Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117 (2018) 408-425

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Process Safety and Environmental Protection IC h e m E :.'

ELSEVIER jo u rn a l hom epage: w w w .e ls e v ie r.c o m /lo c a te /p s e p

Sustainable Industry 4.0 framework: A systematic literature review ®

identifying the current trends and future perspectives C heck for
updates

Sachin S. Ramble3, Angappa Gunasekaranb’*, Shradha A. Gawankar3

J Operations and Supply Chain Management, National Institute of Industrial Engineering (N1T1E), Mumbai, 400087, India
b School o f Business and Public Administration, California State University, Bakersfield 9001 Stockdale Highway, 20BDC/I40, Bakersfield, CA, 93311-1022,
USA

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: In d u stry 4.0 and its o th e r sy n o n y m s like S m art M anufacturing, S m art P roduction o r In te rn e t o f Things,
Received 17 February 2018
h ave b een identified as m ajo r co n trib u to rs in th e c o n te x t o f digital an d a u to m a te d m a n u fa c tu rin g en v i­
Received in revised form 6 May 2018
ro n m en t. The te rm in d u stry 4.0 co m p rises a variety o f tech n o lo g ies to en ab le th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f th e
Accepted 9 May 2018
value chain re su ltin g in red u ced m a n u fa c tu rin g lead tim es, an d im proved p ro d u ct qu ality an d o rg an iza­
Available online 29 May 2018
tional perfo rm an ce. Industry 4.0 has a ttra c te d m uch a tte n tio n in th e re c e n t lite ra tu re , h o w e v e r th e re are
very few sy ste m a tic an d ex ten siv e rev iew o f resea rch th a t c a p tu re s th e d y n am ic n a tu re o f th is topic. The
Keywords:
Industry 4.0 rapidly g ro w in g in te re st from b o th academ ics and p ra c titio n e rs in In d u stry 4.0 h as urged th e n eed for
Smart manufacturing rev iew o f u p -to -d a te resea rch and d e v e lo p m e n t to develop a n ew agenda. Selected 85 p ap ers w e re classi­
Internet of things fied in five resea rch categ o ries n am ely co n cep tu al p a p e rs on In d u stry 4.0, h u m a n -m a c h in e in teractio n s,
Process safety m a c h in e -e q u ip m e n t in teractio n s, tech n o lo g ies o f Industry 4.0 and su stain ab ility . The rev iew p rim arily
Augmented reality a tte m p te d to seek an sw e rs to th e follow ing tw o q u estio n s: (1) W h a t a re d ifferen t resea rch a p p ro ach es
Sustainability u sed to stu d y In d u stry 4.0? an d (2) W h a t is th e c u rre n t sta tu s o f rese a rc h in th e d o m ain s of in d u stry 4.0?.
Big data
W e p ro p o se a su sta in a b le In d u stry 4.0 fram ew o rk b ased on th e findings o f th e rev iew w ith th re e critical
c o m p o n e n ts viz., In d u stry 4.0 technologies, process in te g ra tio n an d su sta in a b le ou tco m es. Finally, th e
scope of fu tu re resea rch is d iscussed in detail.
© 2018 In stitu tio n of Chem ical E ngineers. P ublished by Elsevier B.V. All rig h ts reserv ed .

1. In troduction
Industry 4.0 is a revolution in manufacturing, and it brings a
whole new perspective to the industry on how manufacturing can
collaborate with new technologies to get maximum output with
minimum resource utilization. Industry 4.0 is a German project
that has amalgamated manufacturing with information technol­
ogy (Adolph et ah, 2016). The outcome of this collaboration results
in the development of factories that are “smart,” i.e., they are highly
efficient in resource utilization, and they adapt very quickly to meet
management goals and current industry scenarios (Wittenberg,
2016). The information technology part of Industry 4.0 consists of
a cyber-physical system (CPS), cloud computing, and the Internet
ofThings (IoT). It is the CPS that makes the whole factory adaptable
(Ivanov et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2015a)). It is a system formed by
the integration of physical systems; in the case of manufacturing,
it is machines such as a CNC, lathe, mill, or grinder to a process­
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: sachin@nitie.ac.in (S.S. Ramble), agunasekaran@csub.edu
(A. Gunasekaran), gawankar.shradha@gmail.com (S.A. Gawankar).
ing unit such as a computer (Karakose and Yetis, 2017; Monostori,
2014). In the system, the computer acts as the head and the machine
acts as the body, i.e., as there are changes, the computer network
takes the decision and implements it through the collection of the
machine. The system also consists of a feedback loop: When there
is any change in the input parameter, the output is changed to
meet the alteration on input, so we can say that the feedback loop
works as a two-way system. The system, due its high adaptability,
is used in hospitals, traffic control systems, and power generation
and distribution. The second part of this system is cloud computing,
which in simple terms is the delivery of services related to the com­
puter or information technology like a server, storage, or database
on the internet. This is referred to as the cloud because it is not
actually present where the service is being used, but at a remote
location, and the whole system is controlled by a third party (Liu
and Xu, 2017). The advantages that cloud computing gives are the
economies of operation, the speed of service, the massive scale of
operation, and accessibility, as it can be accessed in any part of the
world, no matter how far away the cloud is located (Yu et al„ 2017).
The third part of the system is the IoT, which refers to machine-
to-machine interaction without human intervention (Xu et al.,
2014). In the IoT, there is a network of devices where each device

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2018.05.009
0957-5820/© 2018 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 40 8 -4 2 5
has a unique identification through the computer system to which it
is connected. The devices connected to the system can be controlled
remotely with high accuracy and efficiency. So, the loT makes the
system smart, and this is what has led to the industrial revolution
known as Industry 4.0 (Lee et al., 2017b; Lu and Cecil, 2016).
There is growing interest around Industry 4.0, yet there is a
scarcity of systematic, extensive reviews of the recent research on
Industry 4.0 (Lu and Cecil, 2016). This paper seeks to explore the sta­
tus of the research in domains of Industry 4.0. This paper identifies
Industry 4.0 research categories based on a systematic literature
review (SLR) viz., c o n c e p tu a l p a p e rs on In d u s tr y 4.0, h u m a n -m a c h in e
in te ra c tio n s , m a c h in e -e q u ip m e n t in te ra c tio n s , te c h n o lo g ie s o f In d u s ­
and s u s ta in a b ility . The review was conducted with two
t r y 4.0,
research questions in mind: (1) What are the different research
approaches used to study Industry 4.0? (2) What is the status of
research in the domains of Industry 4.0? The review paper is struc­
tured as follows. Section 2 describes the review methodology used
for the SLR. Section 3 presents the descriptive findings from the
review. Section 4 presents the detailed review of the collected
material. Section 5 describes the proposed sustainable Industry
4.0 framework based on the findings of the review. Section 6 pro­
vides the scope for future research. Section 7 concludes the review,
presents the research contributions and research limitations.
2. Review methodology
A literature review is an essential part of any research work.
Through literature review, the pertinent literature is assessed
and analyzed, with an aim of finding possible research gaps. The
research gaps should be such that, if worked upon, would help
strengthen the field of study (Tranfield et al., 2003). Saunders et al.
(2016) prescribed a structured literature review through an iter­
ative cycle of defining suitable search keywords, searching the
relevant literature, and performing the analysis at the end. In this
paper, the authors adopted a similar review procedure.
For this paper, first, relevant sources of publication were identi­
fied regarding developments in the fields of Industry 4.0 and smart
manufacturing. For this, the authors referred to papers from the
Web of Science (WoS) database, which contains a significant num­
ber of renowned publications, like Emerald, Taylor and Francis,
Springer, IEEE, and Elsevier. The structured review methodology
adopted a six-step process as presented in Fig. 1 (Lamba and Singh,
2017; Arunachalam et al., 2017; Nguyen et al., 2017; W am baet al.,
2015; Mishra et al„ 2016).
Selection of
Database
Fig. 1. Research process adopted for the structured literature review.
409
2.1. S e le ctio n o f d a ta b a se
The search strategy was developed by first going through the rel­
evant data sources. To have access to a wide range of academic and
conference publications, the Web of Science database was selected.
Web of Science is one of the most extensive abstract and cita­
tion databases and includes thousands of peer-reviewed journals
in the fields of science, technology, medicine, and social sciences.
These peer-reviewed journals belong to various publishing houses,
including Elsevier, Springer, Emerald, Taylor and Francis, and IEEE.
2.2. K e y w o rd se le c tio n
The authors cited only the most relevant and appropriate
research publications related to the topic at hand to establish a
reproducible, comprehensive, and unbiased article search process.
The keywords used by the authors fell into the following two cate­
gories;
Industry 4.0-related keywords: i ) In d u s tiy 4.0, i i ) S m a rt m a n u ­
fa c tu r in g , i i i ) S m a rt p ro d u c tio n , iv ) S m a rt fa c to r y , v ) C y b e r-p h y s ic a l
S ystem s, v i) C lo u d M a n u fa c tu rin g , v ii) In te r n e t o f T h in g s (lo T )
Operations-related keywords: i ) P ro d u c tio n , i i ) M a n u fa c tu rin g ,
i i i ) J u s t in T im e, iv ) A g g re g a te P la n n in g , v ) C a p a c ity p la n n in g , v i) Lean
m a n u fa c tu rin g , v i i) Q u a lity , v i ii ) Process im p ro v e m e n t
Search was executed through a pairwise query, taking one key­
word from each category at a time.
2.3. C o lle c tio n o f a rtic le s
The initial search queries resulted in a total of 529 publica­
tions. The authors ensured that different aspects of Industry 4.0
were covered. Book chapters, books, doctoral theses, white papers,
editorial notes, etc. were excluded from the search to ensure that
the research originated from academic sources (Ramos et al„ 2004;
Lamba and Singh, 2017). The total number of articles dropped to
202 .
2.4. F ilte r in g (in c lu s io n /e x c lu s io n )
To refine the results further, authors removed duplicates, papers
that were present in more than one combination of keywords, and
articles with incomplete bibliographic data points. Articles were
also filtered based on their relevance to the topic. In addition, arti­
cles that mentioned Industry 4.0 as a short point of reference or as
Keyword
Selection * Collection
o f Articles
r-N
y[ _______
Filtering
r Descriptive
o
Review
Statistics
J Discussions
Development
o f Framework
o
Future
Research
Perspectives
410 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 408-425

WILEY-BLACKWELL

B BEHES VERLAG G M B H & CO KG

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD

M D P I AG

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS.

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV

SPRINGER

0 2 4 6 8 10

Fig. 4. C o n t r ib u t io n s f r o m p u b lis h e r s ( > t w o p a p e r s ).

Fig. 2 . Y e a r w is e p u b lic a t io n d e t a ils .

3.4. Contributions from journals

a collateral research topic were dropped from the study. A total of The credibility and fame of publishing journals have a signif­
85 papers were selected for the final review. icant impact on how people perceive the publication. The journal
classification was extracted by using the BibExcel tool. The journals
3. Descriptive statistics Engineering, International Journal o f Production Research, and Inter­
national Journal o f Advanced Manufacturing Technology have three
3.1. Year wise publications publications each (see Fig. 5).

