sustainability

Article
Industry 4.0 and Sustainability Implications:
A Scenario-Based Analysis of the Impacts
and Challenges
Silvia H. Bonilla 1, * , Helton R. O. Silva 1 , Marcia Terra da Silva 1 ,
Rodrigo Franco Gonçalves 1,2 and José B. Sacomano 1
1 Post Graduate Program in Production Engineering, Paulista University, UNIP, São Paulo 04026-002, Brazil;
[email protected] (H.R.O.S.); [email protected] (M.T.d.S.); [email protected] (R.F.G.);
[email protected] (J.B.S.)
2 Graduate Program in Production Engineering, University of São Paulo, USP, São Paulo 13010-111, Brazil
* Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected]; Tel.: +55-11-96390-2641




Received: 1 August 2018; Accepted: 9 October 2018; Published: 17 October 2018


Abstract: The new evolution of the production and industrial process called Industry 4.0, and its
related technologies such as the Internet of Things, big data analytics, and cyber–physical systems,
among others, still have an unknown potential impact on sustainability and the environment. In this
paper, we conduct a literature-based analysis to discuss the sustainability impact and challenges of
Industry 4.0 from four different scenarios: deployment, operation and technologies, integration and
compliance with the sustainable development goals, and long-run scenarios. From these scenarios,
our analysis resulted in positive or negative impacts related to the basic production inputs and outputs
flows: raw material, energy and information consumption and product and waste disposal. As the
main results, we identified both positive and negative expected impacts, with some predominance
of positives that can be considered positive secondary effects derived from Industry 4.0 activities.
However, only through integrating Industry 4.0 with the sustainable development goals in an
eco-innovation platform, can it really ensure environmental performance. It is expected that this
work can contribute to helping stakeholders, practitioners and governments to advance solutions
to deal with the outcomes emerging through the massive adoption of those technologies, as well as
supporting the expected positive impacts through policies and financial initiatives.

Keywords: Industry 4.0; Internet of Things; sustainability; environmental sustainability;

sustainable development

1. Introduction
Without doubt, industry has contributed to social welfare through the supply of high-quality
products adapted to human necessities as well as ensuring the right working conditions for employees.
Nevertheless, the pattern of current production is not environmentally sustainable [1]. In this context,
a more concerned society, public sector, and non-governmental organizations are demanding that the
industrial sector produce in an economically, environmentally and socially sustainable manner [1,2].
This requirement is genuine since it has become evident that production, when focused only on profit,
leads to an unequal distribution of wealth, poor working conditions, the depletion of environmental
stocks and the overexploitation of ecological services. The alleged right to human wellbeing, while
ignoring the real limits of the biosphere, has resulted in the unsustainability of our consumption and
production systems [3].
The framework of environmental sustainability restricts production within limits imposed by
ecological constraints. In this way, the rate of exploitation of natural resources should not exceed the

Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740; doi:10.3390/su10103740 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 2 of 24

rate of regeneration, the rate of waste generation should not exceed the assimilative capacity of the
biosphere, and the depletion of nonrenewable resources should require comparable substitutes [4].
To produce within the paradigm of environmental sustainability, at least within the model of “weak
sustainability”, implies in a rational allocation of natural resources, the minimization of waste or
when impossible their proper treatment before adequate disposal, and the adoption of the industrial
ecology approach.
On the other hand, consumers, although nowadays more aware of the finite nature of resources,
are far from adopting the principles of sustainable consumption and they demand many products
far beyond their real needs. When it comes to the actual purchase of sustainable products, an
apparent inconsistency between attitudes towards sustainable consumption and actual behavior is
observed [5]. The current scenario, which encourages increased production, contributes to the depletion
of non-renewable resources, climate change, and a loss of biodiversity, among other ecological impacts.
Although the corporate vision is not unanimous, multiple successful cases and academic results
have been demonstrating that producing in an environmentally proactive way is not a synonym
for expense [6,7]. Companies have begun to recognize the benefits and competitive advantage
associated with proactive environmental activities [8]. The resulting benefits cover a broad spectrum,
such as the satisfaction of the stakeholders who currently have many environmental concerns [9],
the elimination of pollution and environmental liabilities [10], and the improvement of financial
performance due to opportunities in new foreign markets [11]. Moreover, a company that embraces
environmentally-friendly behavior could become a supplier in a green supply chain [12] or obtain
environmental certification, with the attached improvement in reputation [13].
In this complex scenario of pressing global environmental challenges, Industry 4.0 emerges from
the synergy of the availability of innovative digital technology and the demand by consumers for
high quality and customized products [14]. It is clear that the Industry 4.0 guiding principle was
not initially focused on providing solutions to the ecological problems faced by production, but on
boosting productivity, revenue growth, and competitiveness. Furthermore, Industry 4.0 has its inherent
challenges to cope with in order to be successful. Some of them deal with essential requirements, such
as the standardization of systems, platforms, and protocols, changes in work organization, digital
security, the availability of skilled workers, research and investment and the adoption of appropriate
legal frameworks [14,15]. Other challenges are related to the pressure that growing digitization is
putting on traditionally successful business models [14,16].
Nowadays, Industry 4.0 is also coping with the necessity of producing within environmental
constraints in order to be geared towards sustainability. The main environmental pressure that
digital technologies are suffering is related to the increasing trend in energy demand, and the urgent
requirement of adopting low-carbon energy systems [17].
Although it seems evident that the deployment and maintenance of both the virtual and the
physical infrastructures inherent to Industry 4.0 require a reasonable environmental budget, the effect
on environmental sustainability is still challenging to predict [15]. This raises a valid question: to
what extent and with what delay will Industry 4.0 affect environmental sustainability, and is society
prepared to deal with the environmental challenges?
The primary objective of this paper is to provide an outlook on how the inherent characteristics of
Industry 4.0 and the changes it promotes affect the flow of raw materials, energy, products, waste, assets,
and information, and how their modification consequently impacts either positively or negatively on
environmental sustainability. This work can contribute to the understanding of possible paths towards
more sustainable societies by helping stakeholders and governments to advance technical and policy
solutions to deal with the outcomes that will result from the massive adoption of those technologies.
Additionally, it contributes to supporting the expected positive impacts through initiatives that could
range from financial incentives to value creation opportunities.
The paper is structured as follows: following this introduction, a section describes in a brief
but comprehensive way the Industry 4.0 concept and its underpinning technologies. Section 3 is an
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 3 of 24

overview of previous studies relating Industry 4.0 technologies with some aspects of environmental
sustainability. This is followed by the analysis of the impact on sustainability, based on a scenario
approach, and the choice of each is justified and described. Thus, the effects of Industry 4.0 on
the deployment and operation scenarios are explored, and the positive and negative impacts on
sustainability are identified. Then, Industry 4.0 characteristics that offer a plausible opportunity
for integration with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) are identified, and an overview
of the opportunities that emerge from this scenario is provided to find pathways to sustainability.
Finally, a credible long-term scenario is analyzed with the purpose of advancing strategic planning
and anticipating public policies. The discussion is largely supported through literature research. Lastly,
the main conclusions and findings are shown.

2. Concepts of Industry 4.0 and Its Underpinning Technologies

The present section provides a background with the key concepts that will assist in the
development of the line of thought and may also help the readers who are not familiar with the terms.
This section is structured as follows. Firstly, we present the concept of Industry 4.0 and then its
fundamental technologies. These technologies support and underpin the new production systems,
leading to the emergence of properties or characteristics that will frame the production processes.
These characteristics will be described in the text. Finally, we describe the capabilities/functionalities
acquired or enhanced through the adoption of these technologies in an integrated way.
The concept of Industry 4.0 rose with a German government initiative in 2011, establishing it as a
critical strategy for industrial production. In this vision, Industry 4.0 is part of an interconnected world,
changed by the ICT (information and communications technologies) revolution. This technological
context is formed by the IoT (Internet of Things) and IoS (Internet of Services), which connect the
industry internally and externally through its supply chain network, while the industrial operation
becomes “smart”, supported by cyber–physical systems (CPS) [14,18].
The close relation of Industry 4.0, CPS and IoT is also pointed out by other authors [19–21].
In a systematic literature review on Industry 4.0, Liao et al. found 249 papers published before July
2016 [21]. Of these papers, only three did not relate Industry 4.0 to IoT and CPS. However, it is hard to
find a consensus in the literature on other Internet concepts related to the Industry 4.0 context. IoS is
mentioned by [14], while [20] refers to a broader, but also abstract, concept: the Internet of People (IoP),
and the Internet of Everything (IoE). The extensive literature review conducted by [22] mentions IoT
without another Internet concept. In this sense, we consider IoT as the only related Internet concept
without extending our analysis to IoS, IoE or IoP concepts.
Within this scope and according to the fundamental components of the Industry 4.0 idea [20],
we mainly consider CPS and IoT as crucial technological components in our scenario analysis. However,
the fourth industrial revolution comprises a variety of enabling technologies developed more or less at
the same time as CPS and IoT that play an important role in expanding the features of the emerging
production process [21]. Other enabling technologies associated with Industry 4.0 include big data,
RFID, cloud computing [22] and additive manufacturing (3D printing) [23] and blockchain [24],
without pretending to be exhaustive.
The formal definition of CPS adopted in this text is a system “where physical and software
components are deeply intertwined, each operating on different spatial and temporal scales, exhibiting
multiple and distinct behavioral modalities, and interacting with each other in a myriad of ways that
change with context” [25]. CPS connects a layer of physical elements, such as machines, components,
and installations, with a “cyber” layer of information systems, through sensors and actuators [19].
In other words, CPS conducts the virtualization of the operation.
CPS is a technology that allows connection and communication, such as information
exchange, triggering actions, and independent control between humans, machines, and products.
When integrated with manufacturing it is defined by [26] as an innovative technology in which
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 4 of 24

information from all related perspectives is carefully monitored and synchronized between the physical
factory floor and the cyber computational space.
The Internet of Things (IoT) is an emerging term that combines different technologies and
approaches, based on the connection between physical things and the Internet [27].
According to [28], IoT is the connection through the Internet of physical world objects which are
equipped with sensors, actuators and communication technologies. IoT can have multiple application
domains, such as manufacturing, health, transport, and energy, facilitating the development of new
applications and improving existing uses.
The installation of proper sensors allows harvesting the signals of the physical production system
for further data mining and recording. When all of the data is aggregated, this amalgamation is called
“big data” [29]. Through big data, Industry 4.0 opens up new forms of value creation, particularly with
the demand for innovative services and new forms of employment [14].
Cloud computing, whose central characteristic is the virtualization of computing resources
and services, is described as a combination of established computing technologies and outsourcing
advantages, expected to generate productivity effects in firms and growth in the economy [30].
The scalability of computing resources allows the use and payment of the resources needed without
massive investment, thus helping to reduce costs and increase competitiveness.
These underpinning technologies when integrated into manufacturing, suppliers and customers in
operational and strategic layers, allow the emergence of specific properties that characterize Industry
4.0. They are automation [31], digitization [31], decentralization (making independent decisions
and producing locally, resulting in a reduction of organizational hierarchies) [31], virtualization
(creation of a virtual copy of a factory by linking sensor data with virtual plant models and simulation
models) [32], real-time data acquisition and processing and real-time data communication (thus
creating the capability of immediately providing the derived insights) [14].
As a consequence, different possibilities emerge for manufacturing, in terms of the production
process capabilities, the value to the final customer, or both. The main features cited in the literature are:
Related to the increased value to the final customer:

