Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-022-02060-6

Collaborative approaches in sustainable and resilient manufacturing

Luis M. Camarinha-Matos1 · Andre Dionisio Rocha1 · Paula Graça1,2

Received: 31 March 2022 / Accepted: 19 November 2022 / Published online: 5 December 2022
© The Author(s) 2022

Abstract
In recent years, the manufacturing sector is going through a major transformation, as reflected in the concept of Industry
4.0 and digital transformation. The urge for such transformation is intensified when we consider the growing societal
demands for sustainability. The notion of sustainable manufacturing has emerged as a result of this trend. Additionally,
industries and the whole society face the challenges of an increasing number of disruptive events, either natural or human-
caused, that can severely affect the normal operation of systems. Furthermore, the growing interconnectivity between
organizations, people, and physical systems, supported by recent developments in information and communication tech-
nologies, highlights the important role that collaborative networks can play in the digital transformation processes. As
such, this article analyses potential synergies between the areas of sustainable and resilient manufacturing and collabora-
tive networks. The work also discusses how the responsibility for the various facets of sustainability can be distributed
among the multiple entities involved in manufacturing. The study is based on a literature survey, complemented with the
experience gained from various research projects and related initiatives in the area, and is organized according to various
dimensions of Industry 4.0. A brief review of proposed approaches and indicators for measuring sustainability from the
networked manufacturing perspective is also included. Finally, a set of key research challenges are identified to comple-
ment strategic research agendas in manufacturing.

Keywords Collaborative networks · Sustainable manufacturing · Resilience · Industry 4.0 · Digital transformation ·
Industry 5.0 · Sustainability indicators

Introduction multiple new technologies that reached a point of maturity,

and the political support for this “industrial revolution”
During the last decade there has been a considerable evolu- led to the emergence of new organisational and manage-
tion in the manufacturing sector as reflected in the Industry rial forms, the development of new processes, the notion of
4.0 / Industry 5.0 and digital transformation “movement” extended product-service systems, and the development of
(Xu et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2021a). The convergence of new business models (Camarinha-Matos et al., 2019).
At the same time, the manufacturing sector also faces the
challenge of responding a growing societal demand for sus-
tainability and social responsibility. Such demand is well
Luis M. Camarinha-Matos reflected in the UN Agenda 2030 (United Nations, 2015),
[email protected] which establishes 17 goals for sustainable development. In
Andre Dionisio Rocha this agenda, manufacturing has a key role, as expressed in the
[email protected] various sub-items of Goal 9, “Build resilient infrastructure,
Paula Graça promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation and fos-
[email protected] ter innovation”. But it goes beyond that as other (indirect)
1
School of Science and Technology and Uninova-CTS, NOVA references to manufacturing are found in various other goals
University of Lisbon, Campus de Caparica, of the Agenda, e.g., “achieve higher levels of economic pro-
Caparica 2829-516, Portugal ductivity through diversification, technological upgrading
2
Instituto Superior de Engenharia de Lisboa, Instituto and innovation”, “double the global rate of improvement in
Politécnico de Lisboa, Rua Conselheiro Emídio Navarro 1, energy efficiency”, “promote development-oriented policies
Lisbon 1959-007, Portugal

13
500 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

that support productive activities, decent job creation, Base concepts

entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage
the formalisation and growth of micro-, small- and medium- In order to set a context for the discussion, some related
sized enterprises”, etc. Reflecting this trend, the term “sus- basic concepts are briefly revisited in this section.
tainable manufacturing” (OCDE, 2021) is becoming quite The notion of sustainability is typically analyzed under
relevant and receiving growing attention. three perspectives: environmental, social, and economic
More recent discussions around the notion of Industry (Camarinha-Matos et al., 2010). This notion involves con-
5.0 (Breque et al., 2021; i-Scoope, 2022) and Society 5.0 siderable complexity, both due to its multi-dimensional
(H-UTokyo Lab, 2020; Broeckaert, 2022) emphasize the nature, and also because it requires a difficult balance among
need to focus on the aspects of sustainability, resilience, and objectives that are often conflicting and involves multiple
human-centric systems. stakeholders. When focusing specifically on manufacturing,
In this context, and as initially identified in (Camarinha- various related terms are often used in the literature, includ-
Matos et al., 2010), there is a great potential in exploiting ing “sustainable manufacturing”, “industrial symbiosis”,
mutual beneficial synergies between the areas of sustain- and “circular economy”.
ability science and collaborative networks. This earlier work Sustainable manufacturing is a concept representing
was one of the first arguing that effective implementation of the “integration of processes and systems capable to pro-
sustainability requires a wide collaboration among multiple duce high quality products and services using less and more
stakeholders, pointing thus to a notion of co-responsibility. sustainable resources (energy and materials), being safer
It was also emphasized that it is not possible to achieve for employees, customers and communities surrounding,
sustainability by the effort of individual entities alone. Fur- and being able to mitigate environmental and social impacts
thermore, collaborative networks have also identified as a throughout its whole life cycle” (Machado et al., 2020). A
“core enabler for Industry 4.0 and digital transformation” similar definition is offered in (OCDE, 2021), which further
(Camarinha-Matos et al., 2017, 2019). emphasizes the need for those processes to be “economi-
Consistent with these trends and the idea of a collabora- cally sound”. The same document illustrates well the three
tive approach to sustainable manufacturing, this work is dimensions of sustainable manufacturing:
guided by the following research question:
(1) Environmental dimension, e.g., using environmen-
What is the role of collaborative networks in tally sound materials and energy, minimizing waste
sustainable and resilient manufacturing? and emissions, minimizing the use of hazardous sub-
stances, using energy and resources efficiently, protect-
This article, which is an extended version of a prelimi- ing biodiversity;
nary presentation at PRO-VE 2021 (Camarinha-Matos (2) Social dimension, e.g., ensuring good community rela-
et al., 2021), focuses on identifying and categorizing rel- tions, guaranteeing good working conditions, ensuring
evant trends and examples to help understand the synergies product safety, treating suppliers fairly, complying with
among the areas of manufacturing, collaborative networks, the law, respecting human rights;
and sustainability. The remainder of the article is structured (3) Economic dimension, e.g., contributing to the local
as follows: in the next section, a set of base concepts are economy, creating jobs, investing in infrastructures,
briefly summarized in order to give a basis for the following driving innovation, paying taxes responsibly, generat-
sections; the following section discusses the role and oppor- ing sales and profits, combating bribery and corruption.
tunities for the adoption of collaborative networks models,
principles, and mechanisms in the various dimensions of Despite all these conditions, the report also claims that mov-
Industry 4.0 and the complementary vision of Industry 5.0; ing to this new way of doing business creates value and can
the article continues with two sections describing the main give companies a competitive advantage.
trends found in literature and example projects, as well as Industrial symbiosis corresponds to one specific imple-
approaches and indicators to measure sustainability. The mentation of sustainable manufacturing representing a
main body of the article ends then with a proposal of contri- “process by which the wastes or by-products of an indus-
butions for a research agenda in this area; and finally, some try or industrial process become the raw materials for
conclusions are presented. another” (EGC, 2018). This notion naturally implies a col-
lective effort by which a group of separate industries form
a kind of collaborative business ecosystem to exchange
materials, water, energy, and by-products (Baldassarre et al.,
2019). This concept implies moving from a linear model of

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 501

“take-make-dispose” to a circular model in which the waste term transformative resilience (Dahlberg, 2015) is some-
of some processes is valorised as a resource for others. times used to describe systems that resist to disruptions/
Circular economy is a more general concept, which shocks and not just conserve their structures, but rather “re-
focuses on “higher resource utilisation by recollecting and organize, reconfigure, restructure, and even reinvent them-
reusing components of products after their use is over” selves” (Ramezani & Camarinha-Matos, 2020) in response
(Pomponi & Moncaster, 2017). As such, it “enables the to disruptions.
reintegration of materials into production processes through Antifragility, which is a characteristic of systems that
their reuse, recycling, and recovery” (Azevedo et al., 2010). can absorb shocks / attacks and get better afterwards (Taleb,
From a traditional point of view, while the circular economy 2012). Thus, a property of systems that adapt to disruptive
focuses on the entire economy, sustainable production may and volatile contexts, learn from experiences and incidents,
seem focused only on the manufacturing stage (Enyoghasi and become stronger.
& Badurdeen, 2021). However, when we take the view of Alo related are recent discussions on viability, a notion
Industry 4.0, and more specifically the notions of extended that has been extended to encompass resilience and sustain-
and smart product, considering the entire product life cycle, ability, as reflected in:
the notions of sustainable manufacturing and circular econ- Viable business ecosystems and supply networks,
omy overlap more. which refer to systems that are dynamically adaptive and
The effective implementation of all these notions requires structurally changeable, to be agile, resilient, and able to
some form of collaboration between the actors involved, so survive at times of long-term global disruptions, in line with
the role of collaborative networks in supporting sustainable sustainability developments (Ivanov, 2020). This notion is
production deserves attention. Indeed, the usual notion of also related to the earlier concept of Minimum Viable Eco-
collaborative network as “composed of a variety of entities system (Adner, 2013), which was less concerned with sus-
– organizations people and even smart machines – which tainability in general.
are largely autonomous, geographically distributed, and
heterogeneous in terms of their operating environment,
culture, social capital and goals… that collaborate to (bet- Research method
ter) achieve common or compatible goals” (Camarinha-
Matos et al., 2009) encompasses a comprehensive view of In this work, we pursue the goal of understanding the syner-
the interactions and inter-dependencies that exist between gies between the areas of sustainability, manufacturing and
the multiple entities involved in a manufacturing system. collaborative networks. For this purpose, we have adopted
Furthermore, the notion of business community or busi- a mixed method, combining a systematic literature-based
ness ecosystem, as represented by the Virtual organization mapping study with case studies/experiences gained from
Breeding Environments, helps to achieve a better percep- various research projects.
tion of co-responsibility of all involved actors regarding the The Systematic Literature Review (SLR) method has
challenges of sustainability (Camarinha-Matos et al., 2010). been applied in different research fields and aims at aggre-
In this direction the notion of circular ecosystem has also gating evidence through a “systematic, replicable, and trans-
been introduced (Konietzko et al., 2020). parent process” to synthetize research results and existing
On the other hand, contemporary manufacturing systems practices (Kitchenham et al., 2009). However, considering
are increasingly exposed to a variety of disruptive events that we are not focused on a single area but rather interested
that may severely affect their operation. Such events may in identifying synergies among three different areas, we had
result from a large variety of factors, including natural to follow a light version of SLR more focused on a mapping
disasters, pandemic situations such as COVID-19, terror- study.
ism, wars and political instability, climate change, economic In order to guide the SLR part the main research question
crisis, demographic shifts, etc. (Chroust & Aumayr, 2017; was further sub-divided into related sub-questions: (1) How
Ramezani & Camarinha-Matos, 2019; Ivanov & Dolgui are collaborative networks aspects supporting sustainability
2021). Such disruptive events appear to be increasing in fre- in the various dimensions of manufacturing systems?, (2)
quency and in harmful effects, which may seriously affect Which performance assessment frameworks, metrics and
the socio-economic dimensions of sustainability. As such, indicators have been suggested for sustainable and collab-
new terms became widely used: orative manufacturing systems?
Resilience, which is a characteristic of systems that, Well known indexing databases were used for search,
after a brief temporary change as a result of a disruption, namely Google Scholar, SCOPUS and Web of Science.
can recover from such event and return to some acceptable Although aiming at including a good sample of reported
state (not necessarily the same as before). Furthermore, the results, we mainly focus on classification and mapping,