In recent years, a steep upward trend is visible regarding papers
published in the field of Industry 4.0 (Fig. 2). There is an upward
trend observed from the year 2012 to 2017. However, the number
of papers published from 2015 onward has increased drastically. It
is observed that 64 out of 84 total papers were published in the year
2016-2017, which shows the researchers’growing interest level in
the emerging technology since 2014.
3.2. High-contributing authors
3.5. Contributions by country
The authors’ affiliations with various countries were extracted,
showing that the USA dominates the list, with 25 papers out of
the selected 80 papers. England, the Netherlands, and Switzerland
are next in the list with contributions of 17, nine, and eight papers
respectively. This shows that the major research contributions are
coming from authors in the USA and Europe (see Fig. 6 and 7 ).
3.6. Keywords statistics

The list of contributing authors was extracted using the BibExcel
tool (Fig. 3). Huang, G. Q,, Wang, S. Y„ and Li, D. top the chart with
three publications each on smart manufacturing, followed by Sanin,
C„ Christofides, P. D, Jiang, P. Y., Qu, T„ and Lao, T. with two papers
each.
3.3. Contributions by publishers
The contributions made by various publishers were extracted by
using the BibExcel tool. Springer has the highest number of publi­
cations, with eight papers, followed by Elsevier Science with seven
papers. This implies that the topic of Industry 4.0 is covered across
different publishers with a wide spread (see Fig. 4).
The most commonly used keywords in all selected papers were
extracted using the BibExcel tool. “Industry 4.0” was the most fre­
quently used keyword (28%), followed by “Internet ofThings” (16%),
“smart manufacturing” (13%), and “cyber-physical systems" (9%).
The other keywords used were “RFID,” “smart factory,” and “cloud
computing” (see Fig. 8).
3.7. Keywords used in titles
“Industry 4.0" was present in the majority of the publication
titles (51%), followed by the phrase “smart manufacturing” (18%).
Other words that appeared in the publication titles included “cyber­
physical systems,” “loT,” and “big data” (see Fig. 9).

O)
E
ro 3
Z
k_ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
I2
<
§ 1
z

.0

* '
IIIIIII
O

/
-O

/
. <c-

/
<A A
* S /
A 3
< -

Author Names

Fig. 3. T o p c o n t r i b u t in g a u t h o r s ( > t w o p a p e r s ).
 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safely and Environmental Protection 117 (2018) 408-425 411

JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND...

COMPUTERS IN INDUSTRY

PROCESSES

CLUSTER COMPUTING-THE JOURNAL OF NETWORKS...

JOURNAL OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND...

AICHE JOURNAL

JOURNAL OF AMBIENT INTELLIGENCE AND SMART...

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED...

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION RESEARCH

ENGINEERING

0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5

Fig. 5. Journal p ub licatio n details.

Fig. 6. C ou n try-w ise p u b licatio n details ( > tw o papers).

y
North
Poct/ic:
(4 ) Slates V /
/f S ,
Sooth Kwea •

t« : '

Mat. Nty«i Sudan

Chad
V *n w uHa Ntgond Ethiopia
Colcrobw ;
Kenya

Bolivia
Namibia
B a liw If
Chile

Go gle Mao data £2017 1CCG km l

Fig. 7. D is trib u tio n o f papers across the w orld .

3.8. Network analysis
There are multiple tools available for performing network anal­
ysis. Some of the most famous are Pajek, HistCite Graph Maker, and
Gephi. For this paper, we have used Gephi. It is a comprehensive
tool that provides flexible visual aids, powerful filtering techniques,
an essential toolkit for network analysis, and the capability to han­
dle different data formats. Other network analysis tools lack one or
more of the features that Gephi provides. Gephi is an open-source
software package. It employs a 3-D render engine for making large
412 S.S. Kamble e t al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117 (2018) 4 08-425

Fig. 8. Frequently used keywords (count >2).

Big data

IOT

Cyber-physical systems

Smart Manufacturing

industry 4.0

0 10 20 30 40 50

Fig. 9. Keywords in publication titles.

Fig. 10. Co-citation map o f the authors.

networks in real time (Gephi, 2013). It contains a flexible, multi­
tasking architecture that facilitates an insightful visualization of
even the most complex of datasets. As per Bastian et al. (2009),
Gephi provides “easy and broad access to network data and assist
in specializing, filtering, navigating, manipulating and clustering of
data.” BibExcel software was used to reformat the data file into a
.NET format, which was used as input for Gephi.
Fig. 10 shows the co-citation map for the selected top contribut­
ing authors. It is observed from the figure that no clear cluster of
papers is developed for the co-citations map. This indicates that
papers have spread across the different topics related to Industry
4.0. The low density of paper citations at the author nodes indicates
that Industry 4.0 and smart manufacturing are emerging fields of
study and have just started to gain attention.
 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 408-425 41 3

40

35

30

25 21
20
15

10
5

0
C o n c e p tu a l Case s tu d y S im u la tio n E x p e r im e n ta tio n S u rv e y P ro to ty p e

F ig . 1 1 . D is tr ib u tio n based o n ty p e o f research.

10

1 1

C o n c e p tu a l S u rv e y P ro to ty p e

»2012 ■ 2013 ■ 2014 2015 2016 2017

F ig . 1 2 . D is tr ib u tio n o f re s e a rc h ap p ro a ch e s.

57
60

50

40

30

20

10

0
In d u s try 4 .0 Key T e c h n o lo g ie s S h o p flo o r-E q u ip m e n t H u m a n M a c h in e S u s ta in a b ility
C oncepts In te ra c tio n In te ra c tio n s

F ig . 1 3 . D is tr ib u tio n o f re s e a rc h c a te g o rie s .

3.9. Industry 4.0 papers based on type of research
Fig. 11 shows the distribution of the selected 85 papers by
methodology. Two research methodologies were considered for
classification: conceptual and empirical. Empirical papers focus on
visible or measurable Industry 4.0 activities and processes through
a variety of methodological approaches. Conceptual papers discuss
the ideas, applications, theories, benefits, and challenges of Indus­
try 4.0 but do not collect primary data or analyze secondary data. It
can be observed from Fig. 11 that 43% of the papers described the
topic at the conceptual level. The remaining 57% of the papers dealt
with the topic using empirical research methods that included case
studies (24%), simulations and prototypes (8%), experimentation
(7%), and surveys (6%).
Fig. 12 presents the trend on how different research techniques
have been used to study Industry 4.0 during the period 2012-2017.
The trend observed in Fig. 12 reveals that there is a steep increase in
the conceptual papers on different aspects of Industry 4.0. The trend
reveals that the concepts presented in papers are being tested and
validated through empirical studies using case studies, simulations,
and experimentations. It is observed that there has been a sharp
increase in the conceptual studies. However, the increase in the
studies using simulations, experimentations, and prototyping is not
significant. More studies using empirical approaches are required
to be undertaken.
3.10. Distribution of publications as per research categories
The selected 85 papers were categorized in five research cate­
gories, as shown in Fig. 13. The distribution of categories indicates
that more attention has been paid to Industry 4.0 technologies (67%
of papers) that include the use of big data, simulations, additive
manufacturing, loT, virtual reality, etc. This was followed by studies
that propose general theories and concepts in Industry 4.0 (45% of
papers), shop floor equipment interactions (43% of papers), human-
machine interfacing (24% of papers), and sustainability (18% of
papers). Fig. 14 presents the distribution of research categories
414 S.S. Kamble e t al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 4 08-425
30
25
20
15
10
0
2012 20 13
......... In d u s try 4 .0
—~ “ Shop f lo o r E q u ip m e n t In te ra c tio n -™ ~ " # R E F !
S u s ta in a b ility
Fig. 14. Distribution of research categories during 2012-2017.
Table 1
Level of research across Industry 4.0 domains.
Research Categories Conceptual
Industry 4.0 Concepts and Theories 30
Key Technologies 23a
Shop Floor-Equipment Interactions 15a
Human-Machine Interactions 7a
Sustainability 6a
a Concepts are covered in the conceptual papers.
during the years 2012-2017. The findings indicate increased inter­
est from researchers in all research categories.
3 . U. Research techniques across Industry 4.0 categories
The results presented in Table 1 help us understand how differ­
ent research techniques have been used to study the Industry 4.0
research categories. Most studies adopt an empirical (65%) research
approach, and the remaining a conceptual approach (35%) to study
Industry 4.0. The empirical approach is concerned with using case
studies, simulations, experiments, etc., for testing and validating
the concepts, theories, and applications. Out of the 57 papers on
the key technologies, 33% of them used a case study approach.
Simulation and experiment were used in 8% and 5% of the stud­
ies respectively. Out of the 37 papers on shop floor-equipment
interaction, around 30% of them used a case study approach, fol­
lowed by 13% using simulation and experimentation approaches
respectively. Again, most of the studies in human-machine inter­
facing and sustainability used a case study approach (28% and 37.5%
respectively). This finding indicates that the case study approach is
the most popular approach used by researchers to demonstrate the
technology or the interface layers. Although the use of simulation,
experimentation, and prototype research approaches is increas­
ing, it is not significant. More studies using these approaches are
required to be conducted in the future. The detailed systematic
literature review classification is presented in Table 2.
4. Review discussion
4.1. Industry 4.0 concepts and theories
Industry 4.0 is the paradigm of connecting different kinds of
physical devices enriched with embedded electronics (sensors,
actuators, radio frequency identification (RFID), etc.) to a net­
work or internet, so they interact. The continuous interaction and
exchange of information are not only between machines, but also
between humans, and between humans and machines (Wan et al.,
2014 2015 20 16 2017
— Key T e c h n o lo g ie s
Case Study Simulation Experimentation Survey Prototype Total
0 0 0 0 0 30
19 7 5 1 2 57
11 5 5 0 1 37
6 2 1 3 2 21
6 3 0 1 0 16
2016). This integration enables identification and communication
for every entity in the value stream and leads to IT-enabled mass
customization in manufacturing (Posada et al., 2015). Compared to
conventional forecasting-based production planning, Industry 4.0
significantly influences the production environment with radical
changes in the execution of operations, enabling real-time pro­
duction planning and control (Sanders et al., 2016). Industry 4.0 is
characterized by increased competitiveness through use of smart
equipment, making use of information about high-wage locations,
demographic changes, resources, energetic efficiency, and urban
production (Heck et al., 2014). The features required for the imple­
mentation of Industry 4.0 include horizontal, end-to-end digital
integration and vertical integration. Horizontal integration refers to
the integration of multiple smart factories through value networks,
occurring both within a smart factory and across different smart
factories. Vertical and horizontal integration enables end-to-end
integration across the entire value chain (Stock and Seligar, 2016).
The smart product is another critical concept component in Indus­
try 4.0’s concept system. In a smart factory, products and machines
communicate with each other, cooperatively driving production.
Smart products can refer to objects, devices, and machines that are
equipped with sensors, controlled by software, and connected to
the internet. Industry 4.0 gives rise to different CPSs, which include
the horizontal and vertical layers integrated with key technolo­
gies and applications with an objective to support collaborative
industrial business processes and the associated business networks
(Liu and Xu, 2017). Roblek et al. (2016) claim that loT technology
enables the creation of new products, services, and business mod­
els, and hence the business value of IoT technology is significantly
higher than is reflected by the number of devices. Nowadays, orga­
nizations are focused on creating value for the customer, who is
becoming more aware and demanding regarding lead time delivery
services and product availability and reliability (Witkowski, 2017).
Mrugalska and Wyrwicka (2017) suggest that lean manufacturing,
when integrated with Industry 4.0, can support achieving great
flexibility of production systems and processes, realizing complex
products and supply chains. The manufacturing organizations can
 S.S. Kamble etal. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection U 7 (2018) 408-425 415

