The Legacy of George Bugliarello: A Review of His Vision and Contributions
Mohammad Karamouz
Polytechnic Institute of New York University
In this volume we remember the professional career of George Bugliarello, who made significant impacts in the lives of many and changed the shape and character of downtown Brooklyn permanently. He was resourceful and instrumental in a variety of academic, administrative, professional, and personal endeavors. He was a kind and giving man, and he enjoyed a variety of roles—colleague, mentor, educator, humanist. He was dedicated to making a difference wherever he was involved, sharing with the world a vision of something better and acting as a driving force in support of realizing that vision.
George Bugliarello’s interests and expertise transcended many disciplines—civil engineering, biomedical engineering, urban development, science policy, water resources, computer languages, fluid mechanics, and environmental science. His vision of the role of science, innovation, and education, coupled with a passion for turning his vision into reality, is reflected in today’s urban communities, forged through academic and industry interactions in ways that spur economic growth and societal well-being while respecting the quality of human life and the environment. His understanding of these interactions was represented in his many works on the concept of biosoma,1 a complex adaptive system with myriad components in the biological, social, and machine domains.
___________________
1 This and other terms—adaptive response, DUMBO, MetroTech, and urban knowledge park—are listed in a Glossary on page 20.
The following section presents an overview of George Bugliarello’s professional career and his accomplishments while at NYU-Poly (formerly Polytechnic University). Next is a review of his scientific, engineering, and professional contributions, including the biosoma, his rethinking of urbanization and engineering for a sustainable future, urban security and adaptive response, and the urban knowledge park, exemplified by Brooklyn’s MetroTech. We then offer personal reflections from George’s distinguished academic, professional, and administrative collaborators.
OVERVIEW OF GEORGE BUGLIARELLO’S PROFESSIONAL CAREER
George Bugliarello—president (1973–1994), professor, and chancellor (1994–2003) of Polytechnic Institute of NYU—was an engineer and educator with a broad background, as indicated in the list of subjects above. He held a doctor of science degree in engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was awarded honorary degrees from Carnegie Mellon University, the University of Trieste, the Milwaukee School of Engineering, the Illinois Institute of Technology, Pace University, Trinity College, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Minnesota.
At the time of his passing, Dr. Bugliarello was serving his second four-year term as foreign secretary of the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), to which he was elected in 1987. He was a lifetime national associate of the National Academies and served as chair of the NAE Council’s International Affairs Committee. He was also active in many National Academies projects and activities. He chaired the study on Sustainable Habitats: Innovation and Technology to Meet Megacity Challenges, Committee on the US-Iran Workshop on Science and Technology and the Future Development of Societies, Board on Science and Technology for International Development, and Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment. He was also a member of the Committee on Counterterrorism Challenges for Russia and the United States, Joint Consultative Committee for the US-Egypt Program, Committee on Science Education K–12, and Committee on Human Rights.
For the American Association for the Advancement of Science, he chaired the National Medal of Technology and Innovation Nomination Evaluation Committee, Advisory Panel for Technology Transfer to the Middle East of the Office of Technology Assessment, and Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy.
Dr. Bugliarello’s international experience included consultantships abroad for OECD, as reviewer of the science policy of several countries, and
for UNESCO; services as a specialist for the US Department of State in Central Africa; a NATO Senior Faculty Fellowship at the Technical University of Berlin; and membership on the Scientific Committee of the Summer School on Environmental Dynamics in Venice. He was the US member of the Science for Stability and Science for Peace Steering Committees of the NATO Scientific Affairs Division.
He was cofounder and coeditor of Technology in Society–An International Journal and interim editor in chief (1997–2011) of The Bridge, the quarterly publication of the National Academy of Engineering. He also served on several editorial advisory boards, authored over 300 professional papers, and was the author, coauthor, or editor of numerous books.
He was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and a fellow of the American Society of Civil Engineers, American Society of Engineering Education, American Association for the Advancement of Science, New York Academy of Sciences, and Biomedical Engineering Society, and a founding fellow of the American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineering.
HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS AT NYU-POLY
George Bugliarello joined the then Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn as president in 1973 and served in that capacity for 21 years.