13
502 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

rather than on performing a statistical analysis of existing mutually supportive roles, contributing to sustainability and
empirical evidence (Petersen et al., 2015). The period 2017– viability. By further discussing these ideas, we hope to gain
2021 was the main target in order to capture recent results, new insights into better organizational structures and gov-
but given the exploratory nature of the mapping exercise, ernance principles that will likely contribute to more sus-
in some cases it was relevant to trace back some lines of tainable and resilient manufacturing ecosystems. Thus, this
development and include some earlier references. Through work is also guided by the general principles of strategic
a preliminary screening phase, only those works with a con- research roadmapping (Camarinha-Matos & Afsarmanesh,
tribution to the mentioned research questions were retained 2004), namely in terms of (i) analysis of baseline, (ii) iden-
for analysis. tification of strategic visions, (iii) research gap analysis, and
Regarding direct experience collected from research proj- (iv) proposition of actions to complement existing research
ects, the authors have been involved in dozens of European agendas, namely the ones mentioned later in the section on
and national projects with links to the addressed topics, but Research Challenges.
for illustration purposes only two of them are highlighted,
illustrating the discussed issues in different dimensions of
manufacturing systems. It shall be mentioned that many Collaborative networks in advanced
other projects are in fact considered through the analysis of manufacturing systems
publications that originated in such projects.
Complementarily, through discussion sessions and pan- Several recent works have advocated the adoption of col-
els in a series of recent conferences (e.g. PRO-VE, INDIN, laborative networks as one of the core enablers for Indus-
IoT, and DoCEIS), the authors collected feedback on the try 4.0 and the associated digital transformation processes
trends in sustainable and resilient manufacturing, which (Camarinha-Matos et al., 2017, 2019; Santos et al., 2021;
contributed to consolidating the findings presented in this Torn & Vaneker, 2019). Indeed, when we consider the vari-
article. For instance, a position paper (Camarinha-Matos at ous dimensions of the fourth industrial revolution, includ-
al., 2017) was presented, followed by discussions in focus ing both the manufacturing system and the product/service
groups and panels along the last four to five years. Most of perspectives (Table 1), it becomes clear that we need to deal,
the consensus achieved in those discussions has not been in all these dimensions, with networks involving multiple
reported, with the exception of a summary on trends in IoT actors, being organizations, people, smart machines, and
research, which nevertheless was not restricted to manufac- intelligent systems, with different degrees of heterogeneity
turing (Camarinha-Matos & Katkoori, 2022). and autonomy. More than integration, we need to deal with
In order to facilitate the aimed mapping and identifica- smart, heterogeneous, and autonomous elements whose
tion of synergies, next section introduces a classification of potential can be harnessed when we move from a focus
six dimensions of analysis for advanced manufacturing sys- on interoperability and control, to a context of negotiation,
tems. This classification was first introduced in (Camarinha- contracting, and sharing, which are characteristics of a col-
Matos et al., 2021), but is discussed here under the laborative environment.
perspective of analyzing the role of collaborative networks Some highlights of this trend toward collaborative sys-
in sustainable manufacturing. These dimensions are later tems are illustrated in Figs. 1 and 2, which go far beyond
used to frame the findings on trends. It should be noted that the traditional view where networks were only considered
among the few systematic reviews on sustainable manu- in relation to value chains, and rather fundamentally influ-
facturing, such as (Jamwal et al., 2021), only the interre- ence all dimensions of Industry 4.0. The included examples
lationships between sustainability and manufacturing are do not intend to be a comprehensive list, but rather an illus-
considered, and the collaboration perspective that is central tration of the idea. In fact, it is too early to attempt a com-
to our study is mostly missing. prehensive categorization of aspects as many new ideas for
We also hope that the identification of synergies among the adoption of a collaborative perspective in this sector are
the considered areas will contribute to a better understand- still emerging.
ing and characterization of the next generation of collab- Of particular relevance in vertical integration is the inter-
orative networks. Typically, a business ecosystem or any connection of the physical and the cyber worlds as reflected
other form of collaborative network does not just involve in the areas of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) and Internet
collaboration, but rather comprises a complex and dynamic of Things (IoT) (Oztemel & Gursev, 2020). As part of this
combination of collaboration and competition. In these integration, the representation of physical entities (e.g., shop
business communities, one can typically observe some floor equipment) in the cyber world led to the concept of
form of “survival instinct” and shared vision that can lead “digital twin” (Lim et al., 2020). A digital twin constitutes a
members to align their activities and commitments and play cyber “reflection” of a physical entity, being “synchronized”

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 503

Table 1 Typical dimensions Dimension Brief description

of Industry 4.0 and digital
Manufactur- 1. Vertical integra- Integration of systems and processes at the various vertical
transformation
ing system tion or networking layers of the enterprise, from shopfloor to the upper layers of
perspective of smart engineering and business management.
production systems This integration facilitates real time data access and transpar-
ency, better supporting decision-making and agility.
2. Horizontal Involves collaborative networking with suppliers, distribu-
integration through tors, and other business partners.
global value chain This integration facilitates smooth flow of information and
networks materials along the supply chain, and thus collaboration
among all involved stakeholders.
3. Acceleration of Aims at optimization of manufacturing systems through the
manufacturing integration of the so-called “exponential technologies”, thus
accelerating and making processes more flexible.
This also involves collaboration with newcomer actors repre-
senting those technologies and the traditional actors of the
manufacturing environment.
Product/Service 4. End-to-end engi- Integration of all product-related engineering activities
perspective neering or through- through the whole product life-cycle, namely from design/
engineering across manufacture to disposal/recycling.
the entire value chain It involves internal collaboration among multiple depart-
ments as well as external collaboration with stakeholders of
the value chain and the customers.
5. Smart products Covering various sub-dimensions: (i) digital models of
& Digitalization products (and even their digital twins), (ii) adding services to
of products and products, (iii) moving towards smart products (which include
services sensing, computing, and communication capabilities).
6. New business Involving the emergence and development of novel business
models and cus- models taking advantage of digitalization and networking.
tomer engagement Early examples include product-service systems, glocal
enterprise, hybrid value chains, customer intimacy, etc., but
other models are likely to emerge.

with that entity. As devices and machines become smarter, additive manufacturing (e.g., through Fab Labs), and even
acquiring increased levels of autonomy, we can refer to the movement of “bring factories back to the cities” (Jura-
smarter or cognitive digital twins, and the shopfloor can be schek et al., 2016), require and fully embed the notion of
seen as a collaborative ecosystem of digital twins. Thus, collaborative networks in manufacturing.
instead of monolithic manufacturing execution systems, we In terms of the acceleration of the manufacturing dimen-
can think of dynamic consortia formation (of digital twins) sion, we observe the “arrival” in the manufacturing sector of
according to the production needs. Similarly, at the upper a number of new “actors” representing the so-called “expo-
levels of the enterprise, instead of large monolithic systems nential technologies” (Deloitte, 2015), which bring new
like the traditional ERP systems, we move to federations of ways of work, which require effective collaboration with
(collaborative) services. This leads to a view of the enter- the traditional manufacturing stakeholders. These new tech-
prise as a multi-layered collaborative network ecosystem of nologies also bring new forms of human-machine/system
smart components and people. interaction (e.g. virtual reality, augmented reality, remote
At the horizontal integration level, the aim is to bring all and mobile interaction), which give rise to new forms of
stakeholders in the value chain into closer relationships with collaboration such as nomadic collaboration, collaborative
each other. This involves networking of suppliers, manu- robotics, etc.
facturers, distributors, service providers, product recycling This view of a manufacturing system as being composed
entities, and even the customers. Collaboration not only of multiple inter-related networks of autonomous or par-
contributes to an improved operation of the supply chain, tially autonomous entities implicitly entails the notion of a
but also helps to increase resilience and implement circular distribution of responsibilities among these entities. Conse-
economy. As we move from large and centralized manufac- quently, the issue of sustainability also needs to be viewed
turing facilities to smaller, distributed manufacturing units, from a collaborative networks perspective, since multiple
there is a clear need to increase the networking and collabo- entities/sub-systems are co-responsible for the level of
ration among such units. Visionary ideas such as personal sustainability that can be achieved by the manufacturing
or social manufacturing, inspired by the possibilities of system.