(i) Increased customization [31,33];

(ii) Increased agility, through the decrease of inventory levels and lead times within the value
chain [34];
(iii) The tracking of raw materials and products during the whole life cycle [35];
(iv) The emergence of novel business models which allow new ways of value creation; according to
Arnold et al. [36] these are cloud-based, service-oriented and process-oriented business models.
Industry 4.0 also allows innovation across business model elements: value creation, value offer
and value capture [18].

Related to the production process capabilities are:

(v) Increased efficiency [14,31];

(vi) Increased modularity (when the structure is decoupled into subsystems with very little
interdependence). This also contributes to flexibilization by replacing or expanding individual
modules [32,37];
(vii) Increased integration through data flow, thus promoting a more flexible structure and data
exchange among all the elements [14,31];
(viii) Promotion of intelligent learning analysis, which allows devices and machines to develop learning
capacities and act in response to different situations based on previous experiences [38];
(ix) Self-control and prediction (allowing predictive maintenance) [35];
(x) Simulation and modeling of the impact of process-steps; possibility to design and test new plants
before set up by virtualization [32];
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 5 of 24

(xi) The improvement of vertical integration, since it allows the integration of the departments and
hierarchical levels of the organization, from product development to manufacturing, logistics,
and sales [14,39];
(xii) The improvement of horizontal integration, as it allows global optimization of the production
process across factory and company boundaries through the availability of product data
throughout the entire network [14,33,39].

Related to increase value and improve production process capabilities:

Sustainability
(xiii) Increased 2018, 10, x FOR
flexibility, PEER REVIEW
enabling reconfiguration through adapting or changing 5 of 24
production
requirements or the addition of machine components [14,31];
(xiii) Increased flexibility, enabling reconfiguration through adapting or changing production
(xiv) End-to-end digital integration,
requirements or the additionallowing
of machine the integration
components [14,31];of business processes across the entire
value(xiv) End-to-end
chain, including digitalthe
integration,
factory allowing
floor andtheservices
integration of business
using processes across the entire
CPS [14,40].
value chain, including the factory floor and services using CPS [14,40].
Figure 1 shows
Figure 1ashows
structural sketch
a structural of of
sketch thethetechnologies and
technologies and capabilities
capabilities described
described above. above.

Figure 1. The underpinning technologies of Industry 4.0 and the acquired capabilities that emerge
Figure 1. The underpinning technologies of Industry 4.0 and the acquired capabilities that emerge
when theywhen
are adopted by production processes.
they are adopted by production processes.

3. Overview of Environmental
3. Overview Sustainability-Related
of Environmental Research
Sustainability-Related Research

The increasing trend in

The increasing theinliterature
trend dealing
the literature dealing with sustainability
with sustainability within
within the Industry
the Industry 4.0 paradigm
4.0 paradigm
reinforces the relevance of the topic as well as the various
reinforces the relevance of the topic as well as the various aspects which can plausiblyaspects which can plausibly be addressed.
be addressed.
Despite the multiple approaches adopted to address the topic, there is currently a unanimous view
Despite thethat
multiple approaches adopted to address the topic, there is currently a unanimous view that
the long-term impacts of Industry 4.0 on sustainable development are still unclear [15]. Since the
the long-term impacts
present of Industry
work mainly addresses 4.0topics
on sustainable development
related to environmental are still unclear
sustainability, [15].aSince
we prioritize generalthe present
work mainly addresses
overview topics
of articles related
dealing withto the
environmental
environmental sustainability, we prioritize
dimensions of sustainability. a general
Lopes Sousa overview
Jabbour et al. [41] affirm that a few emerging works provide insight into
of articles dealing with the environmental dimensions of sustainability. Lopes Sousa Jabbour et al. [41] the integration of Industry
4.0 technologies and environmentally-sustainable manufacturing.
affirm that a few emerging works provide insight into the integration of Industry 4.0 technologies and
The consequences of the adoption of novel process technologies for advanced manufacturing,
environmentally-sustainable
more precisely the additive manufacturing.
manufacturing (or 3D printing), on industrial sustainability are
The consequences of the adoption
addressed [42], showing the benefitsofbutnovel
also process
the challengestechnologies
due to thefor advanced
immature stage manufacturing,
of the
technology. The exploratory study based on cases shows
more precisely the additive manufacturing (or 3D printing), on industrial sustainabilitythe benefits of additive manufacturing at are
different stages of the life cycle by considering opportunities in terms of product design, production,
addressed use,
[42],services
showing the benefits but also the challenges due to the immature
and repair and closing the loop. It also addresses innovative business models supported
stage of the technology.
The exploratory
by valuestudy based on cases
chain reconfiguration thatshows the benefits
will contribute of additive
to sustainable manufacturing
production at different stages
and consumption.
of the life cycleAccording
by considering
to Stock and opportunities in terms
Seliger [34] industrial valueof product
creation mustdesign,
be gearedproduction, use, services and
towards sustainability
and Industry 4.0 provides immense opportunities for the realization
repair and closing the loop. It also addresses innovative business models supported by value chain of sustainable manufacturing.
The authors carried out a state-of-art review to analyze the opportunities for sustainable
reconfiguration that will contribute to sustainable production and consumption.
manufacturing from the micro and macro perspectives through horizontal integration across the
According to
entire value Stock andnetwork,
creation Seliger the [34] industrial
entire product value creation
life-cycle, mustintegration.
and vertical be gearedThey towards sustainability
concluded
and Industry 4.0 provides immense opportunities for the realization of sustainable manufacturing.
that Industry 4.0 provides an excellent opportunity for realizing sustainable industrial value creation
The authors from a life cycle
carried out aperspective
state-of-art andreview
supported to by the intelligent
analyze cross-link.
the opportunities for sustainable manufacturing
Beier et al. [43] affirmed that there was very little research devoted to investigating the impact
from the micro and macro perspectives through horizontal integration across
of digitalized industry on relevant industry sustainability aspects. The authors surveyed German and
the entire value creation
network, the entire
Chinese product
companies to life-cycle,
investigate the andexpected
verticalIndustry
integration. They
4.0 impacts onconcluded
ecological and that Industry 4.0
social
sustainability. The ecological dimension was evaluated through material and energy efficiency, the
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 6 of 24

provides an excellent opportunity for realizing sustainable industrial value creation from a life cycle
perspective and supported by the intelligent cross-link.
Beier et al. [43] affirmed that there was very little research devoted to investigating the impact
of digitalized industry on relevant industry sustainability aspects. The authors surveyed German
and Chinese companies to investigate the expected Industry 4.0 impacts on ecological and social
sustainability. The ecological dimension was evaluated through material and energy efficiency,
the capacity of renewable energy implementation and the adoption of environmental strategies or
standards. The findings show that the transformation is expected to positively affect ecological issues
while posing challenges for the social dimension.
Corporate sustainability could be positively affected by the extensive digitization provided by
Industry 4.0 by facilitating more accurate, high quality, real-time external environmental accounting
and environment management accounting according to Burritt and Christ [44]. The authors offer an
understanding of how the broader context of corporate sustainability could be incorporated into this
agenda, hitherto undeveloped.
Kiel et al. [33] argue that the TBL (Triple Bottom Line) perspective on the opportunities
and challenges that arise from the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) are not well understood.
The authors address the implications of IIoT on TBL through an exploratory approach based on
semi-structured expert interviews in 46 manufacturing companies from three leading German
industries. The systematic and inductive examination suggests that IIoT-related benefits and challenges
apply to all the three sustainability dimensions. The benefit to the companies that is directly related to
the environmental dimension is resource efficiency.
The study by Lin et al. [45] attempts to sketch a cross-national comparative policy analysis
and innovation requirements to provide policy recommendations under Industry 4.0 for sustainable
development. The authors try to reveal the competition and coalition trend and anatomize the
cross-strait policy content on Industry 4.0 through a comparative policy analysis across China and
Taiwan. The intention is to provide a precise analysis tool for government support technology and
innovation development on the national level. Both countries focus on environmental policies so that
the needed infrastructure by Industry 4.0 may be developed.
The study of Müller et al. [46] examines the Industry 4.0-related opportunities and challenges
as drivers for Industry 4.0 implementation in the context of sustainability and analyzes differences
in company characteristics, such as size, industry sector, and the company’s role as an Industry
4.0 provider or user. The authors propose a research model based on TBL comprising Industry 4.0
opportunities and challenges. The empirical results show a positive and highly significant relationship
between environmental benefits and Industry 4.0 implementation. This trend is not dependent on size
and industry sector.
Lopes Sousa Jabbour et al. [41] argue that the Industry 4.0-associated technologies have the unique
potential to unlock environmentally-sustainable manufacturing and the authors present a study where
eleven critical success factors (CSF) are identified through literature research. The CSF are considered
to pose challenges and opportunities to the process of simultaneously implementing Industry 4.0 and
environmentally-sustainable manufacturing. The approach adopted for sustainable manufacturing by
the authors is related to “green issues” in the sense of being more focused on environmental issues.
Also in the in the context of sustainable production, a paper by Lopes de Sousa Jabbour et al. [47]
proposes a roadmap to enhance the application of circular economy principles in organizations within
the Industry 4.0 approach, aiming at the sustainable use of natural resources.
Gobbo et al. [48] identify the potential connections and benefits between process safety
and environmental protection with industry 4.0 concepts through the measurement of keyword
co-occurrence and concluded that there is much more collaborative research between environmental
protection and industry 4.0 than between process safety and industry 4.0.
The potential for sustainable value creation in Industry 4.0 for the macro and micro perspective
based on a literature review and expert interviews was assessed in [32]. The results show that
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 7 of 24

