DP8
Individual
483961ce
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/177#DP8
Properties
Parent
Decision Point Id
DP8
Decision Question
Should Firm A perform city-mandated inspection of developer infrastructure that Firm A itself designed, or must it recuse from self-review and arrange for independent inspection of its own design work?
Focus
City-Retained Engineer Self-Design-Review Prohibition: Whether Firm A Should Inspect Infrastructure It Also Designed for the Same Private Developer
Option1
Decline to perform city inspection of any infrastructure Firm A itself designed, and proactively arrange for a fully independent engineer to conduct the city-mandated review of that work, disclosing the self-review conflict to the city as the basis for the recusal.
Option2
Proceed with city inspection of Firm A's own design work while implementing enhanced documentation protocols — including detailed checklists, third-party peer review of inspection findings, and full disclosure to the city — on the theory that procedural rigor and transparency can adequately substitute for structural independence.
Option3
Disclose the self-review scenario to the city before proceeding, obtain the city's explicit written consent to Firm A inspecting its own design work, and rely on the city's informed authorization as sufficient ethical clearance under a BER 74-2 type public interest analysis for resource-constrained municipalities.
Role Label
Engineer
TTL
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proethica_case_177: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/177> .
<http://proethica.org/ontology/case/177#DP8> a owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP8" ;
rdfs:subClassOf <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint> .
Metadata
Ontology
Type
Individual
Content Hash
483961cec073eea5...Last Updated
2026-03-08 16:29
Extraction Provenance
Generated
2026-03-01T09:53:24.922847
Generated By
ProEthica Case 177 Extraction