Table 2
Systematic literature review.
SI. No. Topic Industry 4.0 Industry 4.0 Machine- Human-Machine Sustainability Research
Concepts and Technologies Equipment Interactions Approach
Theories Interactions
1 Alexandre et al, (2017) J J Survey
2 Bahrin et al. (2016) V Conceptual
3 Bogle (2017) V V Conceptual
4 Chen and Lin (2017) V J Conceptual
5 Choi et al. (2016) V V Conceptual
6 Cornells and Strandhagen (2017) ■J ■J V Conceptual
7 Davis etal. (2012) J J Conceptual
8 Fernandes and Assuncao (2017) V Survey
9 Gentner(2016) V Conceptual
10 He et al. (2017) J Experimentation
11 Heck and Rogers (2015) V Conceptual
12 Ivanov et al. (2016) J J Conceptual
13 Kamigaki (2017) V J V Conceptual
14 Karakose and Yetis (2017) ■J ■J ■J J Conceptual
15 Kersten(2016) V V Case Study
16 Kibiraet al. (2016) V Conceptual
17 Kim et al. (2016) J Case Study
18 Lao et al. (2014) ■J ■J ■J Case Study
19 Lao et al. (2016) •J V V Simulation
20 Lee and Liu (2016) ■J ■J Experimentation
21 Lee et al. (2017a) V ■J Case Study
22 Lee et al. (2017b) Survey
23 Li etal. (2017) V V Experimentation
24 Lin et al. (2016b) ■J •J Simulation
25 Liu and Xu (2017) V Conceptual
26 Lobo(2016) V Conceptual
27 Lotzmann et al. (2017) V ■J V Case Study
28 Lu and Cecil (2016) ■J V Conceptual
29 Marques etal. (2017) V V Conceptual
30 Menasceetal. (2015) V J Conceptual
31 Monostori (2014) •J J J Conceptual
32 Moreno et al. (2017) •J V Simulation
33 Mosterman and Zander (2016) V Simulation
34 Moyne and Iskandar (2017) V ■J Case Study
35 Mrugalska and Wyrwicka (2017) ■J Conceptual
36 Mueller et al. (2017) ■J V Conceptual
37 Oesterreich and Teuteberg (2016) ■J V Conceptual
38 Paelke(2014) V V Experimentation
39 Papazoglou et al. (2015) V V V Conceptual
40 Park and Tan (2015) V V J Conceptual
41 Parlanti (2017) ■J •J ■J Conceptual
42 Pei et al. (2017) •J J ■J ■J Case Study
43 Pfeiffer (2016) s i
Conceptual
44 Pfliegl and Keller (2015) ■J ■J V V Conceptual
45 Posada et al. (2015) V ■J Conceptual
46 Prause and Atari (2017) J Survey
47 Preuveneers and Ilie-Zudor (2017) V Conceptual
48 Qian etal. (2017) V Conceptual
49 Qu et al. (2016) ■J V Case Study
50 Quintas et al. (2017) V V Experimentation
51 Ramadan et al. (2017) s! V V Simulation
52 Reis and Gins (2017) V Conceptual
53 Reubmann et al. (2015) Case Study
54 Roblek et al. (2016) ■J Conceptual
55 Sackey etal. (2017) ■J Survey
56 Sanders et al. (2016) V V Conceptual
57 Schlechtendahl et al. (2015) ■J Case Study
58 Schuh et al. (2014a) ■J V V Case Study
59 Schuh et al. (2014b) V V V Conceptual
60 Shafiq et al. (2015) V J V Simulation
61 Shafiq et al. (2016) J V V Case Study
62 Shamim et al. (2017) ■J ■J V Case Study
63 Sommer (2015) ■J Conceptual
64 Strange and Zucchella (2017) ■J Conceptual
65 Tao et al. (2014) V V •J Prototype
66 Theorin etal. (2017) V V Case Study
67 Thramboulidis and Christoulakis (2016) V V Prototype
68 Uhlemann et al. (2017) V ■J V Conceptual
69 Waibel et al. (2017) J V Case Study
70 Wan et al. (2016) •J V V Case Study
71 Wanget al. (2015) ■J •J •J Conceptual
72 Wang et al. (2016) ■J ■J Case Study
73 Wang et al. (2016) ■J J ■J Simulation
74 Wang et al. (2017) ■J J ■J Case Study
416 S.S. Kamble etal./ Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 408-425
Table 2 (Continued)
SI. No. Topic Industry 4.0 Industry 4.0
Concepts and Technologies
Theories
75 Witkowski (2017) V ■J
76 Wittenberg (2016) V ■J
77 Wolf and Serpanos (2017) V V/
78 Wong and Kim (2017) V Conceptual
79 Wu et al. (2017) ■J
80 Xu et al. (2014) V ■J
81 Yang et al. (2017) V V
82 Yu etal., (2017) V Simulation
83 Yuan etal. (2017) ■J ■J
84 Yue etal. (2015) ■J
85 Zawadzki and Zywicki (2016)
commit to Industry 4.0 with the perspective of making their pro­
duction shop floors lean (Sanders et ah, 2016). The exchange and
use of data by the elements on a shop floor enables a certain
degree of autonomy, and moreover, a shift to decentralized pro­
duction planning and control, which is another characteristic of
Industry 4.0 (Liu and Xu, 2017). Strange and Zucchella (2017) dis­
cuss the implications of Industry 4.0 for global value chains. They
note that the emergence of Industry 4.0 will impact the activities
and strategic decisions of MNEs. The MNEs will need to control
the design and distribution stages of the global value chains. The
authors further report that 3-D printing technology and virtual
engineering will potentially allow customers to provide input on
product design and influence decisions on where and when the
product is to be manufactured. The manufacturing facilities may
move closer to the final customers. The decisions about selection
of plant locations will be revised with the decreased cost economies
that would result from the use of robotic systems in manufacturing.
The deployment of BDA and the IoT are identified as the compe­
tencies that will guide organizational performance in the future,
which will be based on the need to anticipate and shape poten­
tial customer demands and improve manufacturing, logistics, and
distribution efficiencies. Oesterreich and Teuteberg (2016) report
that most of the critical technologies—cloud computing, mobile
computing, modularization-have reached market maturity, while
the others—like additive manufacturing; robotics; and augmented,
virtual, and mixed reality—are still in their formative stages.
4.2. Industry 4.0 and human-machine collaboration
Bahrin et al. (2016) identify the interconnection of human
beings, objects, and systems, which leads to dynamic real-time
optimized and self-organized intercompany value systems as one
of the critical components of Industry 4.0. Shamim et al. (2017),
recognizing that continuous learning and innovation in an orga­
nization depends on people and the enterprise’s capabilities,
proposed a framework of management practices that promote an
environment of innovation and learning in an organization, mak­
ing the digital enhancements and implementation of CPSs much
easier. Pfeiffer (2016), based on a qualitative survey of 62 man­
agers in assembly plants, challenged the dominant view that a
human could be easily replaced by robots. He further adds that
experiential knowledge, informal expertise, and tacit knowledge
are essential on a shop floor, bringing interactive capabilities into
assembly work to ensure high performance, quality, and smooth
material flow. Workers bring much value to the processes of inno­
vation and organizational learning. The modern manufacturing
system is considered a composition of cyber-physical, cyber, and
human components, and IoT is used as a connecting element for
integration (Thramboulidis and Christoulakis, 2016). Cooperative
control and optimization of plant-wide production processes via
human-cyber-physical interaction is identified as an element for
Machine- Human-Machine Sustainability Research
Equipment Interactions Approach
Interactions
Conceptual
V Conceptual
Conceptual
V Experimentation
Conceptual
V Case Study
■J V Case Study
■J Case Study
V V Conceptual
implementing smart and optimal manufacturing processes (Qian
et al., 2017). The efficacy, acceptance, adaptability, and overall
performance of human-machine systems and human-system inter­
action applications can be enhanced by integrating context and
interaction information models into a decision-making component
that behaves as a supervision process for controlling interaction
(Quintas et al., 2017). Alexandre et al. (2017), based on their study
of the application of Industry 4.0 in the design and manufacture
of handicraft products, recommend respecting the individual iden­
tity values of the craftsmanship to promote an interdisciplinary
relationship between industrial designers, industrial manufactur­
ers, and artisans. However, considering the aspects of human-cyber
interaction, there may be adoption barriers to successful imple­
mentation of smart manufacturing in the organizations. Sackey
et al. (2017) feel the need to manage the impact of Industry 4D
on an industrial engineering (IE) education curriculum by offering
practical teaching and learning infrastructure.
4.3. Shop floor and equipment integration
The shop floor entities (machines, conveyors, etc.), the smart
products, and the cloud can communicate and exchange interac­
tively over the established network. Each of the shop floor entities,
considered as agents collaborate efficiently to achieve agility and
flexibility. Global coordination between these agents are required
to handle issues such as load-unbalance and inefficiency that may
occur due to the compability issues. New control algorithms with
big data feedback mechanisms will be reqiured to minimise the
load-unbalance (Li et al„ 2017). In a production system, sensors
play an important role in the operation of the IoT and CPSs. A sen­
sor is “a mechanical device sensitive to light, temperature, radiation
level, or the like, that transmits a signal to a measuring or control
instrument.” It is a useful device that converts information from the
physical world into data in the cyber system. Use of self-sustaining
intelligent sensor nets is proposed by Mueller et al. (2017) to collect
and transmit the manufacturing process information in real-time
to the computers. The improved instructions are transferred bade
to the physical system with the support of network algorithms in
cyber systems for better control of the process. Lin et al. (2016)
suggest building a controlled workspace using large-scale deploy­
ment of wireless sensors. They suggest that, to achieve efficient
connectivity between the machines, the wireless sensors be fur­
ther divided into multiple groups for multiple monitoring tasks,
and each group of sensors be deployed densely within a subarea
in a large plant or along a long production/assembly line. Menasce
et al. (2015) propose a framework that combines various models,
like a process model to represent machines, parts inventories, and
the flow of parts through machines in a discrete manufacturing
floor; a predictive queueing network model to support the analy­
sis and planning phases of smart manufacturing; and optimization
models to support the planning phase of smart manufacturing. The
 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117 (2018) 408-425
combination of these different models helps to achieve different
levels of integration and provides improved decision-making.
4.4. Technologies of Industry 4.0
In Industry 4.0, the IoT is connected alongside CPSs in such
a way that the system develops the potential to generate and
feed information, adding value to the manufacturing process. The
interconnection is made possible with a combination of software,
sensor, processor, and communication technologies (Bahrin et al„
2016).
4.4.1. IoT
The IoT is a new industrial ecosystem that combines intelli­
gent and autonomous machines, advanced predictive analytics,
and machine-human collaboration to improve productivity, effi­
ciency, and reliability (Wong and Kim, 2017; Thramboulidis
and Christoulakis, 2016). The IoT (IoT) provides real-time
sensing/actuating ability and fast transmission capability of
data/information, so that the remote operation of manufactur­
ing activities and efficient collaboration among stakeholders are
greatly facilitated (Yang et al., 2017; Lu and Cecil, 2016). Cloud man­
ufacturing (CM) and the IoT (IoT) are interlinked, yet most work
only focuses on one of them and takes the other as a constituent
technology unit (Qu et al., 2016). The increasing use of sensors on
physical products allows them to capture, process, and communi­
cate data with humans and other physical systems. There exists a
vast potential for the development of sensor-based applications, as
these sensors provide real-time data that may be used for preven­
tive maintenance by detecting equipment wear and tear, to avoid
stock-outs through monitoring of inventory levels, for better capac­
ity planning, and to assess the usage and functionality of products
(Lin et al., 2016). IoT technology is used for collecting, analyzing,
and managing data, and an object-oriented RFID system is used
as a control process in manufacturing systems (Yang et al., 2017;
Kamigaki, 2017). IoT products are allotted unique identifiers and
are intricately linked to information about their provenance, use,
and destination. The use of the IoT helps in the effective coordina­
tion and synchronization of product and information flows. The
CPSs based on IoT technology find applications in smart manu­
facturing to achieve intelligent perception and access to various
manufacturing resources (Tao et al„ 2014), to connect multiple par­
ties using social networks to facilitate open innovations (Yang et al„
2017), for process control using RFID to provide more flexibility to
the manufacturing process (Kamigaki, 2017), to improve the pro­
ductivity of the microdevices assembly (Lu and Cecil, 2016), and
to manage dynamics in production logistics processes (Qu et al.,
2016).
4.4.2. Role of big data in Industry 4.0
Manufacturing companies should understand that it is imper­
ative to have the data analytics capabilities for driving the digital
transformation. They are therefore required to possess a wide vari­
ety of skill sets for developing the algorithms and interpreting
the data (Lee et al., 2017a, 2017b; Liu and Xu, 2017). Big data
analytics and technologies support real-time data collection from
many different sources, comprehensive analysis of the data, and
real-time decision making, leading to improved manufacturing
flexibility, product quality, energy efficiency, and improved equip­
ment service through predictive maintenance (Bahrin et al., 2016;
Li et al., 2017; Rubmann et al„ 2016; Strange and Zucchella, 2017;
Preuveneers and Ilie-Zudor,2017; Wan etal., 2016). Big data analyt­
ics has been widely used in manufacturing for process monitoring,
and fault finding is supporting new capabilities like predictive ana­
lytics (Lee et al., 2017a, 2017b; Qian et al., 2017; Yuan etal., 2017).
However, these capabilities require high data quality and exper­
417
tise in analytics for the realization of efficient online manufacturing
solutions (Moyne and Iskandar, 2017; Reis and Gins, 2017). Exploit­
ing intelligence from big data to drive agility will require tackling
new challenges, such as how to ensure the consistency and con­
fidentiality of data through long, complex supply chains (Bogle,
2017).
4.4.3. Cloud for integrating the CPS
Industry 4.0 and cloud manufacturing enable the networking
of manufacturing things, services, data, and people over the inter­
net in the manufacturing field, which constitutes part of the smart,
networked world. It can be envisioned that Industry 4.0 and cloud
manufacturing will unleash the full potential of the manufactur­
ing industry in the coming new era of industrial production (Yue
et al., 2015). Cloud technologies can be widely used in Industry 4.0
for increased data sharing across company boundaries, improved
system performance (such as increased agility and flexibility), and
reduced costs through bringing systems online (Liu and Xu, 2017;
Tao et al., 2014). Wang et al. (2016a, 2016b, 2016c) present a smart
factory framework that incorporates industrial network, cloud, and
supervisory control terminals with smart shop floor objects such as
machines, conveyors, and products. These self-organized physical
systems are assisted by cloud-based big data feedback and coordi­
nation control. The proposed system helps design complementary
strategies to prevent deadlocks by improving the agents’ decision­
making and the coordinator’s behavior. A similar framework was