the value creation might positively contribute to sustainable development through new business
models, new processes and a life cycle perspective. On the other hand, critical areas with expected
negative contributions are related to the quantity of materials used, primary energy consumption,
and working conditions.
The Industry 4.0 initiatives for supply chain sustainability in the Indian manufacturing industry
were identified in [49]. Even Industry 4.0 initiatives fostering sustainable supply chains face many
challenges. The research identifies 18 challenges to Industry 4.0 initiatives for developing supply chain
sustainability using an extensive literature review and analyzed through a survey.
The overview of the literature encompassing Industry 4.0 technologies and the environmental
dimension of sustainability highlights some approaches and methodologies. The papers presented
here use different approaches to address the topic, including exploratory cases [42], state-of-the-art
review [34,49], surveys in the manufacturing sector [34,43], expert interviews [32,33], literature
analysis and/or exploration [32,41,44,46,47], descriptive content analysis with descriptive statistics [45],
empirical study based on partial least squares structural equation modeling of the research model [46],
and bibliometric networks [48].
The indicators adopted to evaluate environmental sustainability consider resource efficiency [33,
42], the efficient use of material, water and energy [34,43], the use of renewable energy [32,34,43], the
adoption of environmental strategy/standards [43], the reliability of environmental cost accounting (by
external environmental accounting) [44], the development of innovative environmental policies [45],
the reduction of environmental impact [46], the quantity of material used, energy consumption and
the amount of waste [32] and greenhouse emissions [32].
The results show that the intelligent cross-link provided by Industry 4.0 technologies enables
the optimization or is expected to optimize resource allocation; the efficient use of material, energy
and water [34,42,43]; facilitate better data quality and higher credibility, leading to more accurate
environmental management accounting and external environmental reporting [44]; and unlock the
integration with environmentally sustainable manufacturing [41].
The expected environmental benefits as pollution decreases will have a positive effect on the
tendency to implement Industry 4.0 [46].
In addition, novel business models offer opportunities to positively influence sustainability
through innovation and new services [32,34,42]. The potential for environmentally-added value
creation is also enhanced [32,34,42,46] through life cycle integration and the application of the circular
economy [47] promoted by Industry 4.0 integration.
Although there exists literature addressing the opportunities, challenges, and barriers of Industry
4.0 with regard to environmental sustainability, it remains uncertain to what extent, with which delay,
and at which stage of deployment the digitization of industrial production will promote or hinder
transformations that will affect environmental sustainability. We think that the technology has not been
sufficiently explored from a sustainability perspective due to its novelty and the different degrees of
implementation within countries, and although it seems promising, its long-run impacts are uncertain.

4. Materials and Methods

The line of thought adopted to address the problem is based on a theoretical analysis to
evaluate the positive or negative impacts of the Industry 4.0 production context and its underpinning
technologies on environmental sustainability aspects. To this end, we consider the necessary flows of
all production activities: raw material (RM), energy (E) and information (INFO) as input flows; and
products, waste, and end-life products (END) as output flows. Four scenarios drive our analysis as
will be explained in 4.2.

4.1. Outlining the Environmental Sustainability Framework Adopted

Environmental sustainability is an ideal state, and it is only possible to quantify the distance from
the ideal point of sustainability [50]. Throughout the text, we refer to the impact on sustainability
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 8 of 24

in the sense of determining whether there is a decrease or increase of the distance towards the ideal
sustainable state. The method used to determine this trend, namely to distinguish whether the actions
are contributing to decreasing or increasing the distance from sustainability, was through the use of
some relevant parameters.
Since the objective of this work was not to quantify or measure indicators, but a systemic and
prospective exploration, we were faced with the challenge of selecting universal parameters, easy to
understand, ubiquitous and almost intuitive, to infer the influence they experience as a result of any
type of activity. Moreover, they must be able to be extrapolated from the micro to the global scales,
thus enabling inferences about the history and disturbance of ecosystems and life cycles.
Additionally, the concept of sustainability is linked to extensive properties, since it depends on
the availability of limited resources within the biosphere. In this way, Bastianoni et al. argued that it is
not possible to assess sustainability by using intensive parameters because the problem is strongly
correlated with the size of the system [50].
By focusing on a production perspective, productivity relies on the ecosphere’s ability to provide
services and resources, and non-sustainability means a systematic degradation of this ability [51].
However, to measure the degradation due to production-related activities is not straightforward, since
impacts have a delay between the cause or “upstream” activity and the observed effect [51]. In this
way, environmental impact evaluation is not considered here as a straightforward methodology to
access the influence of manufacturing activities on sustainability.
Also from a production perspective, some tools deal with sustainability within a range of spatial
dimensions (from micro to more systemic scales). According to Robèrt, there are more than 60
codes [51]. However, most of the tools emerged from the mathematical aggregation and weighting
of other parameters, a fact that hinders a correct prevision of the effect of activities. However,
a comparison of some of the recognized tools applied in addressing organizational sustainability
allows the extraction of common environmental parameters that are considered as single indicators or
within an aggregated index.
From a comparison by Goodland and Daly that compiles some examples of proposed
sustainability performance measuring systems, we found a subset of parameters that have the desirable
specific characteristics [52]. They are omnipresent, they allow us to establish a direct cause–effect
relationship, they are well-established and easy to control, they are easy to handle, and their trends
due to anthropogenic activities are easy to foresee. Additionally, they are scalable to enable correlation
with global theories of environmental sustainability. The set—composed of material, water and energy
use, waste and air pollution (and greenhouse emissions)—is directly related to the paradigms of
environmental sustainability. Thus, the flows of material, water, energy, waste and pollutants involved
in production should be constrained within the requirements stated by the paradigm considered in the
sustainability framework adopted. The biosphere acts as a resource provider and as a sink for wastes
and pollutants [53]. The basic definition of environmental sustainability relies on the input–output rule,
determining that waste emissions from a project must be within the biosphere’s assimilative capacity
and resource inputs must be within the regenerative capacity of the natural system that generates
them [53].
The evaluation of the influence of Industry 4.0 activities on sustainability will be carried out
employing an analysis of the parameters mentioned above. No quantification will be accomplished,
but rather a comparison regarding the necessary flow of all production activities between the actual
state and the future stages in the four perspectives of analysis (next Section 4.2). The comparison
requires a certain degree of abstraction in the cases in which there is a lack of literature relating
cause–effect. In these cases, discussion among the authors and the exchange of ideas helped evaluate
the effect on the flows considered and thus establishing a trend in sustainability terms.
The principles of Industry 4.0 promote the real-time sharing of information, allowing the rapid
modification of production and the monitoring and performance control of production lines through
connections between machines, devices, and supply chain tiers [41]. The collection of data on usage is
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 9 of 24

also one of the goals of Industry 4.0, since it can help companies to understand patterns of consumption,
improve the customization of products, and enhance the service aspects of products [41]. Accordingly,
it is possible to affirm that Industry 4.0 relies on information. Not only the information generated,
but also the transmission, storage, and analysis are material-dependent and energy-intensive [54–56].
The basic flows are subject to changes that will affect the environment either positively or negatively,
as they contribute or negatively interfere with environmental sustainability. The literature also confirms
that the digitalization of industrial production will influence environmental production factors such
as resources and energy consumption, as found in the results of surveys conducted in companies in
China and Germany [43].

4.2. Selection of the Analysis Scenarios

The scenarios to carry out the analysis were selected by setting the basic elements of Industry 4.0
relevant to expected future states and through a description of the consequent necessities/demands
faced and the opportunities that emerge. The necessities and opportunities, identified mainly through
the literature review, affect the environmental sustainability through the relevant flow modification.
As a “scenario”, we consider a set of conditions, variables and boundaries that drive a future
(prospective) context of analysis. The scenario-based approach has been used in environmental
impact analysis, sustainable energy future and other prospective studies [57–59].
In this sense, a scenario involves a context boundary to restrict the analysis to a well-delimited
frame of time and variables or agents, to describe a possible near or long-term future. However, the four
presented scenarios are not alternatives for the future, as pointed out by [60], but complementary,
representing four different contexts and times of analysis: the near future, medium-term future and
long-term, as well as a SDG-related discussion scenario.
The scenarios are:

• Industry 4.0 Deployment: refers to the evolution from the current industry level to the Industry 4.0
level. This includes the infrastructure necessary for the implantation of the fundamental elements
to reach the operational condition. In this case, RM and E are related to the infrastructure. END is
related to obsolete devices and equipment.
• Industry 4.0 Operation: refers to the operational stage, on which companies are transforming
inputs (RM, E, INFO) into outputs. Under this scenario, we discuss the Industry 4.0 differentials or
advantages created by the underpinning technologies and their effects on input and output flows.
• SDG Compatibility: discusses the possibilities and impacts from the point of view of the UN
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Our analysis involves the subset of the SDGs more
related to environmental goals to support the discussion.
• Long-Term: this scenario involves a prospective analysis, or projection, of possible positive and
negative long-term and growing effects of the impacts on sustainability.

