering decisions reflect and reinforce broader questions of access, equity, and sustainability. Engineering, in both cases, emerges not just as a technical activity but as a fundamentally social practice. By examining design choices through both practical and political lenses, my work seeks to illuminate how the built environment either empowers or marginalizes the communities it serves.
The technical portion of my thesis produced a comprehensive site design for Phase 2 of Biscuit Run Park in Albemarle County, Virginia. Our design included athletic fields, paved trails, and green stormwater infrastructure, all guided by a theme of “living with nature.” Using Civil 3D and VRRM tools, our team navigated complex grading conditions, environmental regulations, and ADA accessibility standards to create a design that balanced sustainability with community function. By incorporating features like bioretention systems, sediment basins, and inclusive trail alignments, we aimed to serve historically underserved neighborhoods while mitigating ecological impact. The result was not simply a park design, but a framework for public infrastructure that values long-term resilience and community inclusion.
In my STS research, I explored how 3D concrete printing (3DCP) is being introduced as a solution to Latin America's affordable housing crisis. While 3DCP is often framed as a neutral innovation promising speed and sustainability, my research used social constructivism to show that its outcomes are contingent on who controls its use. Drawing on case studies from São Paulo, Bogotá, and beyond, I argued that without participatory governance, 3DCP risks deepening existing inequalities—benefiting developers and state elites while excluding the very populations it claims to serve. The technology’s potential lies not in its efficiency alone, but in the political and economic systems that shape its deployment.
Together, these projects demonstrate that engineering gains power and ethical clarity when coupled with STS analysis. Technical designs benefit from asking not only what is feasible, but what is just, and for whom. STS frameworks help engineers confront the cultural and institutional forces that shape infrastructure—from zoning laws and labor markets to community voice and environmental stewardship. This synthesis challenges engineers to move beyond technical problem-solving by engaging with real-world complexities, including community needs, political dynamics, environmental justice, and the long-term social consequences of design. In doing so, it reframes engineering as an act of civic responsibility.