George knew that in order for Poly to grow, the physical and economic character of its neighborhood needed to change as well. He saw this problem and converted it into an opportunity by carving a path to revitalize downtown Brooklyn with Poly in a leading role. He proposed the development of a technology park, an idea that paid off in 1989 when ground was broken for MetroTech, the first modern university-industry research and technology park in the United States. The project—15 years from concept to completion—required working with the city administrators and the corporate sector to renew the area surrounding Polytechnic. The resulting Metropolitan Technology Center, or MetroTech, grew to a workforce of more than 20,000 employees in financial, utilities, and communication sectors (including the 911 emergency system for New York City).
Among George’s key decisions was the creation in 1982 of the Center for Advanced Technology in Telecommunications (CATT), which continues to receive funding from the state of New York in return for disseminating technological research to New York companies for new applications. He also formed a Center for Technology and Financial Services at Poly in 1994, with teaching and research functions and a strong focus on users of technology
in the financial industry. This fostered the first US master’s degree program in financial engineering.
The success of MetroTech was such that it became the catalyst that George believed would transform downtown Brooklyn into the vibrant place that it is today. In 1994, he was honored with the New York City Mayor’s Award for Excellence in Science and Technology.
HIS SCIENTIFIC, ENGINEERING, AND PROFESSIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS
The Biosoma
The biosoma, illustrated in Figure 1, is an entity created by the interaction of a biological component (a city’s inhabitants and other forms of life such as vegetation or microorganisms), a social component (the collective activities, ideas, and organizations of the inhabitants), and a machine component (artifacts, tangible and intangible, that support the life of the city) (Bugliarello 2000, 2001). The schematic representation in Figure 1 belies its complexity.
The biosoma concept helps provide a comprehensive picture of the interaction of living systems and society with machines and with the environment, whether one looks, for example, at cities, where half of the world population now lives, or at natural and anthropogenic environmental challenges and disasters (Bugliarello 2007).
FIGURE 1 The Biosoma (Bugliarello 2000, 2001)
Balance among the three biosomic components is important to maintain a city’s positive characteristics while reducing its dysfunctionalities. Balance considerations have far-reaching implications in making a city livable and manageable. A totally automated city becomes an inhuman city (Bugliarello 2001).
Human actions on the environment fall into two often synergistic categories: transformation and utilization. The origin of life itself is the transformation from inanimate materials and energy in the environment into biological organisms. The environment is also affected by tradeoffs between the hierarchy of elements of the matrix, such as energy-materials, energy-information, or materials-information (Bugliarello 2007).
George Bugliarello’s writings on the biosoma have been cited in a number of scientific papers. For example, his article “The Biosoma: The Synthesis of Biology, Machines, and Society” (Bugliarello 2000) has been cited by Thomas et al. (2003), Cathcart and ĞircoviČ (2006), Amadei (2003), and Sandekian et al. (2007). Benedikter (2010) cited his 1998 work “Biology, Society and Machines.”
Rethinking Urbanization and Engineering for a Sustainable Future
The accelerating urbanization of the world is a recent phenomenon: at the beginning of the 20th century an estimated 5 percent of the world population lived in cities, whereas now half is urbanized. An understanding of this phenomenon in all its dynamics and implications is still missing, from the question of how the sustainability of cities affects the overall sustainability of the globe, to that of the long-term impact of urban living on society (Bugliarello 2011).
In the area of engineering for economic sustainability, the challenges are to design technologies and systems that can facilitate global commerce, cultivate technological innovations and entrepreneurship, and help generate jobs while alleviating environmental impacts and using resources efficiently (Bugliarello 2010a). Urban sustainability is multifaceted and encompasses security, economics, environment and resources, health, and quality of life (Bugliarello 2010b). It can be viewed as the intersection of two extremely complex and not yet fully understood processes, urbanization and global sustainability, which will increasingly overlap as urban populations continue to grow (Bugliarello 2010b). Effective policies are critical for addressing urban sustainability, and must be politically realistic in deciding on appropriate balances, such as centralized versus decentralized systems, “soft” versus “hard”
solutions, local versus regional focus, agriculture versus pollution, and free markets versus interventions (Bugliarello 2008).
George Bugliarello’s work on urbanization and engineering for a sustainable future has been cited in numerous journal papers. His work “Engineering: Emerging and Future Challenges” (Bugliarello 2010a) has been cited by Amadei et al. (2009) and Amadei and Sandekian (2010); “The Engineering Challenges of Urban Sustainability” (Bugliarello 2008) has been cited by Erickson and Stefan (2009). Bolay and Kern (2011), Sobrino (2012), and Amadei et al. (2009) cited “Megacities: Four Major Questions” (Bugliarello 2009). And Oliver-Solà et al. (2011), Ejechi and Ejechi (2008), Agudelo-Vera et al. (2011), and Blasi et al. (2008) cited his article “Urban Sustainability: Dilemmas, Challenges and Paradigms” (Bugliarello 2006).