developed by Lu and Cecil (2016) using Extended Enterprise Mod­
eling Language (EEML), which provides a structured foundation
for designing and developing collaborative frameworks, and by
Qu et al. (2016) to achieve real-time production logistics synchro­
nization by systematically integrating cloud manufacturing and
IoT infrastructures to enable a smart PLS control mechanism with
multi-level dynamic adaptability. Mosterman and Zander (2016)
successfully demonstrated a smart manufacturing system includ­
ing a physical environment; a wireless network; parallel computing
resources; and computational functionality such as service arbitra­
tion, various forms of control, and processing of streaming video on
a pick and place machine. The system proposed by Wan et al. (2016)
introduced mobile services as the third layer, integrated with the
cloud computing technology and manufacturing device layers. In
this system, the manufacturing device layers are composed of phys­
ical devices, such as a flexible conveyor belt, industrial robots, and
corresponding sensors, which are connected to the cloud via the
support of a wireless module. The manufacturing big data about
customized manufacturing is then computed in the cloud and used
to receive orders from customers and to inquire about the necessary
production information, based on a mobile services platform. Park
and Tran (2015) proposed a cloud-based smart manufacturing sys­
tem for machining transmission in which the advanced information
and communication technology, such as cognitive agent, swarm
intelligence, and cloud computing, are used to integrate, organize,
and allocate the machining resources. With the increasing use of
cloud computing technologies, there is a need to optimize storage
space. The use of flash memory is recommended with improved
algorithms (He et al., 2017).
4.4.4. Simulations and prototype
Simulations and prototyping will leverage real-time data to
mirror the physical world in a virtual model, which can include
machines, products, and humans. This allows operators to test and
optimize the machine settings for the next product in line in the vir­
tual world before the physical changeover, thereby driving down
machine setup times and increasing quality (Bahrin et al., 2016).
The simulation technique was used to study cyberattacks using
the bifurcation control method with an objective of generating the
expected dynamic behaviors and guaranteeing the trustworthiness
418 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018)408-425
of cyber-physical manufacturing systems at run time (Yu et al.,
2017). Simulation studies were also used for observing the behav­
ior of machines: movements, machining operations, connectivity
with robotic arms (Moreno et al., 2017), real-time tracking of man­
ufacturing cost (Ramadan et al., 2017), energy efficiency of wireless
sensor networks (Lin et al., 2016), deadlock prevention (Wang et al.,
2016a, 2016b, 2016c), and the use of virtual engineering objects
for industrial design and manufacturing (Shafiq et al., 2015). Pro­
totype as a tool was used to study the CPS (Thramboulidis and
Christoulakis, 2016; Tao et al., 2014). Yuan et al. (2017) present the
applications of smart manufacturing in the petrochemical industry
to manage the physical resources efficiently. A few of the suggested
areas where smart manufacturing is applied are the fault detection
of a catalytic cracking unit driven by big data and advanced opti­
mization for the planning and scheduling of oil refinery sites. Use
of digital twins (prototypes) to simulate the process behavior of the
actual machines interactively is proposed by Moreno et al. (2017).
Digital twins are based on the Ethernet/lP communication protocol
and provide information like movements, machining operations,
and connectivity with robotic arms.
4.4.5. 3-D printing and augmented reality
Machining techniques such as cutting, drilling, grinding, and
sanding used in traditional manufacturing processes are referred
as “subtractive manufacturing," in which parts and components
manufacturing relies on the removal method. These parts and com­
ponents are then assembled to form the final products. In contrast,
3-D printing relies on additive manufacturing, which forms the
final products by building up successive layers of materials, thus
avoiding the need for parts and component assembly. A computer-
aided design (CAD) software is used in 3-D printing to generate a
digital model, followed by creating (printing) a three-dimensional
object in a 3-D printer from raw materials in either liquid or parti­
cle form. Thin layers of raw material are deposited microscopically
by the printer so that the deposition of successive layers mate­
rializes in the formation of the final product (Baynes and Steele,
2015 in Oesterreich and Teuteberg, 2016). Additive manufactur­
ing techniques will have a significant contribution toward Industry
4.0, as they will help organizations manufacture small batches of
customized products that offer construction advantages, such as
complex, lightweight designs (Stock and Seilger, 2016; Rubmann
et al., 2015). High-performance, decentralized additive manufac­
turing systems will reduce transport distances and stock on hand
(Strange and Zucchella, 2017). Although 3-D manufacturing sys­
tems are still in the initial stages, organizations are expected to
make much broader use of it in Industry 4.0. Chen and Lin (2017)
assert the need for the use of 3-D printing technology as an enabler
for smart manufacturing. However, they identify that 3-D printing
faces technical challenges like limited types of usable materials,
low precision, and low productivity. If these challenges are over­
come, then smart manufacturing based on this technology will be
able continually to provide 3-D objects of interest to customers
or join as many ubiquitous manufacturing networks as possible.
Zawadzki and Zywicki (2016) discuss hybrid prototyping, which is
an integration of additive manufacturing technologies and virtual
reality techniques.
Spatially registered information on the task directly in the user’s
field of view may be used to guide the human workers through
unfamiliar tasks and visualize information directly in the spa­
tial context using augmented reality, supporting the worker in
the quickly changing production environment. Such augmented
reality-based systems can support a variety of services to the user
organizations, such as locating spare parts in a warehouse and send­
ing maintenance repair instructions over mobile devices (Paelke,
2014).
4.4.6. Robotic systems
Modern robots are characterized as systems offering autonomy,
flexibility, and cooperation. It is predicted that the robots will soon
start interacting with one another and work safely with humans
and even learn from them. These robots will offer cost advan­
tage and an excellent range of capabilities, performing most of the
processes in the intelligent factory (Pei et al., 2017). Use of pro­
grammable dual-arm robot is proposed by Mueller et al. (2017) for
material distribution in the assembly line. Further to assure safe
operation of the robot and monitor the environment a safety eye
concept is implemented. If any disturbance such as some person
or equipment such as an automated guided vehicle enters the vir­
tual space (safety eye), the system stops the movement of the robot
with unique sound anticipating some complicity. The operator has
to remove the obstacle before the robot starts working again. As the
manufacturing tasks become more individualized and more flexi­
ble, the machines in the smart factory will be required to do variable
tasks collaboratively without reprogramming. Wang et al. (2016a,
2016b, 2016c) discuss the similarity between smart manufacturing
systems and the ubiquitous robotic systems, and propose deploying
ubiquitous robotic technology to the smart factory.
4.4.7. Cyber security
The IoT-based CPSs that are connected to millions of embedded
sensors and communications devices pose the normal risks asso­
ciated with increased use of data and the more significant risks of
systemic breaches (Wittenberg, 2016). CPMSs may face the threat
of cyber-attacks. Once the CPMSs are deployed in the organiza­
tions, malicious software can affect and spread from one machine
to another by communication systems. The viruses spread through
this malicious software may be intended to modify the manufactur­
ing process or destroy data through the system, leading to quality
defects in the products or a complete shutdown. The security issues
in the CPMSs in the form of cyberattacks and data thefts are criti­
cal and need to be controlled to improve the trustworthiness and
acceptability of the system (Yu et al., 2017). The industrial data is
highly sensitive, as it encapsulates various aspects of the industrial
operation, including information about products, business strate­
gies, and companies (Wolf and Serpanos, 2017).
4.5. Sustainable Industry 4.0
The contribution of Industry 4.0 toward more sustainable indus­
trial value creation will be remarkable in the future (Stock and
Seliger, 2016). In the existing literature, this contribution is mainly
attributed to the economic and environmental dimensions of sus­
tainability. Besides economic and environmental sustainability,
Industry 4.0 has enormous potential for realizing sustainable indus­
trial value creation in social dimensions.
4.5.1. Economic sustainability
SM implementation studies on management of financial
resources are insufficient in the literature. Lee et al. (2017a, 2017b)
developed a big data analytics platform for the implementation
of smart factories in small and medium-sized enterprises. They
proposed using cloud-based computing for the platform so that
the enterprises can reduce their financial burdens of infrastructure
and experts. Ramadan et al. (2017) focused on reducing the man­
ufacturing costs by identifying the causes and eliminating them
by implementing a real-time manufacturing cost tracking system
integrating lean manufacturing and RFID. Conducting real-time
preventive maintenance of measurement sensors helps improve
the economic performance of manufacturing processes and pro­
vides process stability (Lao et al., 2015). Schuh et al. (2014a, 2014b)
provide an Industry 4.0 perspective by analyzing a series of differ­
ent cost-optimized scenarios for several points in time in the future,
 S .S . K a m b l e e t a l .
with distinct parameter settings for the design of global production
networks. The objective of the study was to identify a path in the
trade-off between the costs for migrating a network structure into
another one and the total landed costs of the regarded series of
future network scenarios. The implementation of lean manufac­
turing in smart manufacturing environments is thought to reduce
costs. Sanders et al. (2016) identify the implementation of Indus­
try 4.0 as a cost-intensive operation, considering the investment
required and the perceived benefits. The authors feel that lean can
be implemented in a smart manufacturing environment, making
the organizations lean and smart.
4.5.2. Process safety and environmental control
There have been continuous efforts to improve the standard
of living in society. The developments in industries are increas­
ing at continuously faster rates to provide a high quality of life for
their members. However, the current developments in the produc­
tion environment are not sustainable (Waibel et al., 2017). Most of
the developments happening in the manufacturing environment
are focused on addressing climate change and the depletion of
energy sources (Schuh et al., 2014a, 2014b). Industry 4.0, steered
with intelligent devices and a smart production system, has the
potential to reduce production waste, overproduction, movement
of goods, and energy consumption. Further, the use of additive man­
ufacturing, which works on the pull principle, makes it possible to
provide customized products with reduced lead times, reducing the
inventory levels of raw materials and utilizing the capacity more
efficiently (Wang et al., 2016a, 2016b, 2016c). Manufacturing com­
panies are connected in smart production networks with shared
resources, like raw materials, power plants, and workforce. Compa­
nies in this network can plan resource-intensive tasks when there
is less requirement for the shared resource at the other location.
For example, the companies may schedule their energy-intensive
tasks when there is an oversupply of power energy or planned
maintenance breaks at the other manufacturing plants. However,
the smart production system, which is based on massive data cen­
ters, sensor devices, and other smart equipment, will have high
energy and resource requirements to operate the system, which
will impact the environment negatively (Wang et al., 2015a, 2015b;
Waibel et al., 2017). Disposal of industrial waste generated in the
form waste water, waste gas, waste residue, and hazardous chemi­
In d u s tr y 4 .0
T e c h n o lo g ie s
I n t e r n e t o f T h in g s
B ig D a ta A n a ly tic s
C lo u d C o m p u tin g
S im ulation & P rototype
3 D P r in tin g
A u g m e n te d R e a lity
R o b o tic S y s te m s
C y b e r S e c u r ity
In te ro p e ra b ility
D e c e n tra liz a tio n
S U S TA IN A B LE IN D U S T R Y 4 .0 E N V IR O N M E N T
/ P ro c e s s S a fe ty a n d E n v ir o n m e n t a l P r o te c tio n U 7 (2 0 1 8 ) 4 0 8 -4 2 5 419
cals is a concern for most of the processing companies. Developing
countries are facing difficulty in supervising hazardous chemicals,
resulting in frequent accidents. There is a need to urgently address
this issue by developing technologies in Industry 4.0, using new
tools and techniques such as sensing, detection, control, and trac­
ing analysis (Qain et al., 2017). Oesterreich and Teuteberg (2016),
in their systematic review of the literature on understanding the
implications of digitization and automation in the context of Indus­
try 4.0, identify employee safety and health hazards as a critical
issue in the construction industry. Technologies recommended for
improving safety in hazardous work areas include safety training
(Guo et al., 2016 in Oesterreich and Teuteberg, 2016), risk maps,
and wearable technologies like smart glasses and helmets, to be
used with mobile devices or wearable computing. Stock and Seliger
(2016) suggest three sustainable approaches for coping with the
social challenge in Industry 4.0: i) increasing the training effi­
ciency of workers by combining new ICT technologies, ii) increasing
intrinsic motivation and fostering creativity to support decentral­
ized decision making, and iii) increasing extrinsic motivation by
implementing individual incentive schemes based on performance
feedback mechanisms within the product lifecycle.
5. Proposed Sustainable Industry 4.0 Framework
Based on the review of the literature we propose a sustainable
industry 4.0 framework comprising of three main components viz.,
industry 4.0 technologies, process integration and sustainable out­
comes (see Fig. 15). The review of the literature identified that
the rapid industrialization has contributed to lower standards of
health and safety of the workforce and degradation in the environ­
ment (Luthra and Mangla, 2018; Guo et al., 2013; Oesterreich and
Teuteberg, 2016). Industry 4.0 is expected to improve the deteri­
orating economic, environmental and social values using modern
Industry 4.0 technologies and process integration (Stock and Seli-
gar, 2016). The proposed framework takes into consideration that