The Deployment Scenario is formed by the basic elements that constitute an Industry 4.0 context.
A previous high level of automation is one of them [14,20], and this is a fundamental condition for
achieving the Industry 4.0 level of productivity and flexibility [19]. Second, the industry requires
the digitization of its process, with IoT, CPS and real-time data acquisition, analysis, and control to
became “smart” [14]. Both IoT and CPS are considered the key elements to the integration—vertical
and horizontal—of the production process that is the fundamental aspect that characterizes Industry
4.0 [14,19,37]. In this sense, we can consider automation, digitization, and integration the key aspects
of the Deployment Scenario.
The Operation Scenario is set by the production objectives acquired with the operation of Industry
4.0, and the benefits offered by the underpinning technologies. As pointed by [14], the operation
becomes “smart” with the vertical and horizontal integration created by IoT and CPS. “Vertical
integration refers to the integration of the various IT systems at the different hierarchical levels” from
the lowest level of sensor and actuators to the highest level of management information systems,
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 10 of 24

while “horizontal integration refers to the integration of the various IT systems used in the different
stages of the manufacturing and business planning processes that involve an exchange of materials,
energy and information” [32]. Smart production is also achieved with real-time data acquisition and
processing, to monitor, control and optimize the production flow [14,20], including advanced data
mining and big data analysis (BDA) [37]. Additive manufacturing, also called 3D printing, is another
technology that composes the operation scenario, especially related to flexibility, customization and
on-demand production [23,61]. Finally, Blockchain and smart contracts are brand new technologies in
Industry 4.0, but considering what is occurring with the crypto-currencies (based in Blockchain) its
vast energy consumption is an aspect to be considered [62].
The elements of the SDG Scenario are defined analogously to the previous scenario.
Additionally, in this scenario, is also relevant to consider innovative business [14,19,61] as a key
element. The integration with sustainability principles is achieved via the setup of a sustainable
development goal platform that considered SDGs 7, 9, 12 and 13. Within this integrative scenario
we identified relevant actions where the integration could contribute in a planned way to
environmental sustainability.
Finally, the Long-Term Scenario is composed of elements derived from the literature and previous
scenarios organized in such a way that their analysis enables us to address the question. This scenario
requires a prospective analysis since it depends on the greater or lesser compliance with the SDGs.
Accordingly, two opposite alternatives depending on how some key factors (extracted from the
literature and from discussion among authors) conduct the long-run evolution. Each key factor is
analyzed by assuming a positive and a negative trend towards sustainability. It represents the opposite
expected situation that Industry 4.0 technology will face as a consequence of environmental pressures
and requirements.
Industry 4.0, driven by its unique junction of characteristics, will affect the systems where it
operates in multiple ways. The “filter” imposed by each scenario or analysis perspective acts in a
restricting way, by directing Industry 4.0 actions within a specific constraint such as: (a) the stage or
degree of implementation (evidenced when comparing actual or pre-Industry 4.0 stages to deployment
and operation stages); (b) the degree of compliance with or commitment to the SDGs (evidenced
when comparing the as-usual operation stage with the SDG scenario); and (c) time (evidenced
when the comparing operation stage with the long-term scenario). In this way, the chosen scenarios
correspond to different conditions; they evidence not only two different stages of implementation
(initial deployment stage vs. operation stage), but also the temporal evolution from the initial scenario
to the long-term scenario.
In each scenario, the pressure exerted by Industry 4.0 activities will manifest differently, by means
of either new demands/necessities or new opportunities.
The Industry 4.0 activities relevant to each specific scenario and the linkages with environmental
sustainability are explored through a cause–effect framework. As Figure 3 shows, the effects resulting
from the Industry 4.0 context (displayed as INDUSTRY 4.0) within each scenario (block termed as
SCENARIOS) lead to direct or indirect changes in the state of each system. This state is defined by
the basic input and output flows (block termed as FLOWS) relevant to the concept of environmental
sustainability. They will be affected as a consequence of Industry 4.0 actions within the scenarios.
The essential elements relevant to environmental sustainability are the flow of raw materials, energy,
products, waste, end-life products, and information. An environmental budget is supposed to support
all these flows and is affected by production activities. All kinds of material, as well as energy flows,
are more easily perceived to be strongly dependent on environmental resources and services since they
rely directly on raw materials, mineral ores, oil, water bodies, and land use. Information flows are also
dependent on environmental resources [54–56], although the perception of this dependence may be
less evident. The inherent principles of Industry 4.0 promote real-time shared information, allowing
the rapid modification of production, as well as the monitoring and control of the performance
of production lines through connections between machines, devices, and supply chain tiers [41].
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 11 of 24

The collection of data on usage is also one of the goals of Industry 4.0, since it can help companies
to understand patterns of consumption, improve the customization of products, and enhance the
service aspects of products [41]. Not only the generation of data but also the transmission, storage,
and analysis are material-dependent and energy-intensive. The changes that may occur in these
essential elements can affect the environment either positively or negatively, as they contribute or
negatively interfere with environmental sustainability. The discussion will enable us to recognize that
sometimes the changes suffered by the flows are not always related to quantity (namely, an increase
in raw materials or an increase in data collection). Changes related to the nature of flows can also
occur, that is, the amount of energy flow may not decrease, but may depend on renewable sources,
thus altering their nature. Flows of information or data can be considered more reliable, and data
acquisition is becoming more sophisticated, thus changes in quality are also considered.
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Finally, the fourth
Sustainability block
2018, 10, in Figure
x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 (RESPONSE) corresponds to the trend 11 ofof11the
of 24
24 impact on
environmentalFinally,
sustainability
the fourth block in Figure 3 (RESPONSE) corresponds to the trend of the impact on 2 shows a
caused by the activities represented in the first block. Figure
Finally, the fourth block in Figure 3 (RESPONSE) corresponds to the trend of the impact on
pictogramenvironmental
ofenvironmental
the scenarios. sustainability caused by the activities represented in the first block.
sustainability caused by the activities represented in the first block.

Figure
Figure 2. 2. Conceptual
Conceptual representation ofof
representation thethe
analysis scenarios.
analysis scenarios.
Figure 2. Conceptual representation of the analysis scenarios.

Figure 3. The line of thought adopted and the causal relationships among the different elements and
blocks. The first block represents the characteristics and technologies inherent to Industry 4.0; the
Figure 3. The linerepresents
second of thought adopted
the four scenariosand the incausal
explored text,relationships
therelationships
whereasamong among
block 3the
displays theflows
the different
thatand elements
Figure 3. The line of thought adopted and the causal different elements
and blocks. The
suffer first
directblock represents
influence from the the characteristics
necessities or opportunities and technologies
generated in each inherent
scenario.
blocks. The first block represents the characteristics and technologies inherent to Industry 4.0; The to Industry
response the 4.0;
regarding thethe positive orscenarios
negative impacts on environmental sustainability
the secondsecond
represents
represents four
the four explored
scenarios explored in in
thethe text,
text, whereas blockisblock
whereas 3 represented in the last
3 displays
displays the flows the
thatflows that
block.
suffer
suffer direct direct influence
influence fromnecessities
from the the necessities
ororopportunities
opportunities generated in each
generated in scenario. The response
each scenario. The response
regarding the positive or negative impacts on environmental sustainability is represented in the last
regarding the positive
5. Results or negative impacts on environmental sustainability is represented in the
and Discussion
block.
last block. This section provides a concise description of the experimental results, their interpretation, as
well as the
5. Results andexperimental
Discussion conclusions. It comprises four subheadings, one for each scenario.
This section provides a concise description of the experimental results, their interpretation, as
well as the experimental conclusions. It comprises four subheadings, one for each scenario.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 12 of 24

5. Results and Discussion

This section provides a concise description of the experimental results, their interpretation, as well
as the experimental conclusions. It comprises four subheadings, one for each scenario.

5.1. Deployment Phase Scenario

It is evident that the spread of Industry 4.0 will face inherent environmental challenges. At least,
new demands to ensure the successful implementation of the technologies will emerge.
As stated by Müller et al. [18] the integration to CPS demands the purchase of new machinery,
the integration of sensors and software, and high computing capacities. The required infrastructure to
support digital transformation will rely on natural and human-made resources.
From a life cycle perspective, a massive adoption of Industry 4.0-related technologies entails
raw materials, water and fuels for manufacturing all of the new machinery and devices as well as
resources (fuels, land and ecological services) for the disposal of obsolete equipment. An exploration
of the literature retrieved evidence that enables us to propose cause–effect relationships regarding the
deployment and the environmental sustainability trend.
Regarding material flows, the present scenario relies on a supporting environmental budget since
electronic devices, robots, computer terminals, and sensors demand material and energy resources
in their manufacture and deployment. According to the International Federation of Robotics (IFR),
robot sales increased by 16% to 294,312 units in 2016 due to the ongoing trend toward automation [63].
The IFR also states that Chinese companies are buying enormous quantities of robots thus installing
more manufacturing robots than any other nation [63]. Digitization relies on hardware that requires
scarce raw materials, such as lithium and heavy rare earth [64], that are difficult to extract, handle,
purify and recycle. An increase in demand for scarce raw materials is expected due to the dissemination
of digital technologies.
An increased use of materials can be expected due to these new technologies as well as to the
upgrade of production facilities, machines, and other resources with additional ICT, in particular,
sensors [32]. The implementation of an integrated production infrastructure implies the consumption
of new devices, mainly sensors and actuators [14]. It also entails the disposal of obsolete equipment
that cannot be integrated with new systems, increasing waste, especially electronic waste.
The obsolescence of machinery and equipment as a consequence of automation and digitization,
leads to the necessity of equipment replacement. According to the level of automation/digitization,
the degree of equipment to be replaced within a company will change. It is expected that about 40 to
50 percent of existing equipment will be replaced in the course of Industry 4.0 [65]. It is important to
consider that those percentages were estimated for developed countries such US, Germany and Japan,
which are at a higher technological stage.
Regarding energy consumption, an increase in primary energy consumption is expected due to
the manufacturing of product-related ICT [32].
Table 1 organizes the above discussion in an attempt to provide evidence of the cause–effect
trend. Accordingly, it shows how the elements relevant to the scenario are expected to impact on
environmental sustainability. The table’s first column is entitled Industry 4.0 elements. The second
column shows the expected necessities or the opportunities that will be generated from deployment
of the Industry 4.0 technologies. The effects on the relevant flows are briefly described in the third
column, while the last column identifies the trend of the expected impact. When possible, the life
cycle perspective was adopted to infer the effect on the flows. Accordingly, not only the direct effect
is estimated but also that related to other phases of the life cycle. A clear example of this life cycle
perspective is the estimated effect on energy flows, which is related to manufacturing phase due to the
crescent trend towards the manufacturing of new machinery.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 13 of 24

Table 1. Overview of characteristics of Industry 4.0 at the deployment phase and their impact on
environmental sustainability based on the above discussion.