Perspectives on Urban Security and Adaptive Response
In the United States, cities of over 100,000 inhabitants account for 80 percent of the country’s population, which makes them major potential targets of terrorist attacks—on their infrastructures, government installations and operations, business sites, housing, chemical plants, and people—because all of their systems are interdependent and the vulnerability of one system can have a major impact on others (Bugliarello 2003). Threats from nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological attacks are of greatest concern, as well as cyber, electromagnetic, and psychological attacks (Bugliarello 2005).
Given the complexity of possible target systems in a city, a comprehensive system is needed that explicitly addresses the interdependence of urban components and vulnerabilities (Bugliarello 2003). Cities must also become adaptive to survive changes in their environment (whether physical, social, or economic) and thus improve performance or seek new niches. The capacity to adapt may be developed exogenously, by design from outside the entity, or, in the case of self-adaptation, endogenously (Bugliarello 1999).
George Bugliarello’s 2005 paper “Urban Security in the United States” was cited by Németh (2010) and “The City as an Adaptive Entity” (Bugliarello 1999) by Mayer (2007).
The Formation of MetroTech: An Urban University-Industry Park
The second half of the last century saw the emergence of a new phenomenon, the knowledge park, exemplified by the Research Triangle Park in North Carolina and the complex around Stanford University in California. These
environments combine industry, business, or government operations with a knowledge institution such as a college, university, or specialized laboratory. As parks become a critical element for the economy, social development, and the workforce of the future, their location cannot be left to historical accident but needs to be rationalized (Bugliarello 2004).
MetroTech, in Brooklyn, New York, is a case where a university played a key role in creating a technology complex in an urban setting (Bugliarello 1997), and George Bugliarello was instrumental in its development (Figure 2). MetroTech is an early example of how science and technology programs can influence a region. It is located one subway stop from Wall Street, across the East River, and comprises 14 buildings (Figure 3), with academic, business, industry, and government occupants (Bugliarello 1997, 2004).
FIGURE 2 Excerpt from Brooklyn Progress, September 1990
FIGURE 3 MetroTech’s Building Layout
The following personal reflections are presented here on behalf of some of George Bugliarello’s close friends and colleagues.
Daniel Berg, University of Miami
President George Bugliarello had a fantastic career with an enormous impact on both engineering and education. Even as an assistant professor, at Carnegie Tech in Pittsburgh, he was ahead of his time in starting a bioengineering research program well ahead of the academic engineering community’s recognition of this important field. His record on engineering and education is very well known and deserved.
But a very important aspect of him, known primarily to his colleagues, was his gentlemanly, thoughtful, and sensitive approach to people.
One illustrative small personal anecdote: After a lengthy session with him and his colleagues at Polytechnic University about possible collaborative projects connected to homeland security involving Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, George insisted on escorting me to the subway to make sure I caught the correct subway train to Penn Station to catch the Amtrak train to Albany-Rensselaer! That was just one small example of the many thoughtful
kindnesses he showed me as well as his other colleagues locally, nationally, and internationally.
Peter D. Blair, National Research Council
George Bugliarello was among the most remarkable people I have ever known. The more I came to know and work with him over the years, the more remarkable his life as an engineer and even more as a person became to me. Our conversations over the years were often as much about art, language, culture, and politics as about science and engineering. Inevitably after a session with George I realized how little I really knew about the world and how much I would learn from him in even the most casual conversations.
In George’s role as foreign secretary of the National Academy of Engineering, his lifelong international perspective on how science and engineering can shape and improve the human condition revealed him to be the quintessential renaissance engineer/statesman. His passion for Poly and for creating MetroTech was a realization of his lifelong vision of how cities could be reshaped for the future.
But above all I will remember George’s engaging personality and his vision and inspiring passion for a better world throughout his life. He directed his powerful intellect, his compassionate nature, and his nurturing spirit to all his endeavors and his interactions with colleagues, friends, students, and everyone who had the good fortune to know him. We all miss him deeply.
Robert Dalziel, AT&T Global Networks (ret.)
George was one of those rare human beings with both vision and the management skill to make visions happen.