13
504 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

Fig. 1 Examples of collaborative aspects in the manufacturing system dimensions

Regarding the product/service perspective, an overview these “history records”, we can envision a kind of “stig-
is presented in Fig. 2. Similar to Fig. 1, the included exam- mergic collaboration” (Camarinha-Matos & Afsarmanesh,
ples are given only for illustration purposes. 2018) among the various stakeholders in the manufacturing
With regard to the end-to-end engineering dimension, value chain. This dimension is also related to the addition of
where the aim is to integrate all engineering activities business services to the physical product, as reflected in the
involved in the entire product life-cycle, from design and terms “service-enhanced product”, “extended product”, or
manufacturing to disposal and recycling, both internal and “product-service system”, whose effective implementation
external collaboration needs to be promoted. Internal to the requires collaboration among multiple enterprises.
manufacturing company, this involves collaboration among The intense networking and ongoing digital transfor-
various departments (e.g., market research, product design, mation processes induce the emergence of new business
service design, production planning, and manufacturing models. This includes, for instance, exploitation of closer
departments). External collaboration involves suppliers and customer relationships (“customer intimacy”), exploita-
customers in co-design/co-innovation, and even involve- tion of global markets with adaptation to local/regional
ment in social networks to better perceive market trends. specificities/“flavors” (the notion of “glocal enterprise”),
The aspects of servicing during product use, and recycling combination of non-profit and for-profit stakeholders to
at the end of the product life, expand the need for external solve societal problems (notion of “hybrid value chains”),
collaboration. creation of new bigdata-related services, etc. In all these
Smart products and digitalization comprise two main models, effective collaboration among multiple stakeholders
sub-dimensions: elaboration of digital models of products is a key issue. Particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic,
(and services) and development of smart products. In other new ways of taking advantage of networked collaboration
words, digitalization involves not only the creation of digital were noticeable in many sectors, reflecting some forms of
models of products, but also a progressive evolution towards transformative resilience or even antifragility.
smart products that embed computing, sensing, actua- In past literature, the role of collaborative networks in
tion, and communication capabilities. In particular, adding supporting sustainability has been widely addressed in rela-
“memory tags” to products allows for recording of products’ tion to the “horizontal integration dimension”, namely in
history and thus facilitates tracking and traceability. Through terms of circular economy and industrial symbiosis, or in

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 505

Fig. 2 Examples of collaborative aspects in the product/service dimensions

relation to “new business models”, as we can find in some resilience and antifragility have been around for some time
cases of hybrid value chains (Baldassarre et al., 2019; Aze- (Ramezani & Camarinha-Matos, 2019), their positioning in
vedo et al., 2017). However, the issue has been less studied the context of collaborative and sustainable manufacturing
for the other dimensions, which justifies an effort to analyze is still limited.
existing trends and relevant examples to identify research The association of a collaborative networks perspec-
gaps. tive with these systems is often not very explicit in the
manufacturing literature. The exception is the case of the
horizontal dimension, where networks of enterprises have
Trends and examples been extensively studied. However, in many publications,
it can be identified that collaboration is an essential aspect
While Industry 4.0 has typically been more concerned of the design and operation of the addressed complex envi-
with technology development and integration, some recent ronments. For example, we can find the implementation of
developments have begun to place some emphasis on solu- shopfloors where machines collaborate with each other and/
tions aimed at introducing more sustainable manufactur- or with human operators. Another case widely observed in
ing practices, not only from a cost and profit perspective, the literature is the optimization of distributed manufactur-
but also considering the other two pillars of sustainability, ing systems where different plants, suppliers and transporta-
namely social and environmental aspects. Although this tion systems work together to optimize their operation as a
trend towards more sustainable ecosystems is more fre- whole. New products are also emerging with new features
quently mentioned in recent literature, there is generally such as communication, sensing, computing, and cloud
no assessment of how aspects of collaboration are directly connectivity that allow manufacturers to extract data from
or indirectly related to the improvement of these complex products and remotely modify their functionality. These
ecosystems. These distributed and complex systems imply facets also bring a new impetus to the old idea of concur-
more intense communication between actors to optimize rent engineering, contributing to the fact that product design
the systems, whether from an economic, social and/or envi- is done in collaboration between different departments in
ronmental perspective. Similarly, although the issues of the company, including the customer, and using the product

13
506 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

Table 2 – Examples of collaboration and sustainability aspects in the manufacturing system dimensions
Economic Social Environmental
Vertical Integration • Cost reduction & increase of productivity: • Improve working conditions • Reduce energy & resources
- Machine collaboration (Adamson et al., 2017; & reduce health problems: consumption:
Zhou et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2020). - Human-robot collaboration - Shared factories (Li & Jiang,
- Collaborative robotics (Calvo & Gil, 2022). (Renteria & Mozos, 2019; 2021).
- Human-robot collaboration (Gualtieri et al., Gualtieri et al., 2020; Ansari et - Collaborative agent-based Cyber-
2020; Lv et al., 2021). al. 2020; Lv et al., 2021; Pos- Physical System and optimization
• Increase efficiency: chmann et al., 2021). engine (Raileanu et al., 2017).
- Self-organization and shared resources (Li & • Support short-term workforce • Reduce waste & improve
Jiang, 2021). displacement: recyclability:
• Improve interoperability in collaborative - Collaborative robotics & social - Human-robot collaboration in
automation: impact (Calvo & Gil, 2022). circular economy (Renteria &
- Semantic aware communication (Lu et al., Mozos, 2019; Poschmann et al.,
2020). 2021).
Horizontal • Cost reduction: • Increase social welfare and • Reduce resources’ waste:
Integration - Auction-based and PSS-based logistics (Kang human rights: - Sharing spaces and machines
et al., 2021). - Collaboration, blockchain and (Wang et al., 2021).
- Blockchain in reducing transaction costs social responsibility (Upadhyay - Auction-based and PSS-based
(Kang et al., 2021). et al., 2021). logistics (Kang et al., 2021).
- Collaborative strategies and eco-packages to • Improve customer value: - Industrial symbiosis and waste
minimize operational costs (Wang et al., 2021b). - Green supply chain and supply management (Chen & Liu, 2021)
- Environmental collaboration and cost saving risks (Lintukangas et al., 2016). • Reduce carbon footprint and
(Grekova et al., 2016). • Increase resilience: energy consumption:
• Improve resource allocation: - Sustainable collaborative gov- - Sustainable collaborative supply
- Collaborative resource allocation (Li et al., ernance of supply chains (Wang chains (Upadhyay et al., 2021;
2018; Upadhyay et al., 2021). & Ran, 2018). Glatt et al., 2021).
• Increase resilience: - Methods to select suppliers for
- Machine Learning & Data-driven simulation sustainable supply chains (Sarkis
of supplier selection (Cavalcante et al., 2019). & Dhavale, 2015; Trapp & Sarkis,
2016; Wu & Barnes, 2016; Caval-
cante et al., 2019).
Acceleration of • Interoperability and integration of resources: • Include customer in the • Reduce energy & resources
Manufacturing - Collaborative CPS in resource sharing (Adam- process: consumption:
son et al., 2017). - Through additive manufactur- - Distributed manufacturing of 3D
- Semantic-aware CPS for machine-to-machine ing / 3D printing (Rayna et al., printed products (Cerdas et al.,
communications (Lu et al., 2020). 2015; Turner et al., 2019). 2017).
• Collaboration in product design: • Improve social aspects: - Digital Twins in shared manufac-
- Digital twins to support the design of products - Blockchain in collaborative turing (Wang et al., 2021; Glatt et
by different teams and at different stages (RTao distributed ecosystem & trust al., 2021).
et al., 2019). increase (Upadhyay et al., - Self-organizing agents the idle
• Improve shared manufacturing: 2021). or excess shared resources (Li &
- Digital Twin-driven and credit-based resources - Cyber-Physical-Social- Jiang, 2021).
allocation (Wang et al., 2021). connected and service-oriented - Cloud-based manufacturing
- Self-organizing agents (Li & Jiang, 2021). manufacturing (Jiang et al., services ecosystem (Zhang et al.,
- Cloud-based manufacturing services ecosys- 2016). 2019).
tem (Zhang et al., 2019). - Blockchain to handle cyber- - Blockchain to support trustable
• Increase resilience: credits among makers in “social consumption reduction in collabor-
- Machine learning in resilient supplier selection manufacturing” (Leng et al., ative and sustainable supply chains
& delivery reliability (Cavalcante et al., 2019). 2019). (Upadhyay et al., 2021).
• Increase collaboration • Implementation of circular
between humans and robots: economy:
- Digital Twins in collaborative - Machine learning for circular
assembly (Lv et al., 2021). manufacturing systems (Paraschos
et al., 2022).

itself as a “means of interaction” in this process (some form Table 2 shows a summary of representative studies
of stigmergy). This new reality is becoming clear with the focused on the development of sustainable manufacturing
introduction of new emerging technologies such as Cyber- systems in which collaborative aspects are present. This
Physical Systems, Artificial Intelligence or Additive Manu- table covers the infrastructure or manufacturing system
facturing, which will force companies to apply new business perspective and presents examples of proposals that aim
models.

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 507

at increasing the sustainability of manufacturing systems From the cases studied, it can be seen that the facets of
through collaboration. collaboration are already present in some cases of applica-
Similar to Tables 2 and 3 presents the elements of col- tion of Industry 4.0 concepts to achieve sustainability. We
laboration and added value regarding sustainability that are can also notice that these facets appear more frequently at
found in various works addressing the dimensions of “end- the level of the vertical and horizontal integration dimen-
to-end engineering”, “smart products”, and the “creation of sions. Another interesting point is that emerging technolo-
new business models”. gies, included in the “acceleration of the manufacturing”
The results summarized in Tables 2 and 3 demonstrate dimension, are particularly relevant for the efficient applica-
that several efforts have already been made to develop more tion of the collaboration aspects. However, it is important
sustainable systems by combining Industry 4.0 practices to note that the combination of manufacturing, sustain-
and models and mechanisms from collaborative network. ability, resilience, and collaborative networks is not always
However, in most of the articles studied, the aspects of col- explicitly presented in the studied literature, but it is pos-
laboration are usually not highlighted; nevertheless, the sible to infer its importance, as summarized in Tables 2 and
synergy between sustainable production and collaborative 3. Regarding antifragility, although various examples in
networks can be inferred. For example, two research proj- other domains can be found in the literature (Ramezani &
ects in sustainable production in which our research center Camarinha-Matos, 2020), it is still difficult to find practical
was involved are illustrated in Figs. 3 and 4, from which it cases in manufacturing.
is possible to observe aspects of collaboration at different
levels of abstraction.
In the first example (Fig. 3), the GO0DMAN project had Measuring sustainability
its main objective to use different tools, either hardware or
software based, to create an environment capable of pre- Although the idea that sustainability is a major concern
dicting quality problems related to parameterizations and for modern manufacturing is gaining wide acceptance, its
deviations in the manufacturing process and the evolution effectiveness needs to be measured, for which appropriate
of the product along the manufacturing line. Thus, several sustainability-related performance indicators must be estab-
solutions have been developed that work together to deliver lished. As illustrated in Tables 4 and 5, some examples of
these forecasts. These tools focus on product inspection, efforts to measure sustainability in a context combining col-
process, and data extraction on the shop floor. In the cloud, laboration aspects and manufacturing and addressing eco-
we have software tools responsible for analyzing the col- nomic, social and environmental concerns can already be
lected data, creating forecast models, and interacting with found in the literature, although not yet fully developed.
the personnel responsible for process quality and mainte- The cases presented in Table 4, which address the manu-
nance. All these tools work in a collaborative ecosystem. facturing system perspective, mainly propose metrics and
Regarding the second example, the GLONET proj- performance indicators to assess sustainability that are often
ect (Fig. 4) (Camarinha-Matos et al., 2017) is focused on borrowed from traditional manufacturing and supply chain
supporting service-enhanced products in the areas of solar performance indicators. Other works, rather than proposing
energy and smart buildings. The project illustrates a case of specific indicators, offer some form of sustainability assess-
horizontal integration where a network of small and medium ment framework. Regarding the collaboration perspective, a
enterprises collaborate through a cloud-based platform to few initiatives can be found that highlight the importance of
develop a product and its associated business services. The collaboration between various stakeholders to achieve bet-
business services are collaboratively supported along the ter sustainability.
product life-cycle (which typically lasts 20–25 years). Table 5 includes some examples of works contributing
Sustainability aspects in GLONET are reflected in the to sustainability metrics and indicators, and assessment
product itself (renewable energy support), the “glocal enter- frameworks focused on “end-to-end engineering”, “smart
prise” concept, involving collaboration with local suppliers products, digitization”, and “new business models”. From
(close to the customer) and considering local specificities. this product/service perspective, the contributions identified
Being solar plants complex and highly customized “prod- are only preliminary approaches to measurement models,
ucts”, it is essential to involve the customer (and other local identification of benefits, and insights into their influence
suppliers, the social pillar) in the process of creating new on sustainable performance. However, with respect to this
services and/or sub-systems, which corresponds to a of co- perspective the number of developments is still very scarce.
creation/co-innovation process that also requires the cre- It should be noted that this study includes only some illus-
ation of temporary collaborative networks to develop these trative examples and not an exhaustive portfolio of cases.
new systems/services. Nevertheless, and despite the identified valuable attempts,