Industry 4.0 Elements Needs/Opportunities Effect on Flows Impact Trend

Increased equipment demand Increased raw materials flow in their manufacturing Negative
Increased energy flow in their manufacturing Negative

Automation Potential equipment Increased flows of end-life products to disposal,

Negative
obsolescence recycling.
Increased fuel flows for transport (towards disposal
Negative
or recycling)
Increased raw materials flows in their manufacturing
Increased device demand Negative
(Li and rare earth)
Increased energy flow in their manufacturing Negative
Digitization Potential equipment Increased flows of end-life products to be disposed,
Negative
obsolescence recycled
Increased fuel for transport (towards disposal or
Negative
recycling)
Increased raw materials flows in their manufacturing
Negative
(Li and rare earth)
Increased devices demand
Integration Increased energy flow in fabrication Negative
(implementation) Increased flows of products to be disposed, recycled Negative
Potential equipment
Increased fuel for transportation (towards disposal
obsolescence Negative
or recycling)

It is important to notice that all the effect on flows in this scenario were evaluated by assessing
the life cycle, thus considering mining and the manufacturing of equipment/devices. The necessities
generated within this scenario as a consequence of the demand for new devices will add a burden to
the environment [17]. Thus, a negative impact on environmental sustainability is expected as discussed
above and listed in Table 1. Additionally, the increasing trend in machinery obsolescence due to new
skill necessities leads to an increase in landfill demand when recycling is out of the question.
The discussion also provides evidence of the challenges to be faced in environmental terms
and shows relevant or potential problems that public policy, society, academia, government,
and international organizations should consider. In this way, the recycling of rare earth to minimize
their extraction and the consequent environmental disturbance is a topic that deserves attention.
Innovation directed towards research on the minimization or substitution of rare metals is strongly
encouraged. The retrofitting of manufacturing equipment when possible can be encouraged [34] as a
way to enable material and energy savings.

5.2. Operation Scenario

This scenario describes the expected situation under Industry 4.0 operation and how it will affect
resources, raw materials and energy consumption, waste generation and data collection, storage,
and analysis.
As described by Qin et al., the operation of Industry 4.0 will involve not only a connected and
automatically exchanging information system, but also a system that has become conscious and
intelligent enough to predict and maintain machines; to control the production process, and to manage
the factory system in a decentralized and interdependent way [37].
The collection of impressive amounts of data and the opportunity to analyze them to perform
more advanced processes are crucial for Industry 4.0 [66].
While the Internet of Things (IoT) allows the acquisition of real-time energy consumption data and
the analysis at the machine and production line level to improve energy-aware decision-making [67],
the smart production systems will require massive data centers to process and support their network
needs [68]. Thus, an increase in primary energy consumption focused on data centers and the
processing of big data in the cloud is expected [32]. The necessity of the constant monitoring and
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 14 of 24

adaptation of the production process demands dynamically configurable processes with the expected
increase in primary energy consumption [32].
Table 2 displays the main needs expected for the operation scenario. The demands generated by
operation within the Industry 4.0 technology framework mainly affects energy flows according to the
literature exploration.

Table 2. Overview of the main requirements of Industry 4.0 at the operation phase and their impact on
environmental sustainability based on the above discussion.

Industry 4.0 Elements Needs Effect on Flows Impact Trend

Smart production:
• IoT and CPS integration Demand for massive data centers Increased energy flow Negative
• Real-time data control

On-demand production and

Dynamically configurable processes Increased energy flow Negative
customization

On the other hand, the digitization of manufacturing processes can offer opportunities for energy
saving [69]. Shrouf and Miragliotta describe six sets of benefits due to IoT adoption and integration
between real-time data and the company’s information technology tools and platforms, in order to
improve energy efficiency [67]. The application of optimization software tools can achieve energy
savings, thus reducing up to 30% of the consumption for a real industrial robot trajectories [70]. Besides
the approach of improving energy efficiency utilizing the optimization of a single machine or the
whole manufacturing process, there exists the possibility of smart energy allocation promoted by
the horizontal integration of factories and enterprises. Energy saving for production management is
performed through intelligent optimization algorithms to optimize total energy consumption with a
big data processing platform [71].
Industry 4.0 can provide support through continuous resource management due to the detailed
information availability on each point of the production process [69]. Accordingly, the monitoring of
real-time data enables the awareness of resource consumption and responsive production management.
In addition, the emergence of novel technologies can improve material savings, as is the
case for additive manufacturing, known as 3D printing. Additive manufacturing creates products
layer-by-layer, it is inherently more resource efficient and less wasteful than traditional subtractive
methods due to its ability to reuse waste material [42]. The technology is promising since a
variety of polymers, metals, ceramics, and composites can be used, furthermore, although the first
applications of it were in the area of rapid prototyping and then tooling, they are increasingly
being used for direct manufacturing [42]. Doubts arise due to the variability of results relating
energy efficiency when compared with other methodologies, but the energy footprint can be low
for processes that do not involve lengthy processing at elevated temperature [32,72]. Even so, due
to the frequent use of laser technologies and when starting from powdered material, additive
manufacturing processes are still energy inefficient [32]. In addition, 3D printing does not require
ancillary, sustainability-impacting cutting fluids, casting release compounds or forging lubricants [72].
Additionally, additive manufacturing processes enable a variety of end-of-life practices, producing
individual spare parts to extend lifespans [32].
Additive manufacturing techniques influence maintenance, logistics and contribute to the
flexibilization necessary for on-demand customized products. In this way, energy and fuel (and
the resulting carbon emissions) are saved when a part is repaired or refurbished rather than being
replaced and disposed, and transportation is decentralized [69,72].
Predictive and remote maintenance, another characteristic of Industry 4.0 promoted by
real-time monitoring, can also positively affect the environmental burden. Preventive and predictive
maintenance promoted by big data analytics extends the lifespan of machinery, thus minimizing end
of life waste [35].
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 15 of 24

On-demand customized products, one of the drivers of Industry 4.0 development, enables two
approaches regarding its impact on environmental sustainability. The more pessimistic approach
relies on the thinking that the easy availability of customization may foster the need to possess
more objects, feeding a short-term hedonism, a sense of ephemeral happiness. On the other hand,
the customized product may eliminate undesired or unneeded functionality for end users. However,
deeper examination of this question is beyond the scope of this paper. Since the physical realization of
each function requires material resources and energy for digital solutions, the reduction of functionality
is supposed to positively impact on the environment [73].
Mass customization leads manufacturing companies to collect many consumers’ personalized
data from the web in real time, while also managing more types of relevant data [74] as well as
subjective data feedback from consumers [66].
Industry 4.0 can also foster disruptive business models where not products but functionalities,
maintenance and services will be offered to consumers [32]. These new business models can extend the
life-cycle of products, since new functionalities could be added in a modular way without replacing
the whole device.
Blockchain technology can reshape business models through integration with Industry 4.0 by
keeping and creating records and enforcing contracts across industries [75]. Since Blockchain is
transparent, immutable and irrevocable [75], it allows the creation of reliable information. However,
the significant amount of energy it consumes is still a limitation to be taken into account when dealing
with environmental sustainability. Furthermore, current consensus algorithms like proof of work
waste too much electricity [76]. Nevertheless, this affirmation is not unanimous [62].
Table 3 presents an overview of the Industry 4.0 elements addressed in exploring this scenario and
capturing their effect on environmental sustainability. From the opportunities generated by Industry
4.0 technologies during operation, the cause–effect impact on the relevant flows is shown in the third
column. The results are extracted from the above discussion.

Table 3. Overview of the main characteristics of Industry 4.0 in the Operation Scenario that impact on
environmental sustainability.

Industry 4.0 Elements Opportunities Effect on Flows Impact Trend

Vertical integration Availability of reliable data about materials flows Positive
Smart production: Availability of reliable data about energy flows Positive
• IoT and CPS integration
• Real-time data control Availability of reliable data about material
Horizontal integration Positive
consumption along the life cycle.
Availability of reliable data about energy
Positive
consumption along the life cycle
Collection of data from consumers Availability of subjective data It depends
Optimization of material
Decreased material flow in manufacturing Positive
consumption/ecoefficiency
Big Data Analytics
Optimization of energy
Decreasing energy flows at the factory Positive
consumption/ecoefficiency
Predictive maintenance/Remote
Decreased energy flows Positive
maintenance
Decreased waste Positive
Prototyping
Tool and mold manufacturing Decreased materials flow Positive
Additive manufacturing
Final product manufacturing
Decreased waste Positive
Part manufacturing
No cutting fluids and forging lubricants Positive
Increased energy flows Negative
Elimination of the undesired
On-demand production and Decreased material and energy Positive
functionalities of products
customization
Disruptive business Extended life cycle of products/decreased end-of-life
Positive
model/functionality and services products
Smart contract/Blockchain Transparency/decentralization/reliable
Increased energy flows Negative
technology information
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 16 of 24

In this scenario, the increase in energy consumption seems to be the problem to deal with.
Even with the possibilities offered by energy optimization due to algorithms and data analytics, energy
consumption is a challenge that must be faced in order to successfully contribute to environmental
sustainability. However, all the elements of the scenario positively contribute, at least partially,
towards environmental sustainability. In this context, technological research, policy-making initiatives,
and fostering innovative business models to add sustainable value are welcomed to reinforce the
positive aspects and to overcome negative aspects.