As a Poly board member, I enjoyed watching a skilled executive in action. He did a superb job of balancing the interests of faculty, administration, and students. I especially appreciated the support he gave to our efforts to improve student life and student retention. As my wife Mary Lou said, “He was a gentleman and a scholar, in the finest sense of the phrase.”
George and Virginia were good friends and good people to be with. We miss him a lot.
Rose J. Emma, former assistant to George Bugliarello
When I think of George, I think of the person who could, with great speed, put into motion the most complex projects—starting a new venture as soon as another was finished and, more often than not, juggling numerous undertakings simultaneously. George was always on a mission and seemed to live in his own time warp. I recall times when he would call me to say he was on his way back to the office from Midtown—and show up at the office seemingly ten minutes later.
George had an uncanny ability to bring out the best in everyone with whom he worked. In the most difficult situations, he always knew what to do and what to say—intelligence and diplomacy incarnate. Amidst all the frenzy of high-level projects, constant writing, and a travel schedule that made everyone who knew him marvel at his stamina, he never failed to find the time to chat with any student, staff, or faculty member who stopped by the office or met him in the hallways.
I fondly recall being chastised for using a knife on my fettuccini, and for mispronouncing the name of a town in Sicily to which he was headed. It still amazes me that he was able to read—upside-down—the bizarre shorthand I had invented to keep up with his rapid-fire dictation (in which he often included the punctuation!). His remarkable writing often took a Dickensian turn, with lengthy phrasing that never missed a grammatical beat.
George’s effect on students was extraordinary and watching him in class was an experience. I knew he had reached his major classroom goal when, after he passed, so many of his students approached me in the halls to tell me they had learned from George how to think.
The memories are abundant and I feel like a Lotto winner, for what are the odds of meeting, let alone working with, someone of George’s caliber? He was truly a shining star, with a brilliance surpassed only by his compassion for everyone around him. I miss him.
John Falcocchio, NYU-Poly
George was a humanist and an engineer with a deep understanding of how science and technology can improve and sustain the quality of urban life. He was an exceptional visionary with an unusual gift for pragmatic approaches in solving societal problems. There was no boundary to his capacity for understanding complex issues and contributing realistic solutions. I miss George at our departmental faculty meetings, where he always infused positive energy in our deliberations. His positive energy was very contagious.
Ivan Frisch, NYU-Poly (ret.)
George Bugliarello was a visionary classicist. Pursuing his activities for Polytechnic, MetroTech, the NAE, and his myriad other constituencies, he worked everywhere in his own handwriting, continually scripting on pads, in margins, and on scraps for his trusted assistant to type as elegant prose. Elegance was his hallmark.
His warmth and versatility were unrivalled. He once arrived at an overseas conference with his speech written in Italian, only to discover the conference was in Spanish. He delivered it in Spanish.
He brought to the enormously challenging job of president grace and humanity that enlightened and broadened everyone. Primarily he was an educator, continuing in his last years to inspire his students in a freshman class as well as all of the rest of us who had so much to learn from him about urban society and the world.
James Garrett and Mitchell Small, Carnegie Mellon University
George Bugliarello was a renaissance man, advancing knowledge and technology in fluid mechanics, biotechnology, urban systems, and technology innovation. In his 11 years as professor of civil engineering at Carnegie Mellon (1959–1969), he studied mechanisms of blood flow in our fluids laboratory and was a founder and first director of the CMU Biomedical Engineering program. His 1970 paper with Andrew K.C. Wong, “Artificial Intelligence in Continuum Mechanics,” appeared in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics and helped to seed and foreshadow CMU’s emergence as a leader in AI and related computer-aided methods for engineering design and analysis, as well as his own out-front thinking on social intelligence and globally linked computer systems. We continue to be influenced by his vision, leadership, and joy for learning.
Ilan Juran, NYU-Poly
George was an elite humanistic explorer, whose creative scientific work and educational dedication were often inspired by a holistic quest for understanding the universe of the complex and intertwined relationships among biological, societal, environmental, and technological systems. For him, engineering was the art of creating technology solutions and systems as the processes that human societies devise to modify or preserve nature for their
sustainable development, and the capability of their strategic integration in the design of the metropolis to address future societal needs.
I have personally deeply appreciated and enjoyed our unforgettable renaissance culture–style brainstorming sessions on the emerging challenges facing fast-growing metropolitan centers in both industrialized and developing countries. Working closely with George on shaping a new vision for the development of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department (CEE) and creatively building an urban-focused nationally recognized research program was an inspiring endeavor and a greatly stimulating learning experience.