13
508 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

Table 3 – Examples of collabora- Economic Social Environmental

tion and sustainability aspects in
End-to-End • Reduce design cycles • Co-creation & user • Design environmentally
the product/service dimensions
Engineering and costs: innovation: friendly solutions:
- Using data collected - Co-creation and user - Smart packaging design and
from products and innovation methods (Rayna life cycle assessment (Cabot et
customers (Verhagen et al., 2015; Zheng et al., al., 2019).
et al., 2015; Tao et al., 2018; Yin et al., 2020). - Cloud-based ecosystem with
2019). • Improve smart product different tools to design the
• Add value to the design: product (including energy
product: - Design / redesign smart consumption reduction) (Zhang
- Co-creation network product-service systems et al., 2019).
(Yin et al., 2020). according to customer
needs and wants (Zheng et
al., 2018).
- Ensuring product quality
during production (Maleki
et al., 2018).
Smart products • Reduce costs and • Increase smart product • Reduce environmental impact
/ Digitalization increase efficiency: quality: of product transportation:
- Extraction & analysis - Smart product-service - Continuous evaluation of the
of products’ data along quality (Maleki et al., products’ conditions (Cabot et
the supply chain to 2018). al., 2019).
reduce costs (Zheng et • Co-creation & user - Extraction & analysis of prod-
al., 2018). innovation: uct data throughout the supply
- Creation of smart - Design framework / chain to reduce environmental
product symbiosis Service co-innovation in impact (Zheng et al., 2018).
network (Yin et al., smart products (Zheng et - Design of Smart PSS in intel-
2020). al., 2018). ligent interoperable logistics
• Design better (Pan et al., 2019).
products: • Support circular economy:
- Framework to design/ - Smart products as enablers for
redesign better products circular economy (Alcayaga &
(Zheng et al., 2018). Hansen, 2019).
- Collaborative net- • Energy consumption and
worked Product Service waste reduction:
System framework to - Data-driven framework for
increase value-added achieving sustainable smart
(Zhang et al., 2022). product-service systems (Li et
al., 2021).
- Smart products characterized
by service and sustainability
concerns (Yin et al., 2020).
New Business • Increase • Increase customer • Reduce the environmental
Models competitiveness: involvement: impact (energy consumption,
- Sharing economy - Stigmergic mass custom- waste reduction):
models (Li & Jiang, ization, co-creation, & co- - Circular economy-based
2021; Wang et al., design (Ogunsakin et al., business models (Rayna et al.,
2021)). 2021; Rayna et al., 2015; 2015; Ansari et al., 2020).
• Reduce costs: Turner et al., 2019). - Distributed SD printed manu-
- Industrial symbiosis - Urban smart manufactur- facturing model and energy
(Gao et al., 2020; Chen ing and user involvement saving (Cerdas et al., 2017;
& Liu, 2021). (Sajadieh et al., 2022). Gupta et al., 2021).
• Increase resilience: • Implement social - Sharing economy to reduce
- Urban smart manu- manufacturing: waste and consumption (Li &
facturing and resilience - Social manufacturing Jiang, 2021; Wang et al., 2021).
(Sajadieh et al., 2022). model (Jiang et al., 2016). - Application of industrial sym-
- Hybrid value chains biosis (Gao et al., 2020; Chen
and social innovation & Liu, 2021).
(Budinich et al., 2007; - Global business sustainability
Doherty & Kittipanya- beyond zero emissions (Svens-
Ngam, 2021). son et al., 2016).
- Blockchain in social
manufacturing (Leng et al.,
2019).

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 509

it is apparent that there is still a lack of consolidated perfor-

mance indicators to assess the benefits of collaboration in
support of better manufacturing resilience and sustainability
performance. For instance, the specific case of end-to-end
engineering has received very little attention in this respect.
For the other dimensions, it has only been possible to iden-
tify some assessment frameworks, without any proposal of
concrete indicators.

Fig. 3 GO0DMAN High-Level Architecture and Collaborative

Aspects. (adapted from (Angione et al., 2019))

Fig. 4 GLONET concept and High-Level Architecture

13
510 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

Table 4 – Examples of sustainability metrics/indicators in the manufacturing system dimensions

Economic Social Environmental
Vertical • Economic sustainability metrics and • Social sustainability metrics and • Environmental sustainability
Integration indicators: indicators: metrics and indicators:
- Assessment at the production line level, - Assessment at the production line - Assessment at the production line
although with few links to collaboration level, although with few links to level, although with few links to
(Huang & Badurdeen, 2018). collaboration (Huang & Badurdeen, collaboration (Huang & Badurdeen,
- Economic-related indicators and circu- 2018). 2018).
larity index (Azevedo et al., 2010). - Economic-related indicators and cir- - Economic-related indicators and
• Economic sustainability assessment cularity index (Azevedo et al., 2010). circularity index (Azevedo et al.,
framework: • Social sustainability assessment 2010).
- Mapping the interconnections between framework: • Environmental sustainability
technical and economic performance - Mapping the interconnections assessment framework:
(Zhang et al., 2021b). between technical and social perfor- - Mapping the interconnections
- Evaluation of the quality of resilience mance (Zhang et al., 2021b). between technical and environmental
in human-robot collaborative assembly - Evaluation of the quality of resil- performance (Zhang et al., 2021b).
(Lv et al., 2021). ience in human-robot collaborative
assembly (Lv et al., 2021).
Horizontal • Economic sustainability metrics and • Social sustainability metrics and • Environmental sustainability
Integration indicators: indicators: metrics and indicators:
- Economic sustainability metrics for - Social sustainability metrics for - Environmental sustainability met-
products and processes (Feng et al., products and processes (Feng et al., rics for products and processes (Feng
2010). 2010). et al., 2010).
- Economic indicators and sustainability - Social performance metrics in - Environmental performance met-
index for supply chain (Salvado et al., selecting sustainable suppliers (Sarkis rics in selecting sustainable suppliers
2015). & Dhavale, 2015). (Sarkis & Dhavale, 2015).
- KPI dashboard for monitoring business - Social indicators and sustainability - Environmental indicators and
performance in Virtual Enterprises (Hao index for supply chain (Salvado et al., sustainability index for supply chain
et al., 2018). 2015). (Salvado et al., 2015).
- Economic performance metrics in - Social sustainability indicators in - KPI dashboard for monitoring envi-
selecting sustainable suppliers (Sarkis & Industry 4.0 (for training) (Chaim et ronmental sustainability indicators in
Dhavale, 2015). al., 2018). virtual enterprises (Hao et al., 2018).
- Economic viability indicators in Indus- - Supply chain indicators to assess - Environmental sustainability indi-
try 4.0 (for training) (Chaim et al., 2018). response to disruptions (Zidi et al., cators in Industry 4.0 (for training)
- Supply chain indicators to assess 2021). (Chaim et al., 2018).
response to disruptions (Zidi et al., • Social sustainability assessment - Performance indicators for indus-
2021). framework: trial symbiosis network (Fraccascia
• Economic sustainability assessment - Methodology and social-oriented et al., 2021).
framework: metrics to evaluate sustainable - Supply chain indicators to assess
- Methodology and metrics to evalu- manufacturing systems (Koren et al., response to disruptions (Zidi et al.,
ate sustainable manufacturing systems 2018). 2021).
(Koren et al., 2018). - Sustainability and resilience criteria • Environmental sustainability
- Multi-dimensional KPI space to control in supplier evaluation and selection assessment framework:
a supply chain’s trajectory according to (Zavala-Alcívar et al., 2020). - Methodology and environment-ori-
risks and opportunities (Cerabona et al., - “Organizational” and “sociocultural ented metrics to evaluate sustainable
2020). barriers” to sustainable manufacturing manufacturing systems (Koren et al.,
- Method to study the sensitivity and (Gupta et al., 2021a). 2018; Glatt et al., 2021).
fragility of a supply chain in face of risks - Assessment of the environmental
or opportunities (Cerabona et al., 2021). performance of a supply chain based
- Sustainability and resilience criteria on balanced scorecard (Ferreira et
in supplier evaluation and selection al., 2016).
(Zavala-Alcívar et al., 2020). - Sustainability and resilience criteria
in supplier evaluation and selection
(Zavala-Alcívar et al., 2020).