5.3. Scenario of Industry 4.0 and Sustainability Integration

The analysis was carried out by establishing an integration platform where Industry 4.0 and
environmental sustainability (and their objectives and tools) were able to interact. The transition
process towards sustainable societies must be appropriately planned, directed and controlled, to
ensure the success of the transformational journey [3]. Within this framework, the objective was to
identify those relevant elements and characteristics of Industry 4.0 technologies that could contribute
in a planned way to attaining the objectives inherent to environmental sustainability. In the first
two analyzed scenarios, the positive influence on environmental sustainability does not emerge from
purposely planned actions in this direction. Moreover, they can be considered as positive secondary
effects derived from Industry 4.0 activities. The present scenario differs since the integrated platform
is the key driver and the positive environmental effects are the goals.
The integration platform in this scenario is constructed through the identification of synergy
points between Industry 4.0 and sustainability. To set a well-supported platform of integration,
we extracted from those Sustainable Development Goals directly linked to environmental aspects the
characteristics that can be interrelated to the Industry 4.0 elements. The Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) were adopted by the UN Sustainable Summit to guide international efforts towards
Sustainable Development until 2030 [77]. The establishment of goals is a necessary condition to begin
the journey towards sustainability. However, the goals will undoubtedly evolve as humans become
capable of considering long-term goals and learn more about the linkages between the systems and
dimensions of sustainability [3].
Of the seventeen SDGs, four were selected due to their close relationship with environmental
issues. Additionally, they should be capable of integrating their objectives with actions intrinsically
related to production processes. In this way, the following SDGs were chosen to compose the
integration platform: SDG#7 “affordable and clean energy”, SDG#9 “industry, innovation and
infrastructure”, SDG#12 “Responsible consumption and production” and SDG#13 “climate actions”.
The elements of Industry 4.0 that would feasibly proactively interact with the selected SDGs
to create new opportunities to achieve sustainability targets are the same as those in the operation
scenario, plus novel business models as an additional key element. The operations scenario showed
that there exist some deficient aspects to be improved and others to be optimized to purposely
contribute towards sustainability. This improvement will be discussed in this scenario, emphasizing
opportunities for the integration with SDGs.
IoT and CPS allow increasing energy saving opportunities, which can be accomplished through
the substitution of technologies, the application of software for energy optimization and adaptations
in business processes.
As stated in [73], the sustainable energy transition and Industry 4.0 share an important
characteristic, namely both are highly influenced by technological innovations.
Smart grids allow real-time decisions in the choice of energy sources. Moreover, real-time
monitoring enables energy supply sources to automatically switch to low or no carbon emissions
depending on the energy costs [44]. The combination of real-time data and the automation-enabled
temporal flexibility offer transparency for optimizing the company’s energy management and smart
grid setting benefits either by consuming and storing energy or, on the contrary, by reducing their
consumption (in case of energy shortage) on demand [73]. The smart grid concepts involve the
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 17 of 24

adoption of an information system to match energy consumption with production [48]. Smart grids
supported by the potentials of information and communication technologies can efficiently manage the
generation, delivery, and consumption of electricity from different decentralized sources of electricity,
as well as integrating renewable energies to meet the varying electricity demands of end-users [78].
Full production information will assist product development from design to disposal, promoting
the life cycle perspective. Additive manufacturing can improve and optimize material and design
selection to positively impact the use phase, allowing recycling or remanufacturing through the whole
life-cycle. The case of General Electric’s LEAP engine is well-documented, where 3D-printed allows
the augmented durability of the component while reducing its weight by 25%, as well as attaining an
optimized geometry to achieve higher combustion efficiency with consequent fuel and CO2 emission
savings [42]. As demonstrated by [79], the 3D printing technology shows remarkable potential for
technological sustainability. A weak point of additive manufacturing, namely the recyclability of
materials, which is largely unexplored, is assumed to be increasingly deployed [32].
The quality, quantity, and accuracy of information gathered within the Industry 4.0 paradigm will
contribute to the release of reliable data capable of feeding national databases, helping policymakers
and contributing to responsible consumption. At the corporative level, sustainability reports supported
by credible environmental accounting could present reliable data, avoiding the accusation of
greenwashing, as stated by [44]. Moreover, the lower human interference in the data collection process,
the more transparent the information for stakeholders will be.
Blockchain technology has been cited as having a great significance in the development of
environmental sustainability, with the long-term goal of reducing the effects of climate change [24].
The Blockchain technology, which has proven to be compatible with Industry 4.0, allows supporting
an emissions trading application framework [80].
Regarding disruptive business models, [81] explored the synergistic relationships between the
circular economy and big data, and how it can enhance social and environmental sustainability,
enabling the decoupling of environmental burden and economic growth.
Since the SDGs present interlinks, a multiplier or synergic effect is observed on the other four
approaches when we focus on one of them. In this way, Table 4 shows the integration of the approaches
and the opportunities for improvement, as well as the final effect on flows.

Table 4. Integration of the approaches between the SDGs and Industry 4.0 elements and the
opportunities for improvement that emerges from that integration.

Enhanced Opportunities towards

SDG Integration through Industry 4.0 Elements Effect on Flows
Environmental Sustainability

SDG#7 Implementation of smart grids Decreased energy flows

• Digitization (IoT and CPS)
Affordable and • Real-time monitoring and data collecting Implementation of life cycle
clean energy Increased renewable energy
• Big data analytics assessments

• Digitization (IoT and CPS) Improve weak points of additive

SDG#9 Decreased energy flows
• Real-time monitoring and data collecting manufacturing (energy and
Industry, Decreased material flows
• Additive manufacturing recyclability)
innovation and Decreased waste flows
• Novel business models Extend integration with the circular
infrastructure Decreased end-of-life products
economy

SDG#12 • Digitization (IoT and CPS) Implementation of reliable and

Increased reliable data
Responsible • Real-time monitoring and data collecting transparent sustainability reporting
Decreased material flows
consumption and • On-demand production/customization on-demand parts manufacturing
Decreased waste flows
production services instead of tangible product

Implementation of smart grids Decreased energy flows

• Digitization (IoT and CPS)
SDG#13 • Real-time monitoring and data collecting Implementation of life cycle
Increased renewable energy
Climate actions • Big data analytics assessments
• Blockchain Blockchain-enabled emission trading Decreased GHG emission

We can expand the analysis by suggesting that innovation supports not only the sustainable
transition, but also other sustainability-driven actions. Although not all requirements have been
translated into technical solutions, innovation supported by appropriate regulations is expected to
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 18 of 24

foster integrated environmental solutions for digital manufacturing. If, to date, innovation seems to
be the main driver of Industry 4.0, the integration with environmental sustainability will promote
eco-innovation. This practice is already positively impacted by the development of lighter materials,
design for the environment, nanomaterials, algorithms for energy optimization, disruptive business
models and integration with more sustainable economic models. As an example, this involves selling
the functionality and accessibility of products instead of only selling the tangible product [34].

5.4. Long-Term Scenario

It is not trivial to assess the longer-term scenario, since not only one future trend is conceivable
from a projection of the present situation. Nowadays, Industry 4.0 is still at an incipient stage, spatially
concentrated and mainly adopted by multinational enterprises.
Even with the existing risks and challenges, it is believed that for business management, Industry
4.0 can be competitive in the long term [33] while creating sustainable value.
Some of the factors that emerge from the literature and further discussion among the authors
could change the trend towards sustainability. Accordingly, an unskilled workforce is considered a
key factor, and predictions vary as to how industry and the government will deal with the workforce
that does not match the new profile. Kagermann et al. already mentioned this social challenge [14].
If the adoption disseminates in a geographically distributed form and among companies of
different sizes, the future trends will vary.
In the long term, the way that Industry 4.0 will impact environmental sustainability is not as
straightforward as in previous scenarios. The reaction of society, business, and governments to the
new paradigm will be critical in directing the types of impact.
If the Industry 4.0 dissemination does not occur in a geographically homogeneous way, there will
be niches of economically and socially disadvantaged countries with a consequent increase in the gap
between developed and developing countries.
As one of the concerns of Industry 4.0 is customization [31], consumers in economically
more productive societies can disregard responsible consumption, motivated by the availability
of on-demand customized products. Additionally, new necessities inherent to the new technological
demands will arise, such as devices, drones and sensors, which will require materials for their
manufacturing [32]. The infrastructure to maintain and provide secure data transfer will also
concentrate a large amount of resources and energy [32].
Many factors may influence the long-term development of Industry 4.0. However, we believe
that the degree of synergy achieved between social and environmental SDGs and the homogeneous
geographic distribution of the technology will be decisive in the proactive interaction with
environmental sustainability.
Although it has been argued that Industry 4.0 can be a facilitator of environmental sustainability
when integrated with the SDGs, the perspective could change to a pessimistic scenario if integration
were not achieved. Within the pessimistic scenario, the combination of some factors such as unskilled
labor, high obsolescence, high consumer demand and low eco-efficiency will have a negative impact
on environmental performance [42]. An additional factor that can drive the long-term response is
the starting point of the industrial structure, since it might be affected differently and the quality of
changes may vary between countries [43]. New business models, in which social media information
could be used to promote pro-environmental actions [46] and select products that are environmentally
friendly [82] should be promoted to avoid the pessimistic scenario. Fostering feedback from customers
and employees could also be driven to value co-creation [83].
The exchange of information and technology will be crucial to involving developing countries
and avoid the unsustainable trend.
In 2035, the demand solely for emerging technologies could even be double that of primary
production in 2013 for three metals: lithium, dysprosium/terbium, and rhenium [64]. For these metals,
the increase in demand due to technological change is significantly higher than the increase in demand
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 19 of 24

due to global economic growth. In this way, substitutes or proper recycling and purification will
require technological innovation and research.
Table 5 shows an overview of the two likely long-term scenarios, namely the optimistic and the
pessimistic scenario according to the key factors analyzed above. The social and technological response
to the shortcomings, demands, and challenges will propitiate one of the trends.

Table 5. Overview of two conceivable long-term scenarios from an optimistic and a pessimistic
projection. The type of response to challenges will direct the trend.

Characteristic of
Key Factors Response Impact Trend
the Projection
Device demand Increased recycling Positive
Research for substitutes Positive
Raw material demand (Li, etc.)
Increased recycling Positive
Consumer concerns Aware Positive
Unskilled workforce Focus on training and formation Positive
Optimistic Company infrastructure Homogeneity in terms of automation and digitization Positive
Promote value co-creation
Novel business models Positive
Promote pro-environmental markets
Spatially homogeneous adoption of the technology Positive
Geography
Exchange of technology between developed and
Positive
developing countries
Increased raw materials flow in fabrication
Device demand Negative
(Li and rare earth)
Consumer concerns Unaware Negative
Company infrastructure Heterogeneity in terms of automation and digitization

Pessimistic Spatially concentrated adoption of the technology Negative

Geography
Technology concentrated in developed countries Negative
Increased flows of products to be disposed, recycled Negative
Equipment obsolescence
Increased fuel for transportation
Negative
(towards disposal or recycling)