Industry 4.0 facilitates the integration of the business processes
and activities through the cyber-physical interaction of connected
elements and process innovations making the manufacturing sys­
tem more flexible, economical and environmentally friendly (Wang
et al., 2016a, 2016b, 2016c; Duarte and Cruz-Machado, 2017). The
components of the sustainable Industry 4.0 framework are dis­
cussed below.
P ro c e s s S u s ta in a b le
In te g r a t io n O u tc o m e s
H um an- E c o n o m ic
M a c h in e
C o lla b o r a tio n
P ro ce ss
A u t o m a t io n a n d
S a fe ty
S h o p f lo o r -
E q u ip m e n t E n v ir o n m e n ta l
In te g r a tio n P r o te c tio n
V ir tu a liz a tio n R e a l-tim e c a p a b ility
M o d u la r ity S e rvice O rie n ta tio n
jn d u s t r y 4 .0 P r in c ip le s
Fig. 15. Sustainable Industry 4.0 Framework.
420 S.S. Kamble eta/. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 408-425
5.1. Industry 4.0 technologies
The review identifies various industry 4.0 technologies that
are used to assist sustainable manufacturing decisions. The survey
identifies big data technologies that include virtual reality, robotic
systems, cloud computing, internet of things, simulation and pro­
totyping, and 3D printing as the emerging technologies of Industry
4.0. The industry 4.0 technologies connect the machines, tools,
devices, components, products and logistics equipm ent’s ensu­
ing real-time communications between themselves (Wang et al„
2016a, 2016b, 2016c; Bahrin et al„ 2016) in such a way that system
develops the potential to generate and feed information, adding
value to the manufacturing process. The interconnection is made
possible with a combination of software, sensor, processor, and
communication technologies (Bahrin et al., 2016). The proposed
framework acknowledges the role of Industry 4.0 technologies
in the accomplishment of process integration. Cyber-security is
shown as one of the critical aspects of the framework as secu­
rity and privacy in an industry 4.0 environment is very critical
(Wittenberg, 2016; Wolf and Serpanos, 2017). The data breaches
and cyber-attacks through malicious software need to be controlled
to improve the trustworthiness and acceptability of the system (Yu
et al., 2017).
5.2. Process integration
The use of industry 4.0 technologies supports a high level of
process integration. The process integration is an outcome of CPS
and human-equipment interface achieved through the deploy­
ment of industry 4.0 technologies. The CPS are the most significant
advances in these disruptive developments (Monostori et al, 2016;
Thramboulidis and Christoulakis, 2016). The process integration
allows for the creation of smart products and processes (Schmidt
et al., 2015) that helps to cater the rapidly changing market require­
ments in the form of increased functionalities and more complexity
(Persson, 2016). The following principles of Industry 4.0 are a con­
sequence of the successful deployment of industry 4.0 technologies
and process integrations (Carvalho et al., 2018).
5.2.1. Interoperability
Interoperability is defined as the ability to perform the same
function even on exchanging the machines and equipment, even
from different manufacturers. Interoperability provides a trusted
environment extending multiple networks in a manufacturing sys­
tem (Qinetal., 2016).
5.2.2. Decentralization
Decentralization is defined as the ability of companies, oper­
ations staff, and even the machines to make decisions instead
of depending on the centralized computing system of decision­
making body. This principle helps to achieve quick decision making
and offers more flexibility. Decentralization acts as a perfect orga­
nizational setup to handle the growing needs of highly customized
products.
5.2.3. Virtualization
Virtualization means creating a virtual copy of the physical
world. The virtualization is used for the process monitoring and
machine-to-machine communication. These simulation-based vir­
tual models are linked to the sensor data. The virtualization assists
in notifying the failures of the system to the human being and
advances the safety provisions.
5.2.4. Real-time capability
Big data technologies take the real-time capability of the orga­
nizations higher. The big data collected from the plants about the
machines, equipment’s, products, the customer’s data collected
through different sources like social media, direct selling points
and the data received from suppliers when analyzed in real-time
changes the way decisions are made and its impact on the prof­
itability of the industry 4.0 based organizations.
5.2.5. Modularity
Modularity refers to the modular production systems that can
be adapted by replacing and expanding the individual modules in
a much more comfortable way. System modularity offers adjust­
ments in capacity in situations of seasonal fluctuations or changes
in product’s production needs. Modularity also facilitates simu­
lating various manufacturing processes, such as product design,
production planning, production and production engineering and
services as individual processes and closely interconnecting them
later offering interchangeability (Qin et al., 2016).
5.2.6. Service orientation
The process integration brings in the sense of service orientation
as all the entities in the production system are interconnected facili­
tating the creation of the product-service system. The flexibility and
agility achieved as an outcome of the service orientation enable
the organizations to respond to market changes more quickly.
This allows the various stakeholders of the organizations to come
together and partner to co-create value for the consumers.
5.3. Sustainable outcome
5.3.1. Environmental protection
It is found from the literature review that the Industry 4.0 allows
for efficient resource allocation that includes water, energy, raw
material and other products based on real-time data collected from
the production processes and other stakeholders using the modern
industry 4.0 technologies resulting in sustainable green practices
(Stock and Seliger, 2016). The framework suggests that the Industry
4.0 technologies have the full potential to make the existing manu­
facturing processes environmentally sustainable (De Sousa Jabbour
et al., 2018).
5.3.2. Process automation and safety
Industry 4.0 supports stabilized manufacturing processes that
lead to positive digital management of processes and continuous
throughput (Chromjakova, 2017). The stability offered through the
digital management of the operations provides improved working
conditions and a safe manufacturing environment to the workmen.
The literature acknowledges that the importance of human factor is
minimizing with complete system automation and use of advanced
technologies (Trstenjak and Cosic, 2017). Many safety-related tasks
are performed at the organizational level to prevent safety hazards
and operational risks in the traditional industries (Reniers, 2017).
The framework proposes that the new industry 4.0 environment
will lead to a new revolution in safety management practices with
“out of the box” thinking.
5.3.3. Economic sustainability
With the Industry 4.0 revolution gaining momentum it is
believed that most of the companies have planned their transfor­
mation to digital supply chains in support of Industry 4.0. Presently
there is not much literature available on achieving economic sus­
tainability through Industry 4.0. However, the researchers are
optimistic that the Industry 4.0 will undoubtedly lead to reduced
costs of manufacturing (Ramadan et al., 2017), the improved
economic performance of manufacturing processes and process
stability (Lao et al., 2015) and cost optimized global produc­
tion networks (Schuh et al., 2014a). Our framework proposes
 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 408-425
that the Industry 4.0 technologies clubbed with process integra­
tion will bring many economic benefits to the organizations. It is
expected that the Industry 4.0 will significantly reduce the total
cost of ownership of the production capital equipment by way
of improved predictive maintenance, reduced product develop­
ment costs, improved purchasing decisions, and offering highly
customized on-demand manufacturing. The on-demand manufac­
turing is a consolidation of just-in-time and lean manufacturing
principles that streamlines the processes and waste reduction.
6. Future research perspectives
6.1. Establishing relationships between the influencing factors for
implementation
Most of the reviewed studies have focused on developing the­
ories enumerating the benefits and limitations of Industry 4.0.
However, the current research trend does not focus on investi­
gating the relationships between the key influencing factors for
implementation of Industry 4.0. Further studies on successful
implementation of Industry 4.0 in different industry environ­
ments to enhance the understanding of these factors are required.
This will enhance understanding so that a guideline for success­
ful implementation, concerning the specific characteristics and
requirements of the industry, can be provided for companies to con­
sider before the implementation of new technologies (Oesterreich
and Teuteberg, 2016). Multi-criteria decision-making techniques
like interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and analytical hierar­
chical process (AHP) may be used to develop these relationships.
6.2. Integration of lean manufacturing with Industry 4.0
Lean production has played a vital role in the mass production
systems focused on improved product quality with the aim of satis­
fying customers. Industry 4.0 and lean production approaches can
support each other (Mrugalska and Wyrwicka, 2017). The reviews
highlight various Industry 4.0 technologies that increase the com­
puting power of the organization’s improvements, or adaptations of
the evolution of these new technologies that need to be analyzed
regarding their influence on lean manufacturing (Mrugalska and
Wyrwicka, 2017). Studies on the practical applications of imple­
menting lean manufacturing in smart production systems must
be undertaken. These studies may focus on creating conceptual
frameworks by integrating lean principles in fully functional CPSs
(Sanders et al., 2016).
6.3. Impact of big data on Industry 4.0
Deployment of BDA and the IoT will be a significant contrib­
utor in guiding organizational performance (Lee et al., 2017b;
Wittenberg, 2016). BDA and the IoT are identified as the capabili­
ties that will help companies anticipate and shape future customer
demands, bringing greater efficiencies in the distribution of final
goods (Strange). It is learned from the review that the success of
Industry 4.0 largely depends on how well the physical systems
communicate between themselves with a continuous exchange
of information. The collected information as an outcome of such
automation is used for the customer-oriented adaptation of prod­
ucts and services that will increase value added for organizations
and customers (Yu et al., 2017). Further research studies are
required on developing new BDA techniques that can analyze the
voluminous data that is generated with the highest speed in real
time. Techniques such as simulation, data analytics, and optimiza­
tion may be integrated to derive better understanding. Research
on efficiently integrating interfaces between and among analysis
models and data sources, such as the shop floor and databases,
421
will need to be conducted. Research work will also be needed to
efficiently combine real-time assessment methods with dynamic
optimization, which is presently missing in the context of Industry
4.0. Machine learning algorithms for data mining associated with
cloud services is also a direction for future research.
6.4. Impact of changing technologies on Industry 4.0 interactions
Human-machine and machine-equipment interactions will
change with the new technologies being used. As Industry 4.0
involves information collection, spatial modeling, searching, dis­
play, and interaction between the different layers, communication
technologies and equipment like sensors, RFID, and robots will have
a significant role to play. Future studies on how to make large-scale
use of RFID and sensors in the smart factory will be required. These
studies should pay more attention to the function of the reading and
writing of RFID chips, with the objective of making the technology
portable and handheld. The benefits of flexible control, collision
detection, and human-machine collaboration through industrial
robots must be validated for its general applicability across various
industries (Pei et al., 2017). Even though the experimentations on
the use of AR technology were conducted in R&D labs more than
two decades ago, there are very few AR-based real-world appli­
cations, because of technological limitations (Paelke, 2014). Future
research on how AR may be used to support workers in the increas­
ingly flexible and data-rich environment of future smart factories
will be required to understand the impact of an AR interface on the
user experience.
The future direction for research on CPSs will be studies on how
to implement CPSs and how to improve CPSs to become more reli­
able, stable, and capable (Lu and Cecil, 2016). The cyber-physical
machine systems may either resist cyberattacks or be forced to
coexist with the malicious software and then reach an unstable
equilibrium (Yu et al., 2017). There are possibilities of bifurcations
and chaotic states occurring that may render a CPMS unstable and
destroy it. Wittenberg (2016) reports that loss of sensitive informa­
tion can result in significant business losses, causing reputational
damage (Wittenberg, 2016). Future research should address the
security issues concerning IoT data-sharing and propose techno­
logical solutions to manage sensitive information in the smart
manufacturing environment.
6.5. Impact of Industry 4.0 on supply chains
Industry 4.0 makes rich data available from different supply
chain domains in real time, which can be used for efficient supply
chain design decisions. The information collected from products,
logistics operations, and manufacturing machines becomes read­
ily available, integrating the physical and digital worlds. This is
combined with independent-acting products, production cells, and
transport (Stock and Seliger, 2016). This data will help improve
products and services compared to the present alternatives. The
smart component of Industry 4.0 makes products “uniquely iden­
tifiable” and “makes the increasing complexity of manufacturing
processes manageable” (Johannes and Strandhagen, 2017). There is
a need to study how smart factories and smart products will impact
supply chain decisions. Future studies on the impact of smart man­
ufacturing on supply chain networks, reverse logistics, production
planning, and control of product recycling and remanufacturing are
required.
6.6. Impact of Industry 4.0 on changing customers
Industry 4.0 provides companies a platform to have a con­
tinuous link with their customers. It is now possible to collect
real-time customer data through wearable devices and other
422 S.S. Kamble e t al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 408-425
communication technologies. This provides an opportunity to
provide highly customized products meeting the customer’s
requirements, industry 4.0 will challenge the role of the customer,
with him being an active participant in the value creation process