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 511

Table 4 (continued)
Economic Social Environmental
Acceleration of • Economic sustainability metrics and • Social sustainability metrics and • Environmental sustainability
Manufacturing indicators: indicators: metrics and indicators:
- Sustainability metrics regarding impact - Sustainability metrics regarding - Sustainability metrics regarding
of Industry 4.0 technologies (Enyoghasi impact of Industry 4.0 technologies impact of Industry 4.0 technologies
& Badurdeen, 2021). (Enyoghasi & Badurdeen, 2021). (Enyoghasi & Badurdeen, 2021).
- Economic-oriented metrics for sustain- - Social-oriented metrics for sustain- - Environment-oriented metrics for
able smart manufacturing (Abubakr et able smart manufacturing (Abubakr et sustainable smart manufacturing
al., 2020). al., 2020). (Abubakr et al., 2020).
• Economic sustainability assessment • Social sustainability assessment • Environmental sustainability
framework: framework: assessment framework:
- Sustainability in cybermanufacturing - To assess ethical and sustainable - To assess ethical and sustainable
systems (Song & Moon, 2017). performance in Industry 4.0 (Gupta et performance in Industry 4.0 (Gupta
- Assess impact of Industry 4.0 technolo- al., 2021a). et al., 2021a).
gies on sustainability (Beltrami et al., - Sustainability in cybermanufactur- - Sustainability in cybermanufactur-
2021; Kamble et al., 2020). ing systems (Song & Moon, 2017). ing systems (Song & Moon, 2017).
- Assess impact of Industry 4.0 tech- - Assess impact of Industry 4.0 tech-
nologies on sustainability (Beltrami et nologies on sustainability (Beltrami
al., 2021; Kamble et al., 2020). et al., 2021; Kamble et al., 2020).

“human-centered and human-driven manufacturing innova-

Research challenges tion”. Although this agenda uses the terms “ecosystem” and
“value network”, the aspects of collaborative networks are
The challenges of sustainable and resilient manufactur- surprisingly not sufficiently highlighted, with the exception
ing are well reflected in various strategic research agendas of the topic of “collaborative product-service engineering”
promoted in different geographic regions. Influenced by and a few other references to “collaborative manufacturing”,
the Strategic Development Goals of the UN 2030 Agenda “collaborative robotics”, “collaborative environments”, and
(United Nations, 2015), most of these agendas are geopo- “collaboration with AI”.
litically motivated and, in some cases, constitute more of a The manufacturing agenda elaborated by the BlueGreen
policy guideline than a true research agenda, but are never- Alliance (2020) is organized around five high-level pillars
theless representative of recent discussions and consolida- very focused on the transformation of the American indus-
tion of ideas towards a vision for sustainable and resilient try, but where sustainability and clean economy concerns
manufacturing systems (Fig. 5). are clearly emphasized. However, it is more a kind of policy
While Industry 4.0 is seen by many people as “technology- vision and not a true research agenda. As such, details about
oriented”, more recently the term Industry 5.0 has started to the technical approaches to be followed are lacking.
be used, namely being pushed by the European Commis- The Society 5.0 vision from Japan (H-UTokyo Lab,
sion, as a complementary view that is more value-driven 2020; Broeckaert, 2022) shares several common goals with
(Breque et al., 2021; i-Scoope, 2022; Xu et al., 2021). The the vision for Industry 5.0, also emphasizing human-centric
vision is based on 3 pillars: an industry that is human-cen- systems, smart systems, and balancing economic devel-
tric, sustainable, and resilient (i-Scoope, 2022). Aiming to opment with response to social issues, but going beyond
leverage human creativity and agility in collaboration with manufacturing / industry and addressing society as a whole.
smart machines and systems, Industry 5.0 shifts the focus, In this plan one can find topics such as “human-centric
putting the human at the center (Maddikunta et al., 2022). approach to AI”, “advanced CPS and next generation ICT
Hence, smart / intelligent technologies should be designed infrastructures”, “cybersecurity for all”, “decentralized
to collaborate with the human, be resilient (e.g., business and collaborative data platform”, and “promotion of the
resilient, cyber resilient), and support sustainable prac- innovation and startup ecosystem”. In addition to the data
tices. Distributed manufacturing, intelligent supply chains, platform, collaboration aspects can also be identified in
and high levels of customization are also associated with manufacturing-related topics such as digital transformation
the concept. In line with this vision, the EFFRA strategic and smart supply chains, smart manufacturing, and con-
research and innovation agenda (SRIA) “Made in Europe” nected industries.
(EFFRA, 2021) proposes a detailed plan around four main Another plan with geographical relevance is the Made
objectives: “Efficient, responsive and smart factories and in China 2025 agenda (Ling, 2018). This plan is, to some
supply chains”, “circular products & climate-neutral manu- extent, inspired by the German Industry 4.0 initiative and
facturing”, “new integrated business, product-service and aims to make China less dependent on advanced technol-
production” approaches, as well as “new use models”, and ogy. While more contemporary to Industry 4.0 than to the

13
512 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

Table 5 – Examples of sustainability metrics/indicators in the product/ in the agenda but looking at recent publications from the
service dimensions
academic community in China, one can see a growing atten-
Economic Social Environmental
tion devoted to the topic.
End-to-End - • Social
Engineering sustainability As a result of the literature review and the findings of
metrics and panels and focus groups discussions (e.g. from PRO-VE,
indicators: DoCEIS, INDIN conferences in the last 3–4 years) summa-
- Value co-cre-
rized in previous sections (the baseline), and also taking into
ation metrics in
service design account the trends and limitations implicit in recent strategic
(including research agendas and policy reports, it is possible to iden-
some aspects tify several topics that require further research to leverage
of sustainabil-
synergies between collaborative networks and the vision of
ity) (Botti et
al., 2018). a resilient and sustainable manufacturing industry. Based on
Smart • Economic • Social • Environmental these gaps, a set of actions are proposed in complement to
products sustainability sustainability sustainability previous agendas / roadmaps, namely:
/ Digitalization metrics and metrics and metrics and
indicators: indicators: indicators:
- Economic- - Social-ori- - Environment-
Vertical integration
oriented ented metrics oriented metrics
metrics to to evaluate to evaluate smart
evaluate smart energy energy sys- ● At the shopfloor level, further rethink the organizational
smart energy systems transi- tems transition
systems tran- tion (Dincer & (Dincer & Acar,
structure and design principles for CPS in terms of a
sition (Dincer Acar, 2017). 2017). collaborative ecosystem of smart entities, embedding
& Acar, sustainability metrics.
2017). ● In terms of supervision, move from a “control orienta-
New Business • Economic • Social • Environmental tion” to a “collaborative orientation”, embedding the
Models sustainability sustainability sustainability
assessment assessment assessment notions of sharing, coordination, negotiation and con-
framework: framework: framework: tracting between sub-systems, under a perspective of co-
- Impact of - Implications - Impact of lean responsibility for sustainability.
lean produc- of servitiza- production and ● Further expand the notion of digital twin to more clearly
tion and ser- tion and servitization on
vitization on digitalization sustainable per- embed the collaborative perspective and sustainability
sustainable in improve- formance (Hao concerns.
performance ment of the et al., 2021). ● Extend the human-machine collaboration to a notion of
(Hao et al., organizational - Quantitative a community of humans, smart machines, and intelli-
2021). resilience analysis of the
- Perfor- and growth environmental gent systems (hybridization), guided by clear indicators
mance mea- in healthcare impact of Indus- of sustainability.
surement in manufacturing try 4.0 enabled
servitization firms during circular economy
(Brax et al., the COVID- (Spaltini et al.,
2021). 19 pandemic 2021). Horizontal integration
- Quantitative (Zhang & Qi, - A 3DR model
analysis of 2021). (disassembly,
the economic deconstruction ● Extend existing reference models to address the inter-
impact of and resilience) to
Industry evaluate the level dependencies and interactions among multiple dynamic
4.0 enabled of the circular- networks and develop corresponding governance mod-
circular ity of building els to better support the circular economy.
economy and demoli- ● Define clear metrics and indicators regarding co-respon-
(Spaltini et tion industry
al., 2021). (O’Grady et al., sibility in sustainability.
2021). ● Achieve a better understanding of issues in collabora-
tive networks involving hybrid value systems, enhanc-
current Industry 5.0 / Society 5.0 discussions, it also pro- ing collaboration between manufacturing companies
motes digital manufacturing ecosystems, collaborative and the other societal actors.
robotics, and includes some concerns for sustainable pro- ● Achieve a better understanding of the principles of
duction and green manufacturing practices. The aspects of self-organization and co-evolution when constrained
collaborative networks are not very explicitly emphasized

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 513

Fig. 5 Some strategic research agendas contributing to resilient and sustainable manufacturing

by performance indicators related to resilience and ● Find new ways to manage security and cyber-risks in
sustainability. hyper-connected environments, understand risk propa-
● Further explore the notions of resilience and antifragil- gation, and develop counter-attack strategies, guided by
ity in sustainable manufacturing under disruptive envi- sustainability principles.
ronments, in combination with the design of appropriate ● Further develop the smartness and sensing dimensions
assessment indicators. towards cognitive collaborative networks (distrib-
uted cognition and awareness) supporting sustainable
manufacturing.
Acceleration of manufacturing ● Explore data-rich and big data environments and mech-
anisms to support new services and better decision
making with respect to resilient and sustainable manu-
● Explore the principles of collaborative ecosystems for facturing. This should include special attention to fake
better integration of new technology players with tradi- data / data quality and how to deal with it collaboratively.
tional manufacturing players.