6. Concluding Remarks
The present work offers a cause–effect perspective on the Industry 4.0 technologies applied
to manufacturing and support activities by analyzing their effect on flows directly linked to
environmental sustainability.
The division of scenarios enabled us to capture in a more specific way the needs and requirements
that will be faced, as well as the opportunities that arise through the different explored situations
filtered by the Industry 4.0 elements and temporal and stage considerations.
Accordingly, the different degrees of implementation were examined when comparing scenarios 1
and 2. The different degrees of commitment to SD principles were examined when comparing scenarios
2 and 3. A temporal prognostic was present in scenario 4, which included two opposite trends.
The trends of the environmental sustainability impacts were stage-dependent, as observed by
the comparison of scenarios 1 and 2. Whereas the trend was shown to be negative at the deployment
stage, the impact during operation was expected to be positive.
The convergence of Industry 4.0 technologies towards the SDGs platform is possible but requires
supportive innovation and policies. When integrated with the SDGs, Industry 4.0 is expected to drive
opportunities for proactive responses, but the real integration will only occur through the use of a
well-established eco-innovation platform to ensure environmental performance. The results indicate
that the emerging functionalities offer a range of opportunities for environmental sustainability when
adequately planned.
On the other hand, the long-term scenario of Industry 4.0 is closely dependent on societal reactions
as well as on public policies, legal frameworks, and homogeneous dissemination. Heterogeneity among
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 20 of 24

the nations adopting Industry 4.0 as well as among companies with different levels of digitalized
infrastructure could create niches of inequality and non-sustainability patterns.
The transparent exchange of information for consumers is a key factor in allowing responsible
consumption, since this new phase places the consumer in an empowered role, which will be risky
without the awareness of environmental concerns.
However, a clarification must be made. Although the flows selected to address environmental
sustainability are relevant and already adopted elsewhere, it is worth noting that sustainability is
an extensive concept [50]. The estimation of the flow trend when an activity is imposed is relatively
straightforward. Nevertheless, an activity that is supposed to entail a positive effect on a specific flow
will also depend on the total production quantity. If the total production increases, the total flows will
increase, and the positive trend due to the technological contribution will be canceled. The same flows,
expressed as ratios or flow intensities (intensive parameters), may show a positive trend, but they
could not reflect the real global sustainability trend (an extensive concept). We tried to take this concept
into consideration when examining the long-term scenario (scenario 4, both tendencies).
Although a quantitative assessment of the impact is beyond the scope of this work, it is important
to highlight that environmental impact depends on the amount of total consumption of biophysical
resources. According to Ehrlich and Holdren [84], the impacts are divided into three sections:
population, level of consumption (affluence) and impact per unit of resource (related to technology).
The concept can be expressed as environmental impact = f (population, affluence, technology).
Our approach is related to the third term and found evidence of a predominance of positive
impacts in qualitative terms.
For a quantitative assessment of the environmental impact due to the effect of Industry 4.0
technologies, other methodologies should be used, such as life cycle assessment, material intensity [85]
or energy accounting [54]. The adoption of these methodologies would require the definition of a
scope and temporal frame that it is beyond the objective of our work.
The topic is not exhausted due to its complexity and its relevance for future generations.
Scenario-based studies could contribute to helping policy makers to anticipate the nature of impacts as
a consequence of the reshaping that Industry 4.0 will cause to production systems.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.H.B., M.T.d.S., R.F.G. and J.B.S.; Methodology, S.H.B. and R.F.G.;
Writing-Original Draft Preparation, S.H.B.; Writing-Review & Editing, S.H.B., H.R.O.S., M.T.d.S., R.F.G. and J.B.S.
Funding: Helton R.O. Silva wants to thank the Prosup program (CAPES) for the Ph.D. degree scholarship
number 1675677.
Acknowledgments: The Vice-Reitoria de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa of Paulista University (UNIP) is fully
recognized. We thank the four anonymous reviewers for their careful reading and valuable comments that
significantly improved the text.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. McWilliams, A.; Parhankangas, A.; Coupet, J.; Welch, E.; Barnum, D.T. Strategic Decision Making for the
Triple Bottom Line: Strategic Decision Making. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2016, 25, 193–204. [CrossRef]
2. Sarkis, J.; Zhu, Q. Environmental sustainability and production: Taking the road less travelled. Int. J. Prod. Res.
2018, 56, 743–759. [CrossRef]
3. Bonilla, S.H.; Almeida, C.M.V.B.; Giannetti, B.F.; Huisingh, D. Key elements, stages and tools for a sustainable
world: An introduction to this special volume. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 46, 1–7. [CrossRef]
4. Daly, H.E. Economics, Ecology, Ethics: Essays Toward a Steady-State Economy; W. H. Freeman and Company:
San Francisco, CA, USA, 1980.
5. Terlau, W.; Hirsch, D. Sustainable Consumption and the Attitude-Behaviour-Gap Phenomenon—Causes
and Measurements towards a Sustainable Development. Int. J. Food Syst. Dyn. 2015, 6, 159–174. [CrossRef]
6. Dowell, G.; Hart, S.; Yeung, B. Do Corporate Global Environmental Standards Create or Destroy Market
Value? Manag. Sci. 2000, 46, 1059–1074. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 21 of 24

7. Guenster, N.; Bauer, R.; Derwall, J.; Koedijk, K. The Economic Value of Corporate Eco-Efficiency. Eur. Financ. Manag.
2011, 17, 679–704. [CrossRef]
8. Sen, P.; Roy, M.; Pal, P. Exploring role of environmental proactivity in financial performance of manufacturing
enterprises: A structural modelling approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 108, 583–594. [CrossRef]
9. Sambasivan, M.; Bah, S.M.; Jo-Ann, H. Making the case for operating “Green”: Impact of environmental
proactivity on multiple performance outcomes of Malaysian firms. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 42, 69–82. [CrossRef]
10. King, A.; Lenox, M. Exploring the Locus of Profitable Pollution Reduction. Manag. Sci. 2002, 48, 289–299.
[CrossRef]
11. Antonietti, R.; Marzucchi, A. Green tangible investment strategies and export performance: A firm-level
investigation. Ecol. Econ. 2014, 108, 150–161. [CrossRef]
12. Laari, S.; Töyli, J.; Solakivi, T.; Ojala, L. Firm performance and customer-driven green supply chain
management. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 1960–1970. [CrossRef]
13. Koe Hwee Nga, J. The influence of ISO 14000 on firm performance. Soc. Responsib. J. 2009, 5, 408–422.
[CrossRef]
14. Kagermann, H.; Wahlster, W.; Helbig, J. Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0;
National Academy of Science and Engineering: Munich, Germany, 2013.
15. Smit, J.; Kreutzer, S.; Moeller, C.; Carlberg, M. Industry 4.0; Study for the European Parliament’s Committee
on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE); European Parliament: Brussels, Belgium, 2016; 94p.
16. Buhr, D. Social Innovation Policy for Industry 4.0; FRIEDRICH-EBERT-STIFTUNG: Bonn, Germany, 2017.
17. Wang, S.; Wan, J.; Li, D.; Zhang, C. Implementing Smart Factory of Industrie 4.0: An Outlook. Int. J. Distrib.
Sens. Netw. 2016, 12, 3159805. [CrossRef]
18. Müller, J.M.; Buliga, O.; Voigt, K.-I. Fortune favors the prepared: How SMEs approach business model
innovations in Industry 4.0. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2018, 132, 2–17. [CrossRef]
19. Drath, R.; Horch, A. Industrie 4.0: Hit or Hype? [Industry Forum]. IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag. 2014, 8, 56–58.
[CrossRef]
20. Hermann, M.; Pentek, T.; Otto, B. Design Principles for Industrie 4.0 Scenarios. In Proceedings of the
2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Koloa, HI, USA, 5–8 January 2016;
pp. 3928–3937.
21. Liao, Y.; Deschamps, F.; de Freitas Rocha Loures, E.; Ramos, L.F.P. Past, present and future of Industry 4.0—A
systematic literature review and research agenda proposal. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2017, 55, 3609–3629. [CrossRef]
22. Lu, Y. Industry 4.0: A survey on technologies, applications and open research issues. J. Ind. Inf. Integr. 2017,
6, 1–10. [CrossRef]
23. Zawadzki, P.; Żywicki, K. Smart Product Design and Production Control for Effective Mass Customization
in the Industry 4.0 Concept. Manag. Prod. Eng. Rev. 2016, 7, 105–112. [CrossRef]
24. Fu, B.; Shu, Z.; Liu, X. Blockchain Enhanced Emission Trading Framework in Fashion Apparel Manufacturing
Industry. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1105. [CrossRef]
25. National Science Foundation (NSF). Cyber Physical Systems NSF11516; NSF: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2012.
26. Lee, J.; Bagheri, B.; Kao, H.-A. A Cyber-Physical Systems architecture for Industry 4.0-based manufacturing
systems. Manuf. Lett. 2015, 3, 18–23. [CrossRef]
27. Pereira, A.C.; Romero, F. A review of the meanings and the implications of the Industry 4.0 concept.
Procedia Manuf. 2017, 13, 1206–1214. [CrossRef]
28. Dijkman, R.M.; Sprenkels, B.; Peeters, T.; Janssen, A. Business models for the Internet of Things. Int. J. Inf. Manag.
2015, 35, 672–678. [CrossRef]
29. Lee, J.; Kao, H.-A.; Yang, S. Service Innovation and Smart Analytics for Industry 4.0 and Big Data
Environment. Procedia CIRP 2014, 16, 3–8. [CrossRef]
30. Candel Haug, K.; Kretschmer, T.; Strobel, T. Cloud adaptiveness within industry sectors—Measurement and
observations. Telecommun. Policy 2016, 40, 291–306. [CrossRef]
31. Lasi, H.; Fettke, P.; Kemper, H.-G.; Feld, T.; Hoffmann, M. Industrie 4.0. WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK 2014,
56, 261–264. [CrossRef]
32. Stock, T.; Obenaus, M.; Kunz, S.; Kohl, H. Industry 4.0 as enabler for a sustainable development: A qualitative
assessment of its ecological and social potential. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2018, 118, 254–267. [CrossRef]
33. Kiel, D.; Müller, J.M.; Arnold, C.; Voigt, K.-I. Sustainable industrial value creation: Benefits and challenges of
industry 4.0. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2017, 21, 1740015. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 22 of 24

