FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Aipedia: Structural and civil engineers
IStructE expects a senior engineer to review any AI-produced structural design, and the 2026 Statement of Ethical Principles asks every engineer to weigh AI risks fully. Neither is statute, but both shape what a court or insurer will see as reasonable practice.
Part of: AI in structural and civil engineering
In short
Two documents set the profession's AI expectations. The Engineering Council and Royal Academy of Engineering Statement of Ethical Principles (February 2026 edition) names artificial intelligence in a new Principle 5 and stresses competence in emerging areas. IStructE's "Implementing AI in structural engineering" (5 February 2026, modified 1 July 2026, aligned to ISO/IEC 42001:2023) is practical: senior review of AI design, an AI lead, a risk matrix, client disclosure, no AI on sensitive projects, and retiring outdated tools. Neither addresses PI, but both describe the controls a careful firm would be expected to have.
Engineering in the UK has no single statutory regulator. Registration titles are overseen by the Engineering Council, and member conduct by institutions. The table summarises the documents that deal with AI as at October 2026.
| Body | Document | Date | Status | AI content |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Engineering Council and Royal Academy of Engineering | Statement of Ethical Principles | February 2026 edition (revises 2017) | Ethical principles for the profession | Names AI in Principle 5; competence in emerging areas |
| IStructE | Implementing AI in structural engineering | Published 5 Feb 2026, modified 1 Jul 2026 | Guidance, with an organisational checklist | Senior review, roles, disclosure, data, lifecycle |
| IStructE | Code of Conduct (2022) | 2022 | Applies to members | No AI wording; competence and skill articles apply |
| CROSS-UK | Report 1554 | 16 Jul 2026 | Safety report with expert panel comment | Inappropriate use of AI in structural design |
Alongside the main guidance, the IStructE technology and digital hub lists a resource on calculation models using large language models, an article on an ethical framework for AI, and two June 2025 roundtables, one on AI in a safety context and one on policies, processes and privacy. These are background reading rather than formal expectations, but they show the direction of travel inside the institution.
For the wider rulebook, including Part 2A dutyholder duties, see our engineers regulatory framework guide.
The February 2026 edition revises the 2017 text. Its AI-relevant points are:
The IStructE guidance is organisational and practical, and comes with a compliance checklist. Its main expectations:
The alignment to ISO/IEC 42001:2023, the management system standard for AI, means the checklist reads like a light management system: policy, roles, risk assessment, controls and review. Firms that already run a quality management system under Code of Conduct Article 6 can usually fold AI into it rather than start again.
CROSS-UK Report 1554 applies these ideas to a real submission: an AI-written calculation report for rooftop plant that was fundamentally wrong. The panel cited Part 2A regs 11F to 11H, referenced the IStructE guidance and ISO/IEC 42001, and said designers should disclose AI-assisted outputs. The statutory duties themselves sit in Part 2A of the Building Regulations 2010, including reg 11K, and in CDM 2015 reg 9. The Building Safety Regulator became a standalone body on 27 January 2026 and is working toward a single construction regulator; whether AI disclosure becomes a formal submission requirement is on the watch list.
For a practice, the guidance translates into a short set of records: a written AI policy, a named AI lead, a tool register with versions and validation notes, evidence of senior review on AI-assisted design, and client-facing disclosure. Our design checking guide and graduate supervision guide show how those records work day to day.
The IStructE guidance does not address PI, and no institution statement on AI and PI was found. Even so, if a claim arises, the guidance is likely to be used as evidence of what a reasonably competent engineer would have done. A firm that can show it followed it is in a stronger position with claimants and insurers. See whether engineers' PI covers AI design errors and the IStructE and PII overview.
Apex arranges PI for structural and civil engineers. A broker can review your cover and how your policy treats AI-assisted work alongside your new AI policy.
It is published as guidance, not as a rule in the Code of Conduct. But Code of Conduct Articles 5 and 6 on competence and skill still apply, and a court or insurer is likely to treat the guidance as evidence of what a competent structural engineer would do.
IStructE says smaller firms may appoint an AI lead. In a small office that can be a principal who owns the AI policy, keeps the tool register, receives concerns and has authority to stop a tool being used if it proves unsafe.
IStructE advises avoiding AI tools on sensitive projects, giving critical national infrastructure, government buildings, hospitals and projects under a non-disclosure agreement as examples. Client permission is also needed before storing project data.
Yes. It is published by the Engineering Council and the Royal Academy of Engineering for the engineering profession as a whole, so its AI principle and its competence expectations apply across disciplines, not only to structural engineers.
Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.
Start a PI quote Request a callbackApex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.