or even becoming a co-producer. In such a situation, it will be diffi­
cult for companies to meet their objectives, with customers trying
to optimize their gains. This may give rise to conflicts that need to
be addressed. For example, companies may have sustainable prac­
tices as one of their values, but the customer may assign the least
importance to this criterion. Future research studies should focus
on addressing the impact of smart products and factories on manag­
ing customer expectations. Studies are focusing on how companies
can create awareness of their value systems and objectives through
Industry 4.0 and how they will manage the new customer channels
and relationships, resolving possible conflicts. Research on how
Industry 4.0 will change the competition between non-sustainable
and sustainable products will be required.
6.7. Sustainable Industry 4.0
The issue of sustainability has received very little attention
in the Industry 4.0 literature, with only six papers discussing it.
Industry 4.0 is believed to reduce operating costs through end-
to-end digital integration. Flowever, it must be weighed against
the high cost of implementation. There are no papers that inves­
tigate weighing these costs against the benefits. More research
in this direction is required to evaluate the various Industry 4.0
solutions that support customer services, supply chain optimiza­
tion, and the facilitation of sustainable practices of remanufacturing
and recycling. Future research studies in the field of environmen­
tal sustainability should address the issues of climate change and
depletion of energy sources. Industry 4.0, steered with intelligent
devices and smart production systems, has the potential to reduce
production waste, overproduction, movement of goods, and energy
consumption. Flowever, more studies will be required in the future
to demonstrate how waste may be reduced. Future studies should
focus on developing frameworks for integrating smart production
networks so that they benefit by sharing resources like raw mate­
rials, power plants, and workforce. Furthermore, there is a need
to urgently address the issue of frequent accidents involving haz­
ardous chemicals by developing technologies in Industry 4.0, using
new tools and techniques such as sensing, detection, control, and
tracing analysis.
7. Conclusions, contributions and limitations
7.1. Conclusions
This work is aimed at investigating the current state of research
on the topic of Industry 4.0 by performing an SLR on selected
publications through an appropriate review methodology. Eight-
five (85) articles were thoroughly analyzed for this purpose. The
result of this SLR indicates that Industry 4.0 is an emerging area
with an increase in the number of publications over the past
few years. Firstly, the SLR was focused on what type of research
methods were used in the studies analyzed. The use of empiri­
cal research approaches to demonstrate and validate the designed
systems, processes, and technologies was frequently observed.
Within the empirical research, a significant number of studies
used a case study methodology. The Industry 4.0 research cat­
egories identified from the SLR were contributions to general
concepts and theories on Industry 4.0, technologies in Industry
4.0, machine-equipment interactions, human-machine interac­
tions, and sustainability. The majority of the studies focused on
managing the technologies of Industry 4.0, followed by general
discussions on Industry 4.0 concepts and theories. Case study and
simulation approaches were mainly used for studies on technolo­
gies. However, more studies on the validation of suggested theories
and concepts using empirical research approaches like simula­
tions, prototypes, experimentation, and case studies are required
for increasing the speed of Industry 4.0 adoption in the industries. A
lack of studies on sustainability, human-machine interfacing, and
machine-equipment interactions indicates an open research area
that should be explored by future studies.
7.2. Implications fo r process safety and environm ental protection
7.2.1. Theoretical contribution
The literature reveals that previous studies on Industry 4.0 have
majorly focused on the basic concepts of Industry 4.0 and case
studies demonstrating the benefits of Industry 4.0. The scarcity of
literature review on Industry 4.0 was identified in the literature,
and hence this study makes a significant theoretical contribution
to the literature in the form of a detailed SLR on the developments
in the field of Industry 4.0. We propose a sustainable Industry 4.0
framework based on the findings of the literature with Industry 4.0
technologies, process integration and sustainable outcomes as the
critical components of this framework. The future research studies
may investigate the influence of various Industry 4.0 technologies
on the level of process integration that is achieved by the orga­
nizations. This will help to identify the important technologies
that help to achieve process integration in the different indus­
trial setups. Further, this study identifies environmental protection,
process automation and safety, and economic sustainability as the
sustainable outcomes of Industry 4.0. The researchers may investi­
gate to what extent the organizations can achieve these sustainable
outcomes and examine the influence of process integration in
achieving these outcomes. The findings of the SLR in the form of a
proposed framework is one of the initial efforts to contribute to the
theory of Industry 4.0 and the relationships between technologies,
process integration levels, and sustainable outcomes. It proposes
that an Industry 4.0 environment leads to unlocking the benefits
of sustainability. The framework will act as a ready reckoner for
the practitioners and policymakers in the field of process safety
and environmental protection while developing the guidelines for
implementation of Industry 4.0 for sustainable development.
The proposed framework may be used in the further studies
to conduct exploratory studies for developing the measurement
constructs for Industry 4.0 technologies, process integration, and
sustainable outcomes. Empirical studies may be conducted for
analyzing the proposed relationships using structural equation
modeling.
7.2.2. Managerial contributions
The findings of the SLR presented in the form of a proposed
framework will guide the practitioners in the field of process safety
and environmental protection. The study identifies the industry 4.0
technologies that are being deployed in the industries for achiev­
ing process integrations leading to a sustainable environment. The
practitioners will acknowledge the role of the modern technologies
such as internet of things, cloud, big data, robotic systems, 3D print­
ing, simulation and prototyping contributing to the evolution of
new sustainable trends in their organizations. The study identifies
that the proposed relationship between the modern technologies
and the process integration results in benefits such as virtualiza­
tion, real-time capability, interoperability, service orientation, and
decentralization. This implies that practitioners can have a bet­
ter industrial control on the processes, increasing the flexibility
and agility of the organizations. The practitioners can make deci­
sions in real time, offer highly customized products in shorter
lead times by efficiently using the available resources and low
 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018)408-425
energy consumption. The framework proposes three sustainable
outcomes viz., economic, environmental protection and process
automation and safety. This implies that the managers should not
get discouraged with the hurdles of adopting Industry 4.0. They
should work hard on overcoming the challenges to achieve a sus­
tainable manufacturing environment.
7.3. Limitations of the study
Selecting the WoS database may be one of the limitations of this
paper, as there might be articles outside of WoS that might be rele­
vant to the scope of the study that have not been considered. Review
studies in the future may include other popular databases, like Sco­
pus. Hence, the results of this research are limited to a selected
number of publications and should be validated by further stud­
ies, e.g., covering other research databases such as Scopus, expert
interviews, or empirical study.
References
Adolph, Lars, et al., 2016. German Standardization Roadmap: Industry 4.0. Version
2. DIN, Berlin.
Alexandre, B„ Salguero, J., Peralta-Alvarez, M.E., Aguayo-Gonzalez, F., Ares, E„ 2017.
Application of Industry 4.0 technologies to the design and manufacturing of
handicraft products. DYNA92 (4), 435-441, http://dx.doi.org/10.6036/8169.
Arunachalam D., Kumar N., Kawalek J.P., 2017, Understanding big data analytics
capabilities in supply chain management: unravelling the issues, challenges and
implications for practice, Transp. Res. Part E xxx (2017) (In press).
Bahrin, M.A.K., Othman, M.F., Azli, N.H.N., Talib, M.F., 2016. Industry 4.0: a review
on industrial automation and robotic. JurnalTeknologi 78 (6-13).
Bogle. l.D.L, 2017. A perspective on sm art process manufacturing research chal­
lenges for process systems engineers. Engineering 3 (2), http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/J.ENG.2017.02.003.
Bastian, Mathieu, Sebastien Heymann, Mathieu Jacomy, 2009. Gephi: an open source
software for exploring and manipulating networks. Icwsm 8,361 -362.
Carvalho, N„ Chaim, 0., Cazarini, E., Gerolamo, M„ 2018. Manufacturing in the fourth
industrial revolution: a positive prospect in sustainable manufacturing. Procedia
Manuf. 21, 671-678.
Chen, T„ Lin, Y.C., 2017. Feasibility evaluation and optimization of a smart manufac­
turing system based on 3D printing: a review. Int.J. lntell. Syst. 32 (4), http://dx.
doi.org/10.1002/int.21866.
Choi, S.S., Jung, K„ Kulvatunyou, B., Morris. K.C., 2016. An analysis of technologies and
standards for designing sm art manufacturing systems. J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand.
Technol. 121, http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/jres.121.021.
Chromjakova, F„ 2017. Process stabilisation-key assumption for implementation of
Industry 4.0 concept in industrial company. J. Syst. Integr. 8 (1), 3.
Davis, J., Edgar, T„ Porter, BernadenJ., Sarli, M., 2012. Smart manufacturing, manu­
facturing intelligence and demand-dynamic performance. Comput. Chem. Eng.
47,145-156, http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2012.06.037.
De Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L., Jabbour, C.J.C., Foropon, C., Godinho Filho, M„ 2018. When
titans m eet-can Industry 4.0 revolutionise the environmentally-sustainable
manufacturing wave? The role of critical success factors. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Change 132,18-25, http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.01.017.
Duarte, S., Cruz-Machado, V., 2017. Exploring linkages between lean and green sup­
ply chain and the industry 4.0. In: International Conference on Management
Science and Engineering Management, Springer, Cham, pp. 1242-1252, July.
Fernandes, l„ Assuncao, E„ 2017. Industry 4.0: training for automation in Europe.
Welding 96 (7), 50-52.
Centner, S., 2016. Industry 4.0: reality, future or just science fiction? How to con­
vince today's management to invest in tomorrow's future! Successful strategies
for Industry 4.0 and manufacturing IT. Chimia 70(9), http://dx.doi.org/10.2533/
chimia.2016.628.
Gephi, 2013. G ephi-M akes Graphs Handy, https://gephi.org.
Brian, Guo, Tak Wing Yiu, Gonzalez, Vicente A.. 2016. Predicting safety behavior in
the construction industry: development and test of an integrative model. Safety
Science 84,1-11.
He, J.F., Jia, G.Y., Han, G.J., Wang, H„ Yang, X., 2017. Locality-aware replacement
algorithm in flash memory to optimize cloud computing for sm art factory of
Industry 4.0. IEEE Access 5, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2740327.
Stefan Heck, SMatt Rogers, Paul Carroll, 2014. Resource revolution: how to capture
the biggest business opportunity in a century. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Ivanov, D„ Dolgui, A., Sokolov, B„ Werner, F„ Ivanova, M„ 2016. A dynamic model
and an algorithm for short-term supply chain scheduling in the sm art factory
Industry 4.0. Int.J. Prod. Res. 54 (2), http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2014.
999958.
Johannes, Cornelis de Man, Strandhagen, Jan Ola, 2017. Research into the potential
revenue models for Industry 4.0 supported sustainable products. Procedia C1RP
63,721-726.
423
Kamigaki, T„ 2017. Object-oriented RFID with IoT: a design concept of informa­
tion systems in manufacturing. Electronics 6 (1), http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
electronics6010014.
Karakose, M„ Yetis, H„ 2017. A cyberphysical system based mass-customization
approach with integration of Industry 4.0 and sm art city. Wireless Commun.
Mobile Comput. 2017,1 -9, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/1058081.
Kersten, T„ 2016. Industry 4.0: self-sufficient production prevents standstill with
sm art processes in a productive and sustainable future - the sm art meat factory.
FLEISCHWIRTSCHAFT 96 (1).
Kibira, D„ Morris, K.C., Kumaraguru, S., 2016. Methods and tools for performance
assurance of sm art manufacturing systems. J. Res. Natl. Inst. Standards Technol.
121, http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/jres.121.013.
Kim, D.B., Denno, P.O., Jones, A.T., 2016. A model-based approach to refine process
param eters in sm art manufacturing. Concurrent Eng.-Res. Appl. 23 (4), http://
dx.doi.org/10.1177/1063293X15591038.
Lamba, K„ Singh, S.P., 2017. Big data in operations and supply chain manage­
ment: current trends and future perspectives. Prod. Plann. Control 28 (11-12),
877-890, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1336787.
Lao, L.F., Ellis, M„ Christofides, P.D., 2014. Smart manufacturing: handling preventive
actuator maintenance and economics using model predictive control. AIChE J.
60 (6), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aic.14427.
Lao, L.F., Ellis, M„ Durand, H„ Christofides, P.D., 2015. Real-time preventive sen­
sor maintenance using robust moving horizon estimation and economic model
predictive control. AIChE J. 61 (10), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aic.14960.
Lee, H.W., Liu, C.H., 2016. High precision optical sensors for real-time on-line mea­
surem ent of straightness and angular errors for sm art manufacturing. Smart Sci.
4(3), http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23080477.2016.1207407.
Lee, Ju Yeon, Yoon.Joo Seong, Kim, Bo-Hyun, 2017a. A big data analytics platform
for sm art factories in small and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises: an
empirical case study of a die casting factory. Int.J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. 18 (10),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl2541-017-0161-x.
Lee, M.X., Lee, Y.C., Chou, C.J., 2017b. Essential implications of the digital transfor­
mation in industry 4.0. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 76 (8).
Li, D„ Tang, H„ Wang, S.Y., Liu, C.L, 2017. A big data enabled load-balancing control
for sm art manufacturing of Industry 4.0. Cluster Comput. J. Netw. Softw. Tools
Appl. 20(2), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl0586-017-0852-l.
Lin, C.C., Deng, D.J., Chen, Z.Y., Chen, K.C., 2016. Key design of driving Industry