13
514 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

End-to-end engineering ● Better understand the interactions between collabora-

tion and competition in the context of sustainable busi-
ness ecosystems.
● Create a culture of collaboration through education and ● Identify and model emerging collaborative business
demonstration, enhancing multidisciplinary and inter- models and assess their impact on sustainability through
disciplinary synergies. adequate metrics and indicators.
● Further develop collaboration in open innovation and
customer involvement (co-innovation and value co-cre- This list of topics is not intended to be a comprehensive
ation) with new intellectual property models and sus- research agenda, but rather to complement contemporary
tainable customer intimacy / society-intimacy. agendas and illustrate the wide range of research and devel-
● Interlink the product life-cycle with collaborative mod- opment opportunities in manufacturing that are open when
els to better support the circular economy and industrial the ideas of collaborative networks and sustainability are
symbiosis. combined.
● Explore AI and machine learning to better perceive soci-
etal trends.
● Develop appropriate sustainability metrics and indica- Conclusion
tors for this dimension.
Sustainability is currently considered a major challenge for
modern manufacturing systems, as reflected in recent strate-
Smart product & digitalization gic research agendas around the world. While the manufac-
turing sector has received renewed attention in recent years,
as reflected in the proliferation of initiatives around Industry
● Progress in designing smart products, integrating sus- 4.0 and digital transformation, making such systems more
tainability concerns. sustainable remains a crucial challenge.
● Improve distributed manufacturing models for smart On the other hand, as manufacturing systems become
products based on advanced and nature-inspired forms increasingly intelligent, autonomous and interconnected,
of collaboration such as stigmergy. they reflect a kind of distributed intelligence/distributed
● Explore the potential of new exponential technologies cognitive systems. Thus, sustainability issues in this con-
to design smart products to better support traceability; text benefit and need to be viewed from a distributed and
explore distributed ledger technologies in support of collaborative perspective. Indeed, the effective achievement
sustainability co-responsibility. of sustainability requires the co-responsibility of multiple
● Support the addition of collaborative service models to stakeholders. Moreover, we live in a time of frequent dis-
products (service design and delivery). ruptive events that can drastically affect the operation of
● Explore product’s digital twins to assess value and manufacturing systems. This raises the importance of con-
impacts. sidering resilience as a facet of sustainability. To this end,
● Develop appropriate sustainability metrics and indica- the synergies between collaborative networks and sustain-
tors for this dimension. able manufacturing need to be further explored.
In this study we have identified a number of proposed
steps in this direction, both at the manufacturing system
New business models level and at the product/service/business model level. How-
ever, the collaboration aspects between all the entities pres-
ent in these systems are not yet sufficiently considered and
● Further develop and apply collaboration principles in analyzed. Therefore, it is clear that despite several positive
the circular economy and industry symbiosis. examples identified, there is a need to substantially pursue
● Evolve from enterprise-centric to collaborative business the exploration of synergies between the areas of manu-
ecosystem-centric models. facturing, sustainability and collaborative networks and to
● Further explore collaborative approaches in servitiza- develop corresponding methodologies and evaluation indi-
tion and development of “glocal enterprises” for more cators. To this end, a list of research topics is also suggested
sustainable systems. as an extension to the ongoing visions for Industry 5.0 and
● Further investigate the potential of networked additive Society 5.0. The proposed list should not be seen as a com-
manufacturing and micro-factories to support sustain- plete research agenda in itself, but rather as a complement
ability and “bring manufacturing back to cities”. to contemporary agendas in manufacturing research. The

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 515

design process for eco-industrial clusters by integrating circu-

central message of this proposal is that resilient and sus- lar economy and industrial ecology perspectives. Journal of
tainable manufacturing can only be achieved through col- Cleaner Production, 216, 446–460. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
laborative networks reflecting a notion of co-responsibility jclepro.2019.01.091.
and engagement of all participating stakeholders for mutual Beltrami, M., Orzes, G., Sarkis, J., & Sartor, M. (2021). Industry
4.0 and sustainability: towards conceptualization and theory.
benefit. Journal of Cleaner Production, 312, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2021.127733.
Funding This work was funded in part by Fundação para a Ciência Bluegreen Alliance (2020). MANUFACTURING AGENDA - A
e Tecnologia through the program UIDB/00066/2020 and Center of National Blueprint for Clean Technology Manufacturing Lead-
Technology and Systems (CTS). ership and Industrial Transformation. Online: https://www.
bluegreenalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/2020_BGA_
Declarations Manufacturing_Agenda-vFINAL.pdf (accessed 24 Mar 2022).
Botti, A., Grimaldi, M., & Vesci, M. (2018). Customer value co-
creation in a Service-Dominant Logic Perspective: some steps
Non-financial interests None.
toward the development of a measurement scale. Social Dynam-
ics in a Systems Perspective. New Economic Windows. Cham:
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61967-5_8.
Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, Brax, S. A., Calabrese, A., Ghiron, N. L., Tiburzi, L., & Grönroos,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, C. (2021). Explaining the servitization paradox: a configurational
as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the theory and a performance measurement framework. International
source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate Journal of Operations & Production Management. https://doi.
if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2020-0535.
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless Breque, M., De Nul, L., Petridis, A. Industry 5.0: Towards a sustain-
indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not able, human-centric and resilient European industry. European
included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innova-
use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted tion, & Directorate, F. (2021). Publications Office of the Euro-
use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright pean Union, Luxembourg. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2777/308407.
holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons. https://eurocid.mne.gov.pt/sites/default/files/repository/para-
org/licenses/by/4.0/. graph/documents/17991/brochura-industry-50_0.pdf
Broeckaert, L. (2022). Digital Transformation in Japan - Assessing
business opportunities for EU SMEs. EU-Japan Center for Indus-
trial Cooperation, Tokyo. https://www.eu-japan.eu/sites/default/
References files/publications/docs/Digital-Transformation-Japan-Assessing-
opportunities-forEU-SMEs.pdf (accessed 24 Mar 2022).
Abubakr, M., Abbas, A. T., Tomaz, I., Soliman, M. S., Luqman, M., Budinich, V., Reott, K. M., & Schmidt, S. (2007). Hybrid value chains:
& Hegab, H. (2020). Sustainable and smart manufacturing: Social innovations and the development of the small farmer irri-
an integrated approach. Sustainability, 12(6), doi: https://doi. gation market in mexico. Available at SSRN 981223, https://
org/10.3390/su12062280. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=981223 (Accessed
Adamson, G., Wang, L., & Moore, P. (2017). Feature-based control and 5 Mar 2021).
information framework for adaptive and distributed manufactur- Cabot, M. I., Luque, A., Heras, A., & Aguayo, F. (2019). Aspects of
ing in cyber physical systems. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, sustainability and design engineering for the production of inter-
43, 305–315. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2016.12.003. connected smart food packaging. PloS one, 14(5), e0216555. doi:
Adner, R. (2013). The wide Lens – what successful innovators see that https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216555.
others Miss. New Yoork: Portfolio/Penguin. Calvo, R., & Gil, P. (2022). Evaluation of collaborative Robot sus-
Alcayaga, A., & Hansen, E. G. (2019). Smart products as enabler for tainable integration in Manufacturing Assembly by using pro-
circular business models: the case of b2b textile washing services. cess. Time Savings Materials, 15(2), 611. https://doi.org/10.3390/
In 3rd PLATE 2019 Conference, Berlin, Germany, pages 18–20. ma15020611.
https://doi.org/10.14279/depositonce-9253. Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Rocha, A. D., & Graça, P. (2021). Brief
Angione, G., Cristalli, C., Barbosa, J., & Leitão, P. (2019). Integra- overview of collaborative approaches in sustainable Manu-
tion challenges for the deployment of a multi-stage zero-defect facturing. Smart and sustainable collaborative networks 4.0.
manufacturing architecture. In 2019 IEEE 17th International PRO-VE 2021 (629 vol.). Cham: Springer. IFIP Advances
Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), volume 1 of in Information and Communication Technologyhttps://doi.
2019 IEEE 17th International Conference on Industrial Infor- org/10.1007/978-3-030-85969-5_1.
matics (INDIN), pages 1615–1620. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2018). Roots of collab-
INDIN41052.2019.8972259. oration: nature-inspired solutions for collaborative networks. Ieee
Ansari, F., Hold, P., & Khobreh, M. (2020). A knowledge-based Access : Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 6, 30829–30843.
approach for representing jobholder profile toward optimal doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2845119.
human–machine collaboration in cyber physical production sys- Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Afsarmanesh, H., & Boucher, X. (2010).
tems. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, The role of collaborative networks in sustainability. Collab-
28, 87–106. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2019.11.005. orative networks for a sustainable world (pp. 1–16). Ber-
Azevedo, S. G., Godina, R., & Matias, J. C. O. (2017). Proposal lin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi: https://doi.
of a sustainable circular index for manufacturing companies. org/10.1007/978-3-642-15961-9_1.
Resources, 6(4), doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040063. Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Afsarmanesh, H., Galeano, N., &
Baldassarre, B., Schepers, M., Bocken, N., Cuppen, E., Korevaar, Molina, A. (2009). Collaborative networked organisa-
G., & Calabretta, G. (2019). Industrial symbiosis: towards a tions - concepts and practice in manufacturing enterprises.