His vision of the university’s core mission was anchored in the belief that Poly, as the prime urban engineering and science university of New York, should creatively build dynamic partnerships with metropolitan stakeholders, government agencies, and urban utilities for accelerating the development and assessment of state-of-the-art technologies and innovative urban solutions to metropolitan renovation and sustainable development challenges. This universitywide initiative involved a great diversity of interconnected disciplines and supported the development of several academic centers, such as the New York State–sponsored Center for Advanced Technology in Telecommunications (CATT; 1982), the fast-expanding graduate program in financial engineering, and the CEE research program, which was initiated with his personal commitment and support.
George’s vision of environmentally sustainable urban development was greatly inspired by his deep global understanding of rising societal needs in a wide diversity of cultural contexts, his assessment of the critical role of technology innovation in shaping the future of cities and enhancing their resiliency, and his concrete grasp of current infrastructure needs to support renovation and extension of their urban systems. With an extreme passion for turning his vision into reality, forged through academic and industry interactions, George carved a path to create the first modern university-industry research and technology park for revitalizing downtown Brooklyn and placed Poly in a leading role to guide its renaissance.
Bill McShane, NYU-Poly (ret.)
My first memory of the new president, George Bugliarello, was at a gathering in the faculty lounge: he was so enthusiastic that he wanted to speak to the gathering while seeing everyone, so he used a chair to stand on a table, to see and be seen. That fire, enthusiasm, and outreach were the hallmark of his many decades contributing to Polytechnic and a very apt first impression.
Move ahead to the era of the Brooklyn Campus Redevelopment Committee, which became the MetroTech initiative. It was a concept that seemed too far-fetched to be serious in the minds of many. Even the codeveloper—Forest City, now a regional presence—had to be enticed from Cleveland. Suffice it to say that MetroTech is a reality, and surrounds and shapes us.
Move ahead again to his years of engagement with students, chatting at George’s home at various gatherings he and Virginia had, or as he finished his class and I began mine in the new Jacobs Building.
Others can speak to his scholarship, his travels, and his presence. I focus on these memories, and on the smile and the energy.
Roger Roess, NYU-Poly
When I was dean I was often asked to speak to prospective students at recruiting events. One year, I was to follow George, who was giving a general welcome. I usually use cards to remind me of the main points I want to make in a presentation. On this particular day, as George did his welcome, I sat there quietly discarding card after card: George, in a five-minute welcome, had covered virtually every point I was going to make. To this day, I can’t quite remember what I said during my 15-minute talk, but I have never forgotten how George distilled the essence of why students should come to Poly into a crisp and eloquent 5-minute welcome.
When I first became dean, we had our regular ABET accreditation visit only a month later. With no hotels in Brooklyn at the time, the visiting team was housed in Manhattan. They were supposed to arrive at 8:00 AM on a Monday morning. George and I, dressed in our Sunday best, were waiting for them at the front door. Unfortunately (and unknown to us), the team was stuck in a vicious traffic jam in lower Manhattan, and didn’t arrive until two hours later. As we waited, George and I noticed that people entering the building were giving us very strange looks. Later, the union made a formal complaint, believing that George and I were standing there to observe the arrival time of employees! It always gave us a humorous moment to share over the years.
George was always a charismatic leader. I was only 34 years old when he asked me to accept the position of Dean of Engineering. I have always treasured the faith he placed in me, and the fact that he was always there to provide help, support, and advice when I needed it, which was pretty often in the early days. His vision of MetroTech and his tireless work to make it happen truly saved Polytechnic from extinction. With all of the difficult times
he had to lead us through, however, he remained a very accessible president and a most personable one. I am very lucky that I was able to work for him for so many years, and to work with him as a treasured colleague in civil engineering.
Richard Thorsen, NYU-Poly
George had a passionate commitment to the welfare of Polytechnic and saw a role for the institute in shaping the city and the world. In 1973 he became the first president of the newly formed institution that arose from the merger of Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn and the New York University School of Engineering and Science, and the eighth president of Polytechnic.
By 1976 he was convinced that it would take multiple decades for a great institution to emerge. He saw three principal phases:
• Rebuilding our local environment—urban decay replaced by MetroTech
• Refurbishing and building our own facilities and infrastructure
• Rebuilding the intellectual capital of the institute
The first was largely completed during his presidency, the second by his successor with seeds planted by George, and the third is the process in which we are now engaged with our new relationship with New York University.