34. Stock, T.; Seliger, G. Opportunities of Sustainable Manufacturing in Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP 2016, 40,
536–541. [CrossRef]
35. Bressanelli, G.; Adrodegari, F.; Perona, M.; Saccani, N. Exploring How Usage-Focused Business Models
Enable Circular Economy through Digital Technologies. Sustainability 2018, 10, 639. [CrossRef]
36. Arnold, C.; Kiel, D.; Voigt, K.-I. Innovative Business Models for the Industrial Internet of Things.
BHM Berg-und Hüttenmänn. Monatshefte 2017, 162, 371–381. [CrossRef]
37. Qin, J.; Liu, Y.; Grosvenor, R. A Categorical Framework of Manufacturing for Industry 4.0 and Beyond.
Procedia CIRP 2016, 52, 173–178. [CrossRef]
38. Pagoropoulos, A.; Pigosso, D.C.A.; McAloone, T.C. The Emergent Role of Digital Technologies in the Circular
Economy: A Review. Procedia CIRP 2017, 64, 19–24. [CrossRef]
39. Deloitte. Challenges and Solutions for the Digital Transformation and Use of Exponential Technologies; Deloitte:
London, UK, 2015; 32p.
40. Wan, J.; Yan, H.; Suo, H.; Li, F. Advances in Cyber-Physical Systems Research. KSII Trans. Internet Inf. Syst.
2011, 5. [CrossRef]
41. Lopes Sousa Jabbour, A.B.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Foropon, C.; Godinho Filho, M. When titans meet—Can industry
4.0 revolutionise the environmentally-sustainable manufacturing wave? The role of critical success factors.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2018, 132, 18–25. [CrossRef]
42. Ford, S.; Despeisse, M. Additive manufacturing and sustainability: An exploratory study of the advantages
and challenges. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 137, 1573–1587. [CrossRef]
43. Beier, G.; Niehoff, S.; Ziems, T.; Xue, B. Sustainability aspects of a digitalized industry—A comparative study
from China and Germany. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf.-Green Technol. 2017, 4, 227–234. [CrossRef]
44. Burritt, R.; Christ, K. Industry 4.0 and environmental accounting: A new revolution? Asian J. Sustain.
Soc. Responsib. 2016, 1, 23–38. [CrossRef]
45. Lin, K.; Shyu, J.; Ding, K. A Cross-Strait Comparison of Innovation Policy under Industry 4.0 and
Sustainability Development Transition. Sustainability 2017, 9, 786. [CrossRef]
46. Müller, J.M.; Kiel, D.; Voigt, K.-I. What Drives the Implementation of Industry 4.0? The Role of Opportunities
and Challenges in the Context of Sustainability. Sustainability 2018, 10, 247. [CrossRef]
47. Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Godinho Filho, M.; Roubaud, D. Industry 4.0 and the circular
economy: A proposed research agenda and original roadmap for sustainable operations. Ann. Oper. Res.
2018. [CrossRef]
48. Gobbo, J.A.; Busso, C.M.; Gobbo, S.C.O.; Carreão, H. Making the links among environmental protection,
process safety, and industry 4.0. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2018, 117, 372–382. [CrossRef]
49. Luthra, S.; Mangla, S.K. Evaluating challenges to Industry 4.0 initiatives for supply chain sustainability in
emerging economies. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2018, 117, 168–179. [CrossRef]
50. Bastianoni, S.; Pulsell, R.M.; Rugani, B.; Niccolucci, V. The Measure of Unsustainability in Emergy Evaluation.
In Emergy Synthesis 5: Theory and Applications of the Emergy Methodology; Brown, M.T., Sweeney, S.,
Campbell, D.E., Huang, S., Ortega, E., Rydberg, T., Tilley, D., Ulgiati, S., Eds.; University of Florida:
Gainesville, FL, USA, 2009; pp. 49–54. ISBN 978-0-9707325-4-5.
51. Robèrt, K.-H. Tools and concepts for sustainable development, how do they relate to a general framework
for sustainable development, and to each other? J. Clean. Prod. 2000, 8, 243–254. [CrossRef]
52. Hubbard, G. Measuring organizational performance: Beyond the triple bottom line. Bus. Strategy Environ.
2009, 18, 177–191. [CrossRef]
53. Goodland, R.; Daly, H. Environmental Sustainability: Universal and Non-Negotiable. Ecol. Appl. 1996, 6,
1002–1017. [CrossRef]
54. Odum, H. Environmental Accouting; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1995.
55. Abel, T. Emergy evaluation of DNA and culture in ‘information cycles’. Ecol. Model. 2013, 251, 85–98.
[CrossRef]
56. Lupinacci, D.M.; Silvia, H. Bonilla Emergy Evaluation for Transmitting and Sustaining Shared Information
during an Oral English Class. In Emergy Synthesis 9: Theory and Applications of the Emergy Methodology;
Brown, M.T., Sweeney, S., Campbell, D.E., Huang, S., Rydberg, T., Ulgiati, S., Eds.; University of Florida:
Gainesville, FL, USA, 2015; pp. 105–110. ISBN 978-0-9707325-9-0.
57. Pardo, N.; Moya, J.A. Prospective scenarios on energy efficiency and CO2 emissions in the European Iron &
Steel industry. Energy 2013, 54, 113–128. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 23 of 24

58. Shi, P.; Yang, T.; Chen, X.; Yu, Z.; Acharyad, K.; Xu, C. Urban water consumption in a rapidly developing
flagship megacity of South China: Prospective scenarios and implications. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess.
2013, 27, 1359–1370. [CrossRef]
59. Mosnier, C.; Duclos, A.; Agabriel, J.; Gac, A. What prospective scenarios for 2035 will be compatible with
reduced impact of French beef and dairy farm on climate change? Agric. Syst. 2017, 157, 193–201. [CrossRef]
60. Duinker, P.N.; Greig, L.A. Scenario analysis in environmental impact assessment: Improving explorations of
the future. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2007, 27, 206–219. [CrossRef]
61. Vranken, H. Sustainability of bitcoin and blockchains. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2017, 28, 1–9. [CrossRef]
62. International Federation of Robotics. World Robotics Report 2016; International Federation of Robotics:
Frankfurt, Germany, 2017.
63. International Federation of Robotics (IFR). World Robotics Report 2016. In Proceedings of the International
Federation of Robotics, Frankfurt, Germany, 29 September 2016.
64. Marscheider-Weidemann, F.; Langkau, S.; Hummen, T.; Erdmann, L.; Espinoza, L.T. Raw Materials for
Emerging Technologies; German Mineral Resources Agency: Berlin, Germany, 2016; 16p.
65. Digital, M. Industry 4.0: How to Navigate Digitization of the Manufacturing Sector; McKinsey & Company:
New York, NY, USA, 2015.
66. Pilloni, V. How Data Will Transform Industrial Processes: Crowdsensing, Crowdsourcing and Big Data as
Pillars of Industry 4.0. Future Internet 2018, 10, 24. [CrossRef]
67. Shrouf, F.; Miragliotta, G. Energy management based on Internet of Things: Practices and framework for
adoption in production management. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 100, 235–246. [CrossRef]
68. Waibel, M.W.; Steenkamp, L.P.; Moloko, N.; Oosthuizen, G.A. Investigating the Effects of Smart Production
Systems on Sustainability Elements. Procedia Manuf. 2017, 8, 731–737. [CrossRef]
69. Gabriel, M.; Pessl, E. Industry 4.0 and sustainability impacts: Critical discussion of sustainability aspects
with a special focus on future of work and ecological consequences. Ann. Fac. Eng. Hunedoara Int. J. Eng.
2016, 14, 131–136.
70. Riazi, S.; Wigstrom, O.; Bengtsson, K.; Lennartson, B. Energy and Peak Power Optimization of Time-Bounded
Robot Trajectories. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2017, 14, 646–657. [CrossRef]
71. Yan, J.; Meng, Y.; Lu, L.; Li, L. Industrial Big Data in an Industry 4.0 Environment: Challenges, Schemes,
and Applications for Predictive Maintenance. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 23484–23491. [CrossRef]
72. Sreenivasan, R.; Goel, A.; Bourell, D.L. Sustainability issues in laser-based additive manufacturing.
Phys. Procedia 2010, 5, 81–90. [CrossRef]
73. Nagasawa, T.; Pillay, C.; Beier, G.; Fritzsche, K.; Pougel, F.; Takama, T.; The, K.; Bobashev, I. Accelerating Clean
Energy through Industry 4.0: Manufacturing the Next Revolution; United Nations: Vienna, Austria, 2017.
74. Zhou, K.; Liu, T.; Zhou, L. Industry 4.0: Towards future industrial opportunities and challenges.
In Proceedings of the 2015 12th International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery
(FSKD), Zhangjiajie, China, 15–17 August 2015; pp. 2147–2152.
75. Sikorski, J.J.; Haughton, J.; Kraft, M. Blockchain technology in the chemical industry: Machine-to-machine
electricity market. Appl. Energy 2017, 195, 234–246. [CrossRef]
76. Zheng, Z.; Xie, S.; Dai, H.; Chen, X.; Wang, H. An Overview of Blockchain Technology: Architecture,
Consensus, and Future Trends. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigData
Congress), Honolulu, HI, USA, 25–30 June 2017; pp. 557–564.
77. United Nations. Sustainable Development Goals; United Nations: Vienna, Austria, 2015.
78. Elzinga, D.; Heinen, S. Technology Roadmap Smart Grids; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2011;
52p.
79. Park, S.; Jun, S. Statistical Technology Analysis for Competitive Sustainability of Three Dimensional Printing.
Sustainability 2017, 9, 1142. [CrossRef]
80. Khaqqi, K.N.; Sikorski, J.J.; Hadinoto, K.; Kraft, M. Incorporating seller/buyer reputation-based system in
blockchain-enabled emission trading application. Appl. Energy 2018, 209, 8–19. [CrossRef]
81. Jabbour, C.J.C.; de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L.; Sarkis, J.; Filho, M.G. Unlocking the circular economy through new
business models based on large-scale data: An integrative framework and research agenda. Technol. Forecast.
Soc. Chang. 2017. [CrossRef]
82. Sogari, G.; Pucci, T.; Aquilani, B.; Zanni, L. Millennial Generation and Environmental Sustainability: The Role
of Social Media in the Consumer Purchasing Behavior for Wine. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1911. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740 24 of 24

83. Aquilani, B.; Silvestri, C.; Ruggieri, A. Sustainability, TQM and Value Co-Creation Processes: The Role of
Critical Success Factors. Sustainability 2016, 8, 995. [CrossRef]
84. Holdren, J.P.; Ehrlich, P.R. Human Population and the Global Environment: Population growth, rising per
capita material consumption, and disruptive technologies have made civilization a global ecological force.
Am. Sci. 1974, 62, 282–292. [PubMed]
85. Ritthoff, M.; Rohn, H.; Liedtke, C. Calculating MIPS: Resource Productivity of Products and Services; Wuppertal
Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy: Wuppertal, Germany, 2003.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).