13
516 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

Computers & Industrial Engineering, 57(1), 46–60. doi: https:// Dincer, I., & Acar, C. (2017). Smart energy systems for a sustain-
doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2008.11.024 Collaborative e-Work Net- able future. Applied Energy, 194, 225–235. doi: https://doi.
works in Industrial Engineering. org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.12.058.
Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Fornasiero, R., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2017). Doherty, B., & Kittipanya-Ngam, P. (2021). The role of social enter-
Collaborative networks as a core enabler of industry 4.0. Col- prise hybrid business models in inclusive value chain devel-
laboration in a Data-Rich World (506 vol., pp. 3–17). Cham: opment. Sustainability, 13(2), 499. https://doi.org/10.3390/
Springer. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication su13020499.
Technologyhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65151-4_1. EFFRA (2021). MADE IN EUROPE: The manufacturing partnership
Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Fornasiero, R., Ramezani, J., & Ferrada, in Horizon Europe - Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda
F. (2019). Collaborative networks: a pillar of digital transfor- (SRIA). Online: https://www.effra.eu/sites/default/files/made_
mation. Applied Sciences, 9(24), doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ in_europe-sria.pdf (accessed 24 Mar 2022).
app9245431. EGC (2018). https://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/
Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2004). A Roadmapping wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Industrial_Symbiosis.pdf. URL
Methodology for Strategic Research on VO. Collaborative net- https://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/wp-con-
worked Organizations—A Research Agenda for Emerging Busi- tent/uploads/2018/05/Industrial_Symbiosis.pdf. (accessed 2 Apr
ness Models, cap. 7.1. Boston, MA, USA: Kluwer Academic 2021).
Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7833-1_30. Enyoghasi, C., & Badurdeen, F. (2021). Industry 4.0 for sustainable
Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Katkoori, S. (2022). Challenges in IoT manufacturing: Opportunities at the product, process, and system
Applications and Research. Internet of things. Technology levels. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 166, 105362. doi:
and applications. IFIPIoT 2021. IFIP AICT (641 vol.). Cham: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105362.
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96466-5_1. Feng, S. C., Joung, C. B., & Li, G. (2010). Development overview
Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Oliveira, A. I., Ferrada, F., & Thamburaj, V. of sustainable manufacturing metrics. In Proceedings of the
(2017). “Collaborative services provision for solar power plants”. 17th CIRP international conference on life cycle engineering,
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117 No(5), 946–966. volume 6, page l2. Citeseer. https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/
https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-06-2016-0246. get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=904931 (Accessed March 15, 2021)
Cavalcante, I. M., Frazzon, E. M., Forcellini, F. A., & Ivanov, D. Ferreira, L. M. D. F., Silva, C., & Azevedo, S. G. (2016). An envi-
(2019). A supervised machine learning approach to data-driven ronmental balanced scorecard for supply chain performance
simulation of resilient supplier selection in digital manufacturing. measurement (env_bsc_4_scpm). Benchmarking: An Interna-
International Journal of Information Management, 49, 86–97. tional Journal, 23(6), 1398–1422. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.03.004. BIJ-08-2013-0087.
Cerabona, T., Lauras, M., Faugère, L., Gitto, J. P., Montreuil, B., Fraccascia, L., Giannoccaro, I., & Albino, V. (2021). Ecosystem indi-
& Benaben, F. (2020). A Physics-Based Approach for Man- cators for measuring industrial symbiosis. Ecological economics,
aging Supply Chain Risks and Opportunities Within Its 183, 106944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106944.
Performance Framework. In Working Conference on Vir- Gao, N., Li, Y., Mai, Y., & Xu, H. (2020). Optimisation of multiple
tual Enterprises (pp. 418–427). Springer, Cham. https://doi. products transportation under the background of industrial sym-
org/10.1007/978-3-030-62412-5_34 biosis network. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on
Cerabona, T., Lauras, M., Gitto, J. P., Montreuil, B., & Benaben, Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM),
F. (2021). Atomic Supply Chain Modelling for Risk Man- 2020 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering
agement Based on SCOR. In Working Conference on Vir- and Engineering Management (IEEM), pages 1281–1285. doi:
tual Enterprises (pp. 601–610). Springer, Cham. https://doi. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM45057.2020.9309810.
org/10.1007/978-3-030-85969-5_56 Glatt, M., Kölsch, P., Siedler, C., Langlotz, P., Ehmsen, S., & Aurich,
Cerdas, F., Juraschek, M., Thiede, S., & Herrmann, C. (2017). Life J. C. (2021). Edge-based digital twin to trace and ensure sustain-
cycle assessment of 3d printed products in a distributed manufac- ability in cross-company production networks. Procedia CIRP,
turing system. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(S1), S80–S93. 98, 276–281. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.01.103.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12618. Grekova, K., Calantone, R. J., Bremmers, H. J., Trienekens, J. H., &
Chaim, O., Muschard, B., Cazarini, E., & Rozenfeld, H. (2018). Inser- Omta, S. W. F. (2016). How environmental collaboration with
tion of sustainability performance indicators in an industry 4.0 suppliers and customers influences firm performance: evidence
virtual learning environment. Procedia Manufacturing, 21, 446– from dutch food and beverage processors. Journal of Cleaner
453. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.143. Production, 112, 1861–1871. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Chen, P. C., & Liu, K. H. (2021). Development of an interactive indus- jclepro.2015.03.022.
trial symbiosis query system with structured industrial waste Gualtieri, L., Palomba, I., Merati, F. A., Rauch, E., & Vidoni, R.
database in Taiwan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 297, 126673. (2020). Design of human-centered collaborative assembly work-
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126673. stations for the improvement of operators’ physical ergonomics
Chroust, G., & Aumayr, G. (2017). Resilience 2.0: computer-aided and production efficiency: a case study. Sustainability, 12(9),
Disaster Management. Journal Of Systems Science And Sys- 3606. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093606.
tems Engineering, 26, 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Gupta, H., Kumar, A., & Wasan, P. (2021). Industry 4.0, cleaner pro-
s11518-017-5335-7. duction and circular economy: an integrative framework for
Dahlberg, R. (2015). Resilience and complexity: conjoining the dis- evaluating ethical and sustainable business performance of man-
courses of two contested concepts. J Curr Cult Res, 7, 541–557. ufacturing organisations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 295,
https://doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525. 1573. 126253. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126253.
Deloitte (2015). Industry 4.0: Challenges and solutions for the digi- Gupta, H., Lawal, J. N., Orji, I. J., & Kusi-Sarpong, S. (2021). Clos-
tal transformation and use of exponential technologies. Online: ing the gap: the role of distributed manufacturing systems for
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ch/Documents/ overcoming the barriers to manufacturing sustainability. IEEE
manufacturing/ch-en-manufacturing-industry-4-0-24102014.pdf Transactions on Engineering Management, 1–20. doi: https://doi.
(accessed 22 Mar 2022). org/10.1109/TEM.2021.3059231.

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 517

Hao, Y., Helo, P., & Shamsuzzoha, A. (2018). Virtual factory system Leng, J., Jiang, P., Xu, K., Liu, Q., Zhao, J. L., Bian, Y., & Shi, R.
design and implementation: integrated sustainable manufactur- (2019). Makerchain: a blockchain with chemical signature for
ing. International Journal of Systems Science: Operations & self-organizing process in social manufacturing. Journal of
Logistics, 5(2), 116–132. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/23302674 Cleaner Production, 234, 767–778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
.2016.1242819. jclepro.2019.06.265.
Hao, Z., Liu, C., & Goh, M. (2021). Determining the effects of lean Li, K., Zhou, T., Liu, B., & Li, H. (2018). A multi-agent system for
production and servitisation of manufacturing on sustainable per- sharing distributed manufacturing resources. Expert Systems
formance. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 25, 374– with Applications, 99, 32–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
389. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.11.018. eswa.2018.01.027.
Huang, A., & Badurdeen, F. (2018). Metrics-based approach to evalu- Li, P., & Jiang, P. (2021). Enhanced agents in shared factory: enabling
ate sustainable manufacturing performance at the production line high-efficiency self-organisation and sustainability of the shared
and plant levels. Journal of Cleaner Production, 192, 462–476. manufacturing resources. Journal of Cleaner Production, 292,
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.234. 126020. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126020.
H-UTokyo Lab. (2020). Society 5.0 - A People-centric Li, X., Wang, Z., Chen, C. H., & Zheng, P. (2021). A data-driven
Super-smart Society. Singapore: Springer. https://doi. reversible framework for achieving Sustainable Smart product-
org/10.1007/978-981-15-2989-4. service systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279, 123618.
i-Scoope (2022). Industry 5.0 – the essence and reasons why it gets https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123618.
more attention. Online https://www.i-scoop.eu/industry-4-0/ Lim, K. Y. H., Zheng, P., & Chen, C. H. (2020). A state-of-the-art
industry-5-0/ (accessed 22 Mar 2022). survey of Digital Twin: techniques, engineering product life-
Ivanov, D. (2020). Viable supply chain model: integrating agility, cycle management and business innovation perspectives. Jour-
resilience and sustainability perspectives—lessons from and nal Of Intelligent Manufacturing, 31, 1313–1337. https://doi.
thinking beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Annals of Operations org/10.1007/s10845-019-01512-w.
Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03640-6. Ling, L. (2018). China’s manufacturing locus in 2025: with a com-
Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2021). A digital supply chain twin for man- parison of “Made-in-China 2025” and “Industry 4.0”. Techno-
aging the disruption risks and resilience in the era of Industry 4.0, logical Forecasting and Social Change, 135, 66–74. https://doi.
Production Planning & Control, 32:9, 775–788, DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.028.
org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1768450 Lintukangas, K., Kähkönen, A. K., & Ritala, P. (2016). Supply risks as
Jamwal, A., Agrawal, R., Sharma, M., & Giallanza, A. (2021). ndustry drivers of green supply management adoption. Journal of Cleaner
4.0 Technologies for Manufacturing Sustainability: A Systematic Production, 112, 1901–1909. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Review and Future Research Directions. Appl. Sci2021, 11, 5725. jclepro.2014.10.089.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app11125725 Lu, Y., & Asghar, M. R. (2020). Semantic communications between
Jiang, P., Ding, K., & Leng, J. (2016). Towards a cyber-physical-social- distributed cyber-physical systems towards collaborative automa-
connected and service-oriented manufacturing paradigm:Social tion for smart manufacturing. Journal of manufacturing systems,
Manufacturing. Manufacturing Letters, 7,15–21. https://doi. 55, 348–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2020.05.001.
org/10.1016/j.mfglet.2015.12.002 Lv, Q., Zhang, R., Sun, X., Lu, Y., & Bao, J. (2021). A digital twin-
Juraschek, M., Vossen, B., Hoffschröer, H., Reicher, C., & Herrmann, driven human-robot collaborative assembly approach in the wake
C. (2016). Urban Factories: Ecotones as Analogy for Sustain- of COVID-19. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 60, 837–851.
able Value Creation in Cities. Proceedings of 1st interdisziplinäre https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.02.011.
Konferenz zur Zukunft der Wertschöpfung, Hamburg, ISBN Machado, C. G., Winroth, M. P., & Silva, E. H. D. R. (2020). Sustain-
978-3-86818-092-3, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Man- able manufacturing in industry 4.0: an emerging research agenda.
uel-Moritz/publication/311776114_Konferenzband_zur_1_inter- International Journal of Production Research, 58(5), 1462–1484.
disziplinaren_Konferenz_zur_Zukunft_der_Wertschopfung/ doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1652777.
links/585a648408ae64cb3d4a9b06/Konferenzband-zur-1-inter- Maddikunta, P. K. R., Pham, Q. V., Deepa, P. B. N., Dev, K., Gadekallu,
disziplinaeren-Konferenz-zur-Zukunft-der-Wertschoepfung.pdf. T. R., Ruby, R., & Liyanage, M. (2022). Industry 5.0: a survey
Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., Ghadge, A., & Raut, R. (2020). A on enabling technologies and potential applications. Journal of
performance measurement system for industry 4.0 enabled smart Industrial Information Integration, 26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
manufacturing system in SMMEs- A review and empirical inves- jii.2021.100257.
tigation. International Journal of Production Economics, 229, Maleki, E., Belkadi, F., Boli, N., van der Zwaag, B. J., Alexopoulos,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107853. K., Koukas, S., Marin-Perianu, M., Bernard, A., & Mourtzis, D.
Kang, K., Zhong, R. Y., Xu, S. X., Tan, B. Q., Wang, L., & Peng, T. (2018). Ontology-based framework enabling smart product-ser-
(2021). Auction-based cloud service allocation and sharing for vice systems: application of sensing systems for machine health
logistics product service system. Journal of Cleaner Production, monitoring. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 5(6), 4496–4505.
278, 123881. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123881. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2018.2831279.
Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O. P., Budgen, D., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. OCDE (2021). The OECD sustainable manufacturing toolkit. https://
(2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering - A www.oecd.org/innovation/green/toolkit/48704993.pdf. URL
systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol, 51, 1. https://doi. https://www.oecd.org/innovation/green/toolkit/48704993.pdf.
org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009. (accessed 6 Apr 2021).
Konietzko, J., Bocken, N., & Hultink, E. J. (2020). Circular ecosys- O’Grady, T., Minunno, R., Chong, H. Y., & Morrison, G. M. (2021).
tem innovation: An initial set of principles. Journal of Cleaner Design for disassembly, deconstruction and resilience: a circu-
Production 253 (2020) 119942, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. lar economy index for the built environment. Resources Con-
jclepro.2019.119942 servation and Recycling, 175, 105847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Koren, Y., Gu, X., Badurdeen, F., & Jawahir, I. S. (2018). Sustain- resconrec.2021.105847.
able living factories for next generation manufacturing. Proce- Ogunsakin, R., Marin, C. A., & Mehandjiev, N. (2021). Towards engi-
dia Manufacturing, 21, 26–36. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. neering manufacturing systems for mass personalisation: a stig-
promfg.2018.02.091. mergic approach. International Journal of Computer Integrated