4.0: joint energy-efficient deployment and scheduling in group-based industrial
wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 54 (10).
Liu, Y.K., Xu, X., 2017. Industry 4.0 and cloud manufacturing: a comparative analysis.
J. Manuf. Sci. Eng.-Trans. ASME Cyber-Phys. Syst. Of-the-art Big Data Chall. 139
(3), http://dx.doi.Org/10.1115/l.4034667.
Lobo, F.A., 2016. Industry 4.0: what does it mean to the semiconductor industry?
Solid State Technol. 59 (8).
Lotzmann, T„ Wenzel, F., Karsunke, U„ Kozak, K„ 2017. For Industry 4.0, visualization
and machine learning can be combined to enhance laser processing. Laser Focus
World 53(1).
Lu, Y.J., Cecil, J., 2016. An IoT (IoT)-based collaborative framework for advanced
manufacturing. Int.J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 84 (5-8), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
sOOl 70-015-7772-0.
Luthra, Sunil, Mangla, Sachin Kumar, 2018. Evaluating challenges to Industry 4.0
initiatives for supply chain sustainability in emerging economies. Process Saf.
Environ. Prot. 117,168-179, http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/j.psep.2018.04.018.
Marques, M„ Agostinho, C., Zacharewicz. G„ Jardim-Goncaives, R„ 2017. Decentral­
ized decision support for intelligent manufacturing in Industry 4.0. J. Ambient
lntell. Smart Environ. 9 (3), http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/AIS-170436.
Menasce, D.A., Krishnamoorthy, M„ Brodsky, A., 2015. Autonomic sm art manufac­
turing./. Decis. Syst. 24(2), http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2015.1046714.
Mishra, D„ Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T„ Childe, S.J., 2016. Big data and supply
chain management: a review and bibliometric analysis. Ann. Oper. Res., 1-24.
Monostori, L„ Kadar, B.. Bauernhansl, T., Kondoh, S., Kumara. S., Reinhart, G., Sauer,
0., Schuh, G„ Sihn, W„ Ueda, K„ 2016. Cyber-physical systems in manufacturing.
CIRP Ann. 65 (2), 621-641.
Monostori, L„ 2014. Cyber-physical production systems: roots, expectations and
R&D challenges. Procedia CIRP 17, 9-13.
Moreno, A., Velez, G„ Ardanza, A., Barandiaran, I., de Infante, A.R., Chopitea, R., 2017.
Virtualisation process of a sheet metal punching machine within the Industry
4.0 vision. Int.J. Interact. Des. Manuf.-IJIDEM 11 (2), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
S12008-016-0319-2.
Mosterman, P.J., Zander, J., 2016. Industry 4.0 as a cyber-physical system study.
Softw. Syst. Model. 15(1), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl0270-015-0493-x.
Moyne, J., Iskandar, J., 2017. Big data analytics for sm art manufacturing: case studies
in semiconductor manufacturing. PROCESSES 5 (3), http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/
pr5030039.
Mueller, E., Chen, X.L, Riedel, R„ 2017. Challenges and requirem ents for the appli­
cation of industry 4.0: a special insight with the usage of cyber-physical system.
Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 30 (5), http://dx.doi.Org/l0.1007/sl0033-017-0164-7,9.
Nguyen, T„ Zhou, L„ Spiegler, V., Ieromonachou, P., Lin, Y„ 2017. Big data analytics in
supply chain management: a state-of-the-art literature review. Comput. Oper.
Res., 1-11.
Oesterreich, T.D., Teuteberg, F., 2016. Understanding the implications of digitisation
and automation in the context of Industry 4.0: a triangulation approach and
elements of a research agenda for the construction industry. Comput. Ind. 83,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2016.09.006.
424 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 408-425
Paelke, V., 2014. Augmented reality in the sm art factory supporting workers in an
industry 4.0 environment. IEEE- 2014 IEEE Emerging Technology and Factory
Automation (ETFA).
Papazoglou, M.P., van den Heuvel, W.J., Mascolo, J.E., 2015. A reference architecture
and knowledge-based structures for sm art manufacturing networks. IEEE Softw.
32(3).
Park, H.S., Tran, N.H., 2015. Development of a cloud based sm art manufacturing
system. J. Adv. Mech. Des. Syst. Manuf. 9 (3).
Parlanti, R„ 2017. Smart Shopfloors and Connected Platformes in Industry 4.0| Elec­
tronics World., pp. 123.
Pei, F.Q., Tong, Y.F., He, F., Li, D.B., 2017. Research on design of the sm art factory for
forging enterprise in the Industry 4.0 environment. Mechanika 23 (1), http://dx.
doi.org/10.5755/j01.mech.23.1.13662.
Persson, J.-G., 2016. Current trends in product development. Procedia CIRP 50,
378-383, http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.05.088.
Pfeiffer, S., 2016. Robots, industry 4.0 and humans, or why assembly work is more
than routine work. Societies 6 (2), http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/soc60200l6.
Pfliegl, R„ Keller, H., 2015. Mobility Governance-digitisation of transport in the
context of Industry 4.0 and society’s responsibility for sustainable mobility. Elek-
trotechnikUnd lnformationstechnik 132(7), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00502-
015-0345-y.
Posada Jorge, Carlos Toro, Inigo Barandiaran, David Oyarzun, Didier Strieker, Raffaele
de Amicis, Eduardo Pinto, B„ Peter Eisert, Jurgen Dollner, Ivan Vallarino, 2015.
Visual computing as a key enabling technology for industrie 4 .0 and industrial
internet. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 35 (no. 2), 26-40.
Prause, G„ Atari, S., 2017. On sustainable production networks for Industry 4.0.
Entrepreneurship Sustain. Issues 4 (4), http://dx.doi.Org/10.9770/jesi.2017.4.
4(2).
Preuveneers, D„ llie-Zudor, E„ 2017. The intelligent industry of the future: a survey
on emerging trends, research challenges and opportunities in Industry 4.0. J.
Ambient Intell. Smart Environ. 9 (3), http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/AIS-170432.
din, J., Liu, Y„ Grosvenor, R„ 2016. A categorical framework of manufacturing for
industry 4.0 and beyond. Procedia CIRP 52,173-178.
Qu, T„ Lei, S.P., Wang, Z.Z., Nie, D.X., Chen, X., Huang, G.Q., 2016. IoT-based real-time
production logistics synchronization system under sm art cloud manufactur­
ing. Int.J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 84(1-4), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-
7220-1.
Qian, F„ Zhong, W.M., Du, W.L., 2017. Fundamental theories and key technologies
for sm art and optimal manufacturing in the process industry. Engineering 3 (2),
154-160, http://dx.doi.Org/l 0.1016/J.ENG.2017,02.011.
duintas, J., Menezes, P., Dias, J., 2017. Information model and architecture spec­
ification for context awareness interaction decision support in cyber-physical
human-machine systems. lEEETrans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 47 (3), http: //dx.doi.org/
10.1109/THMS.2016.2634923.
Ramadan, M., Al-Maimani, H„ Noche, B„ 2017. RFID-enabled sm art real-time man­
ufacturing cost tracking system. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 89 (1 -4), http://dx.
doi.org/10.1007/S00170-016-9131 -1.
Ramos-Rodriguez, Antonio-Rafael, Jose Ruiz-Navarro, 2004. Changes in the intel­
lectual structure of strategic management research: A bibliometric study of the
Strategic Management Journal, 1980-2000. Strategic Management Journal 25
(no.10), 981-1004.
Reis, M.S., Gins, G„ 2017. Industrial process monitoring in the big Data/Industry 4.0
era: from detection to diagnosis, to prognosis. Processes 5 (3), http://dx.doi.org/
10.3390/pr5030035.
Reniers, C., 2017. On the future of safety in the manufacturing industry. Procedia
Manuf. 13,1292-1296.
Rubmann, M., Lorenz, M„ Gerbert, P„ Waldner, M„ Justus, J., Engel, P., Harnisch, M„
2015. Industry 4.0: The Future of Productivity and Growth in Manufacturing
Industries. The Boston Consulting Group, Boston, MA (Accessed 28 August 2016)
https://www.bcgperspectives.com/content/articles/engineered.products.
project-business_industry_40_future.productivity_growth_manufacturing_
industries/.
Roblek, V„ Mesko, M„ Krapez, A., 2016. A complex view of Industry 4.0. Sage Open
6 (2), http://dx.doi.Org/l 0.1177/2158244016653987.
Sackey, S.M., Bester, A., Adams, D„ 2017. Industry 4.0 learning factory didactic design
parameters for industrial engineering education in South Africa. S. Afr.J. Ind. Eng.
28 (1), http://dx.doi.org/10.7166/28-l-1584.
Sanders, A., Elangeswaran, C., Wulfsberg, J., 2016. Industry 4.0 implies lean man­
ufacturing: research activities in industry 4.0 function as enablers for lean
manufacturing.). Ind. Eng. Manage.-JIEM 9 (3), http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.
1940.
Saunders, M„ Lewis, P„ Thornhill, A., 2016. Research Methods for Business Students.
Pearson Education Limited, Pearson Education UK, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/
CB09781107415324.004.
Schlechtendahl, J., Keinert, M., Kretschmer, F„ Lechler, A., Verl, A., 2015. Making
existing production systems Industry 4.0-ready Holistic approach to the integra­
tion of existing production systems in Industry 4.0 environments. Prod. Eng.-Res.
Dev. 9(1), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sl 1740-014-0586-3.
Schmidt, R„ Mohring, M„ Harting, R.-C., Reichstein, C, Neumaier, P„ Jozinovic, P„
2015. Industry 4.0 - potentials for creating sm art products: empirical research
results. In: Abramowicz, W. (Ed.), Business Information Systems, 2015. Springer
International Publishing, pp. 16-27.
Schuh, G„ Potente.T., Varandani, R„ Schmitz, T., 2014a. Global footprint design based
on genetic algorithms - an Industry 4.0 perspective. CIRP Ann.-Manuf. Technol.
63 (1), http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.121.
Schuh, G„ Potente, T„ Wesch-Potente, C„ Weber, A.R., Prote.J.P., 2014b. Collaboration
Mechanisms to Increase Productivity in the Context of Industrie 4.0. Elsevier,
Germany.
Shafiq, S.I., Sanin, C„ Toro, C„ Szczerbicki, E., 2015. Virtual engineering object (VEO):
toward experience-based design and manufacturing for industry 4.0. Cybern.
Syst. 46 (1-2), http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01969722.2015.1007734.
Shafiq, S.I., Sanin, C„ Szczerbicki, E„ Toro, C., 2016. Virtual engineering factory: cre­
ating experience base for industry 4.0. Cybern. Syst. 47 (1-2), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/01969722.2016.1128762.
Shamim, S., Cang, S„ Yu, H.N.A., Li, Y„ 2017. Examining the feasibilities of Industry
4.0 for the hospitality sector with the lens of management practice. Energies 10
(4), http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/enl0040499.
Sommer, L., 2015. Industrial revolution - Industry 4.0: are german manufacturing
SMEs the first victims of this revolution? J. Ind. Eng. Manage.-JIEM 8 (5), http://
dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem. 1470.
Stock, T., Seliger, G., 2016. Opportunities of sustainable manufacturing in Industry
4.0. Procedia CIRP 40, 536-541.
Strange, R., Zucchella, A., 2017. Industry 4.0 global value chains and international
business. Multinatl. Bus. Rev. 25 (3), http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MBR-05-2017-
0028.
Tao, F„ Zuo, Y„ Xu, LD„ Zhang, L„ 2014. IoT-based intelligent perception and access
of manufacturing resource toward cloud manufacturing. lEEETrans. Ind. Inf. 10
(2), http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TII.2014.2306397.
Theorin, A., Bengtsson, K.. Provost, J., Lieder, M.,Johnsson, C„ Lundholm.T., Lennart-
son, B„ 2017. An event-driven manufacturing information system architecture
for Industry 4.0. Int.J. Prod. Res. 55 (5), http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.
2016.1201604.
Thramboulidis, K„ Christoulakis, F., 2016. UML41oT-A UML-based approach to
exploit loT in cyber-physical manufacturing systems. Comput. Ind. 82, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2016.05.010.
Tranfield, D„ Denyer, D., Smart, P., 2003. Towards a methodology for developing
evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br.
J. Manage. 14(3), 207-222, http://dx.doi.Org/10.l 111 /1467-8551.00375.
Trstenjak, M., Cosic, P., 2017. Industry 4.0 readiness factor calculation-problem
structuring. International Conference Management of Technology-Step to Sus­
tainable Production (MOTSP 2017), June.
Uhlemann, Uhlemann, Thomas H-J., Christian Lehmann, Rolf Steinhilper, 2017. The
digital twin: realizing the cyber-physical production system for industry 4. 0.
Procedia CIRP 61,335-340.
Waibel, M.W., Steenkamp, M.W., Moloko, L.P., Oosthuizen, G.A., 2017. Investigating
the effects of Smart Production Systems on sustainability elements. Procedia
Manuf. 8,731-737.
Wamba, S.F., Akter, S., Edwards, A., Chopin, G., Gnanzou, D„ 2015. How 'big data'
can make big impact: findings from a systematic review and a longitudinal case
study. Int.J. Prod. Econ. 165, 234-246.
Wan.J.F., Yi, M.L, Li, D„ Zhang, C.H., Wang, S.Y., Zhou, K.L, 2016. Mobile services for
customization manufacturing systems: an example of Industry 4.0. IEEE Access
4, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2631152.
Wang, L., Thorngren, M„ Onori, M„ 2015a. Current status and advancement of cyber­
physical systems in manufacturing.). Manuf. Syst. 37 (Pt. 2), 517-527.
Wang, S„ Wan, J.D., Zhang, C„ 2015b. Implementing smart factory of Industrie 4.0:
an outlook. Int.J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2016, p. 10.
Wang, S.Y., Wan.J.F., Zhang, D.Q., Li, D„ Zhang, C.H., 2016a.Towards smart factory for
Industry 4.0: a self-organized multi-agent system with big data based feedback
and coordination. Comput. Netw. 101, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/jxomnet.2015.
12.017.
Wang, W.S., Zhu, X.X., Wang, LY., Qiu, Q„ Cao, Q.X., 2016b. Ubiquitous robotic tech­
nology for smart manufacturing system. In: Computational Intelligence and
Neuroscience.
Wang, S., Wan, J., Li, D„ Zhang, C., 2016c. Implementing sm art factory of industrie 4.
0: an outlook. Int.J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 12 (1), 3159805.
Wang, C., Jiang, P.Y.. Ding, K„ 2017. A hybrid-data-on-tag-enabled decentralized
control system for flexible sm art workpiece manufacturing shop floors. Proc.
Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C-J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 231 (4), http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0954406215620452.
Witkowski Krzysztof, 2017. Internet of things, big data, industry 4. 0?innovative
solutions in logistics and supply chains management. Procedia Engineering 182,
763-769.
Wittenberg, C., 2016. Human-CPS interaction - requirements and human-machine
interaction methods for the Industry 4.0. IFAC-Papersonline 49-19,420-425.
Wolf, M„ Serpanos, D„ 2017. Safety and security of cyber-physical and internet
of- things systems. Proc. IEEE 105 (6), http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2017.
2699401.
Wong, K.S., Kim, M.H., 2017. Privacy protection for data-driven sm art manufac­
turing system. Int.J. Web Serv. Res. 14 (3), http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/lJWSR.
2017070102.
Wu, D.Z., Jennings, C., Terpenny, J., Gao, R.X., Kumara, S., 2017. A comparative study
on machine learning algorithms for sm art manufacturing: tool wear prediction
using random forests. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng.-Trans. ASME139 (7), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1115/1.4036350.
Wyrwicka, M.K., Mrugalska, B„ 2017. “Industry 4.0’’-to w ard s opportunities and
challenges of implementation. DEStech Transactions on Engineering and Tech­
nology Research ICPR.
Xu, L, He, W., Li, S., 2014. loT in industries: a survey. lEEETrans. Ind. Inf. 10 (4),
2233-2243.
 S.S. Kamble et al. / Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117(2018) 408-425 425