MetroTech not only gave Poly an urban campus but was the catalyst for the rebirth of downtown Brooklyn. Without the success of MetroTech there would be no waterfront development (including DUMBO1), no residential towers, and no Barclays Center. These all grew out of George’s recognition that the future of humanity was in its cities.
George showed great courage in building a strong and enduring relationship with Donald Othmer in the face of opposition to investing [fundraising] resources during eras of financial stress for Poly. This investment paid off after George had left the presidency with a $175 million gift from the Othmers, making possible our new building and refurbishing Rogers Hall.
The third leg of George’s view of Poly’s future, building her intellectual capital, is what we are now engaged in. George would love to have seen this process mature, particularly in the area of urban studies and research, something he was a proponent of from the first day of his presidency.
So much of what we are today and what we are poised to become have their roots in George’s presidency. We are all in his debt and society will reap the benefits.
Lucio Ubertini, Sapienza University of Rome
It was the 2nd of June 1992 when George Bugliarello, president of Polytechnic University, and Giancarlo Dozza, president (rettore) of the Università degli Studi di Perugia, signed the “Agreement of collaboration between Polytechnic University (USA) and Università degli Studi di Perugia (Italy).” The program was presented during a memorable seminar on September 20 and 21, 1993, hosted by the Italian Cultural Institute of New York and Polytechnic University. The presentation document concludes: “The first major initiative resulting from these agreements will enable civil engineering students in Italy, who have completed the fourth year of the five-year Laurea degree, to attend the Polytechnic University for their fifth year. With this arrangement, they will receive both the Laurea degree from the Italian university and the master’s degree from the Polytechnic University. It is expected that this program will be extended to include other opportunities for Italian-American faculty and student exchanges and other interesting modes of cooperation between universities.” The achievement of the program was “providing for collaboration in teaching, research, studies, and other academic activities in fields of mutual interest, thus encouraging the exchange of different experiences and points of view.”
Today we can say that thanks to the tremendous vision of George Bugliarello there has been an incredible growth of that initiative; in fact, in 2004 at Sapienza University of Rome we created H2CU (www.h2cu.com), the Honor Center of Italian Universities. Currently 21 Italian universities and three Italian National Research Council (CNR) institutes are related to H2CU. The Center has allowed more than 200 students to be enrolled and obtain the doppio titolo (dual degree) at important US universities such as Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Columbia University, Polytechnic Institute of New York University, and Pace University.
I am very grateful to George for this opportunity and the great gift to appreciate his humanity, generosity, and great friendship.
Chuck Vest and Lance Davis, National Academy of Engineering
George Bugliarello was in all respects a delight to have as a colleague, and his intellectual enthusiasm for discussing all matters of science, engineering, technology, and society was mesmerizing. His dedication and devotion to duty are evidenced by his scholarly engagement on an article for the NAE Bridge journal during his last days in the hospital in mid-February 2011.
George was the NAE foreign secretary from July 1, 2003, until his death and the NAE is greatly indebted to him for his outstanding service in international affairs and his wise counsel on all facets of engineering and technology as a member of the NAE Council. His election as foreign secretary was a stroke of insight on the part of the NAE membership, because he brought enormous experience to the post based on many years of participation in both UN and National Research Council international study delegations. He led NAE interactions with the other engineering academies of the world, through the Council of Academies of Engineering and Technical Sciences, and supported and participated in our bilateral Frontiers of Engineering (FOE) symposia with Germany, Japan, India, China, and the European Union.
As one would expect of a person who was a lifelong educator, he was especially drawn to the young engineers invited by NAE to participate in FOE meetings. One of those young engineers, Melissa Knothe Tate, of Case Western Reserve University, was moved to write a remembrance of George:
The loss of a mentor like George Bugliarello is devastating, but the fruits cultivated through his mentorship will continue to grow, nourish, and disperse new scientific seeds, sowing a bright future for engineering. George was a world citizen who never lost his curiosity to learn anew; perhaps his greatest legacy will be as a role model for mentoring talented young engineers and for helping society to understand the great potential as well as societal implications of the technologies that we, as engineers, develop. At Frontiers meetings, together with other meeting participants, we engaged in discussions as diverse as cell mechanics, alternative energy technologies, engineering human health, and the history of engineering science. These discussions occurred at poster sessions, coffee breaks, bus rides, wherever George could get a discussion going; he was simply insatiable for knowledge!