13
518 Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519

Manufacturing, 34(4), 341–369. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/095 Procedia CIRP, 98, 115–120. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
1192X.2020.1858508. procir.2021.01.015.
Oztemel, E., & Gursev, S. (2020). Literature review of industry 4.0 and Svensson, G., Padin, C., & Eriksson, D. (2016). Glocal business
related technologies. Journal Of Intelligent Manufacturing, 31, sustainability - performance beyond zero!. International Jour-
127–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-018-1433-8. nal of Procurement Management, 9(1), 15–26. doi: https://doi.
Pan, S., Zhong, R. Y., & Qu, T. (2019). Smart product-service sys- org/10.1504/IJPM.2016.073385.
tems in interoperable logistics: design and implementation pros- Taleb, N. N. (2012). Antifragile: things that Gain from disorder. New
pects. Advanced engineering informatics, 42, 100996. https://doi. York: Random House Publishing Group.
org/10.1016/j.aei.2019.100996. RTao, F., Sui, F., Liu, A., Qi, Q., Zhang, M., Song, B., Guo, Z., Lu,
Paraschos, P. D., Xanthopoulos, A. S., Koulinas, G. K., & Koulourio- S. C. Y., & Nee, A. Y. C. (2019). Digital twin-driven product
tis, D. E. (2022). Machine learning integrated design and opera- design framework. International Journal of Production Research,
tion management for resilient circular manufacturing systems. 57(12), 3935–3953. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.
Computers & Industrial Engineering, 167, 107971. https://doi. 1443229.
org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.107971. Torn, I. A. R., & Vaneker, T. H. J. (2019). Mass personalisation with
Petersen, K., Vakkalanka, S., & Kuzniarz, L. (2015). Guidelines for industry 4.0 by smes: a concept for collaborative networks. Pro-
conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: cedia Manufacturing, 28, 135–141. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
An update, Inf. Softw. Technol., vol. 64, pp. 1–18, Aug. 2015. promfg.2018.12.022.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007 Trapp, A. C., & Sarkis, J. (2016). Identifying robust portfolios of sup-
Pomponi, F., & Moncaster, A. (2017). Circular economy for the pliers: a sustainability selection and development perspective.
built environment: a research framework. Journal of Cleaner Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 2088–2100. doi: https://doi.
Production, 143, 710–718. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.062.
jclepro.2016.12.055. Turner, C., Moreno, M., Mondini, L., Salonitis, K., Charnley, F.,
Poschmann, H., Brüggemann, H., & Goldmann, D. (2021). Fostering Tiwari, A., & Hutabarat, W. (2019). Sustainable production in
end-of-life utilization by information-driven robotic disassem- a circular economy: a business model for re-distributed manu-
bly. Procedia CIRP, 98, 282–287. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. facturing. Sustainability, 11(16), doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/
procir.2021.01.104. su11164291.
Raileanu, S., Anton, F., Iatan, A., Borangiu, T., Anton, S., & Morariu, United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda
O. (2017). Resource scheduling based on energy consumption for for sustainable development department of economic and
sustainable manufacturing. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, social affairs. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda. URL https://sdgs.
28(7), 1519–1530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-015-1142-5. un.org/2030agenda. (accessed 6 Apr 2021).
Ramezani, J., & Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2020). Approaches for Upadhyay, A., Mukhuty, S., Kumar, V., & Kazancoglu, Y. (2021).
resilience and antifragility in collaborative business ecosystems. Blockchain technology and the circular economy: implica-
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 151, https://doi. tions for sustainability and social responsibility. Journal of
org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119846. Cleaner Production, 293, 126130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Rayna, T., Striukova, L., & Darlington, J. (2015). Co-creation and jclepro.2021.126130.
user innovation: the role of online 3d printing platforms. Journal Verhagen, W. J. C., de Vrught, B., Schut, J., & Curran, R. (2015). A
of Engineering and Technology Management, 37, 90–102. doi: method for identification of automation potential through model-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2015.07.002. ling of engineering processes and quantification of information
Renteria, A., & Mozos, E. A. (2019). Human-robot collaboration as a waste. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 29(3), 307–321. doi:
new paradigm in circular economy for weee management. Proce- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2015.03.003.
dia Manufacturing, 38, 375–382. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Wang, G., Zhang, G., Guo, X., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Digital twin-driven
promfg.2020.01.048. service model and optimal allocation of manufacturing resources
Sajadieh, S. M. M., Son, Y. H., & Noh, S. D. (2022). A conceptual in shared manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 59,
definition and future directions of Urban Smart Factory for Sus- 165–179. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.02.008.
tainable Manufacturing. Sustainability, 14(3), 1221. https://doi. Wang, J., & Ran, B. (2018). Sustainable collaborative governance in
org/10.3390/su14031221. supply chain. Sustainability, 10(1), doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/
Salvado, M. F., Azevedo, S. G., Matias, J. C. O., & Ferreira, L. M. su10010171.
(2015). Proposal of a sustainability index for the automo- Wang, J., Xu, C., Zhang, J., Bao, J., & Zhong, R. (2020). A collabora-
tive industry. Sustainability, 7(2), 2113–2144. doi: https://doi. tive architecture of the industrial internet platform for manufactur-
org/10.3390/su7022113. ing systems. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing,
Santos, L. M. A. L., Costa, M. B., Kothe, J. V., Benitez, G. B., Schae- 61, 101854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2019.101854.
fer, J. L., Baierle, I. C., & Nara, E. O. B. (2021). Industry 4.0 Wang, Y., Peng, S., Guan, X., Fan, J., Wang, Z., Liu, Y., & Wang,
collaborative networks for industrial performance. Journal of H. (2021). Collaborative logistics pickup and delivery problem
Manufacturing Technology Management, 32(2), 245–265. doi: with eco-packages based on time–space network. Expert Systems
https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-04-2020-0156. with Applications, 170, 114561. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Sarkis, J., & Dhavale, D. G. (2015). Supplier selection for sustain- eswa.2021.114561.
able operations: a triple-bottom-line approach using a bayesian Wu, C., & Barnes, D. (2016). An integrated model for green part-
framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 166, ner selection and supply chain construction. Journal of Cleaner
177–191. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.11.007. Production, 112, 2114–2132. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Song, Z., & Moon, Y. (2017). Assessing sustainability benefits of jclepro.2015.02.023.
cybermanufacturing systems. The International Journal of Xu, X., Lu, Y., Vogel-Heuser, B., & Wang, L. (2021). Industry 4.0
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 90(5–8), 1365–1382. doi: and industry 5.0—Inception. conception and perception, Jour-
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9428-0. 9. nal of Manufacturing Systems, vol. 61, pp 530-535, https://doi.
Spaltini, M., Poletti, A., Acerbi, F., & Taisch, M. (2021). A quanti- org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.10.006 .
tative framework for industry 4.0 enabled circular economy. Yin, D., Ming, X., & Zhang, X. (2020). Sustainable and smart prod-
uct innovation ecosystem: an integrative status review and future

13
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2024) 35:499–519 519

perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 274, 123005. doi: manufacturing platform for mass personalization model. Com-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123005. puters & Industrial Engineering, 163, 107805. https://doi.
Zavala-Alcívar, A., Verdecho, M. J., & Alfaro-Saiz, J. J. (2020). org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107805.
Assessing and selecting sustainable and resilient suppliers in agri- Zhang, Y., Xi, D., Yang, H., Tao, F., & Wang, Z. (2019). Cloud
food supply chains using artificial intelligence: a short review. manufacturing based service encapsulation and optimal config-
In Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises (pp. 501–510). uration method for injection molding machine. Journal of Intel-
Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62412-5_41 ligent Manufacturing, 30(7), 2681–2699. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Zhang, C., Chen, Y., Chen, H., & Chong, D. (2021). Industry 4.0 and s10845-017-1322-6.
its Implementation: a Review. Inf Syst Front (2021). https://doi. Zheng, P., Lin, T. J., Chen, C. H., & Xu, X. (2018). A systematic design
org/10.1007/s10796-021-10153-5 approach for service innovation of smart product-service sys-
Zhang, H., Veltri, A., Calvo-Amodio, J., & Haapala, K. R. (2021). tems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 201, 657–667. doi: https://
Making the business case for sustainable manufacturing in small doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.101.
and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises: a systems decision Zidi, S., Hamani, N., & Kermad, L. (2021). Reconfigurable supply
making approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 287, 125038. chain performance: a bibliometric analysis. In Working Con-
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125038. ference on Virtual Enterprises (pp. 161–169). Springer, Cham.
Zhang, J., & Qi, L. (2021). Crisis preparedness of healthcare manu- https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85969-5_14.
facturing firms during the COVID-19 outbreak: digitalization and
servitization. International Journal of Environmental Research Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
and Public Health, 18(10), 5456. https://doi.org/10.3390/ dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
ijerph18105456.
Zhang, X., Ming, X., Bao, Y., Liao, X., & Miao, R. (2022). Network-
ing-enabled product service system (N-PSS) in collaborative

13