Yang, C„ Lan, S.L., Shen, W.M., Huang, G.Q., Wang, X.B., Lin, T.Y., 2017. Towards
product customization and personalization in IoT-enabled cloud manufactur­
ing. Clust. Comput.J. Netw. Softw. Tools Appl. 20(2), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
Sl0586-017-0767-x|.
Yu, Zhenhua, Ouyang, Jie, Li, Sisi, Peng, Xia, 2017. Formal modeling and control of
cyber-physical manufacturing systems. Adv. Mech. Eng. 9 (10).
Yuan, Z.H., Qin, W.Z., Zhao, J.S., 2017. Smart manufacturing for the oil refining
and petrochemical industry. Engineerings (2), http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/J.ENG.
2017.02.012.
Yue, X., Cai, H„ Yan, H., Zou, C., Zhou, K„ 2015. Cloud-assisted industrial cyber­
physical systems: an insight. Microprocess. Microsyst. 39 (8), 1262-1270.
Zawadzki, P., Zywicki, K., 2016. Smart product design and production control for
effective mass customization in the Industry 4.0 concept. Manage. Prod. Eng.
Rev, 7 (3), http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mper-2016-0030.
Copyright of Process Safety & Environmental Protection: Transactions of the Institution of
Chemical Engineers Part B is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.