George had an uncanny way of seeing the “big picture,” particularly with respect to engineering, technology, and society. I will never forget how eye opening it was to hear him speak of the technological developments exerting the greatest impact on society; of course he touched on obvious technological developments regarding energy and transportation, but perhaps more remarkably, he talked about the development of television, its impact on human interaction and its
lasting transformation of society over the past decades. I had never thought of the impact of such ubiquitous entertainment “technology” in that way.
George was revered by NAE members and foreign associates and many have sent notes of condolence to NAE. His legacy extends far, far beyond his service to NAE, and has been captured eloquently by others. Perhaps George’s persona was best captured by NAE member Bert Westwood, who described him as a gentleman, a scholar, an outstanding engineer, a dedicated member of our fraternity, a multicultural enthusiast, and an experienced and accomplished diplomat in the cause of international understanding and scientific collaboration.
Richard Wener, NYU-Poly
Of all the faculty members I have met and worked with over my 35 years at Polytech, I am most proud of the time spent with George Bugliarello and the relationship I formed with him, especially over the last 10 years. George had a keen and analytic mind and was a very original thinker—a quick scan of the syllabi for his courses on Sustainable Cities and Biosoma will demonstrate that. But what was most impressive was the way his fascination with new ideas and new projects never waned. Of all the senior faculty I have ever met, he was by far the most open and least resistant to novel proposals or unusual ideas. His intellectual enthusiasm never flagged, even at an age when most scholars suffer “hardening of the acumen.” I used to say that I wanted to be George Bugliarello when I grew up. I still do.
The legacy and contributions of George Bugliarello are far-reaching and influential in many disciplines such as civil engineering, biomedical engineering, urban development, science policy, water resources, and environmental science. A pioneer in developing ways for universities to advance urban development and sustainability through collaboration and innovative thinking, Dr. Bugliarello is credited with a number of scientific inventions and educational innovations. These include Hydro, a computer language for water resources; pioneering graduate programs in biological and financial engineering; and the journal Technology in Society. More specifically, he changed the way we look at urbanization issues and directed us toward creat-
ing a more sustainable future. Many activities at NYU-Poly have witnessed this impact, changing the way we engage our curriculum and programs.
Perhaps Dr. Bugliarello’s greatest accomplishment was MetroTech. In 1975, during a recession, he foresaw that a university-industry collaboration would revitalize the city, its faltering financial industry, and its economy.
How do we continue George Bugliarello’s legacy and culture? The answer to this question begins with this symposium and its contributions to the academic field, along with a scholarship and an endowed chair of urban sustainability in his name.
George Bugliarello was a leader in teaching and research and he successfully tackled some of the 21st century’s greatest challenges and opportunities. He was compassionate toward the world, concerned about the conditions in which we live, and adamant in showing how building a better surrounding is a worthy goal for each of us.
Agudelo-Vera C, Mels AR, Keesman KJ, Rijnaarts HHM. 2011. Resource management as a key factor for sustainable urban planning. Journal of Environmental Management 92(10):2295–2303.
Amadei B. 2003. Program in engineering for developing communities: Viewing the developing world as the classroom of the 21st century. 33rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference F3B-1. November 5–8, Boulder, CO.
Amadei B, Sandekian R. 2010. Model of integrating humanitarian development into engineering education. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 136(2):84–92.
Amadei B, Sandekian R, Thomas E. 2009. A model for sustainable humanitarian engineering projects. Sustainability 1(4):1087–1105.
Benedikter R. 2010. The future of the (self-)image of the human being in the age of transhumanism, neurotechnology and global transition. Futures: The Journal for Policy, Planning and Futures Studies 41.
Blasi C, Capotorti G, Marta M, Marchese M. 2008. An integrated approach to better define the concept and functions of urban biosphere reserves. Plant Biosystems 142(2):324–330.
Bolay JC, Kern A. 2011. Technology and cities: What type of development is appropriate for cities of the South? Journal of Urban Technology 18(3):25–43.
Bugliarello G. 1997. Urban knowledge parks: The example of Metrotech in New York City. Science Parks, Innovation and High Technologies: Ways for Growth, Competitiveness and Internationalization of Economy, Proceedings of the XIV International Association of Science Parks (IASP). World Conference on Science and Technology Parks, AREA Science Parks, June 16–19, Trieste.
Bugliarello G. 1998. Biology, society and machines. American Scientist 86(3):230.
Bugliarello G. 1999. The city as an adaptive entity. Journal of Urban Technology 6(2):1–11.
Bugliarello G. 2000. The biosoma: The synthesis of biology, machines, and society. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 20(6):452–464.
Bugliarello G. 2001. Rethinking urbanization. The Bridge 31(1).
Bugliarello G. 2003. Urban security in perspective. Technology in Society 25(4):499–507.
Bugliarello G. 2004. Urban knowledge parks, knowledge cities and urban sustainability. International Journal of Technology Management 28(3–6):388–394.
Bugliarello G. 2005. Urban security in the United States: An overview. Technology in Society 27:287–293.
Bugliarello G. 2006. Urban sustainability: Dilemmas, challenges and paradigms. Technology in Society 28(1-2):19–26.
Bugliarello G. 2007. Opinion piece: The biosoma paradigm and environmental engineering. Environmental Engineering Science 24(3):245–256.
Bugliarello G. 2008. The engineering challenges of urban sustainability. Journal of Urban Technology 15(1):53–83.
Bugliarello G. 2009. Megacities: Four major questions. Journal of Urban Technology 16(1):151–160.
Bugliarello G. 2010a. Engineering: Emerging and future challenges. In: Engineering: Issues and Challenges for Development, a report of UNESCO in conjunction with the World Federation of Engineering Organizations and the International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences (CAETS). Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
Bugliarello G. 2010b. The future of urban sustainability: Some urgent sociotechnological challenges. Sustainability: The Journal of Record 3(6).
Bugliarello G. 2011. Critical new bio-socio-technological challenges in urban sustainability. Journal of Urban Technology 18(3):3–23.
Cathcart RB, ĞircoviČ MM. 2006. Extreme climate control membrane structures: Nth degree macro-engineering. In Macro-Engineering: A Challenge for the Future, Water Science and Technology Library, vol 54, eds. Badescu V, Cathcart RB, Schuiling RD. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 151–174.
Ejechi EO, Ejechi BO. 2008. Safe drinking water and satisfaction with environmental quality of life in some oil and gas industry impacted cities of Nigeria. Social Indicators Research 85(2):211–222.
Erickson T, Stefan H. 2009. Groundwater recharge in a coldwater stream watershed during urbanization. Project Report No. 524, prepared for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, St. Paul.
Mayer H. 2007. What is the role of the university in creating a high-technology region? Journal of Urban Technology 14(3):292–315.
Németh J. 2010. Security in public space: An empirical assessment of three US cities. Environment and Planning A 42(10):2487–2507.
Oliver-Solà J, Josa A, Arena AP, Gabarrell X, Rieradevall J. 2011. The GWP chart: An environmental tool for guiding urban planning processes. Application to concrete sidewalks. Cities 28:245–250.
Sandekian R, Amadei B, Bielefeldt A, Summers RS. 2007. Engineering for poverty reduction: Challenges and opportunities. Fifth International Latin American and Caribbean Conference for Engineering and Technology (LACCEI), May 29–June 1, 2007, Tampico, México.
Sobrino J. 2012. Urban demographic growth: The case of megacities. In Handbook of Research Methods and Applications to Urban Economies, eds. Kresl PK, Sobrino J. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. pp. 343–371.
Thomas MB, Casula P, Wilby A. 2003. Biological control and indirect effects. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19(2):61.
Wong AKC, Bugliarello G. 1970. Artificial intelligence in continuum mechanics. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division 96(6):1239–1265.
Adaptive response: the capacity of an entity (e.g., a city) to sense and respond to a perturbation. An effective adaptive response anticipates a threat and leads to action rather than reaction.
Biosoma: concept created by George Bugliarello to consider the interaction of the natural inanimate inorganic environment with the Earth’s biological systems (humans and other species), their social entities, and their machines (artifacts).
DUMBO: acronym for Down Under the Manhattan Bridge Overpass, a neighborhood in the New York City borough of Brooklyn. It encompasses two sections: one located between the Manhattan and Brooklyn Bridges, which connect Brooklyn to Manhattan across the East River, and another that continues east from the Manhattan Bridge to the Vinegar Hill area.
MetroTech: the Metropolitan Technology Center, a university-industry park in Brooklyn, conceived and catalyzed by George Bugliarello and Polytechnic University in 1975.
Urban knowledge parks: dense geographical environments combining industry and research-oriented institutions.
