Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Production and Consumption

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/spc

Review article

How the combination of Circular Economy and Industry 4.0 can

contribute towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals
T.E.T. Dantas a,∗, E.D. de-Souza b, I.R. Destro b, G. Hammes b, C.M.T. Rodriguez b, S.R. Soares a
a
Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Department of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering, Life Cycle Assessment Research Group (CICLOG),
Florianopolis, 88040-970, Brazil
b
Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Department of Production and Systems Engineering, Logistics Performance Laboratory (LDL), Florianopolis,
88040-970, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) are an interconnected strategy for the promotion of sus-
Received 20 July 2020 tainable practices and solutions that addresses the main issues faced by our society. Concomitantly, two
Revised 1 October 2020
emerging topics are currently gaining interest due to their potential to implement systematic shifts and
Accepted 7 October 2020
contribute to achieving the SDG – Circular Economy (CE) and Industry 4.0 (I4.0). This research performed
Available online 8 October 2020
a systematic literature review to identify how the CE-I4.0 nexus, the combination of CE practices and
Editor: Prof. Ioannis Nikolaou I4.0 technologies, could contribute to achieving the SDG. A total of 50 peer-review articles that addressed
Keywords: the simultaneous or individual link between CE and I4.0 to sustainability form the review portfolio. The
Sustainable development goals articles were first screened with regard to the I4.0 technologies and CE practices applied, and further an-
Sustainability alyzed in order to understand the stronger links to the SDG. Findings show that the CE-I4.0 nexus directly
Circular economy benefits SDG 7, SDG 8, SDG 9, SDG 11, SDG 12, and SDG 13. The specific targets addressed by the com-
Industry 4.0 bined implementation of CE practices and I4.0 technologies are disclosed and discussed. We argue that
the CE-I4.0 nexus is pivotal in the endeavors to reach the SDG, as it connects innovative technologies
with novel circular production and business models, which ultimately brings the opportunity to tackle
the SDG targets intensified in this study. Further research could quantitatively address the impacts of the
CE-I4.0 nexus, investigate secondary effects on the SDG, or develop further case studies under the CE-I4.0
umbrella.
© 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Sustainable practices received increasing attention from aca-
demics, companies, and policymakers over the last decades
(Sadhukhan et al., 2020; Stahel, 2007). This movement was inten-
sified due to the global commitments directed to cutting green-
house gas emissions, addressing resource scarcity, and rethinking
waste management (EMF, 2015; Nerini et al., 2019; Zhang et al.,
2019). Additionally, international agreements and policies are de-
manding sustainability-related initiatives as prerequisite for con-
tracts, turning the adherence to sustainable initiatives into a mar-
Abbreviations: AI, Artificial Intelligence; AM, Additive Manufacturing; AR, Aug-
mented Reality; BD, Big Data; CE, Circular Economy; CC, Cloud Computing; CPS, Cy-
ber Physical Systems; CPPS, Cyber-Physical Production Systems; DDA, Data-driven
Analytics; I4.0, Industry 4.0/Fourth Industrial Revolution; IoS, Internet of Services;
IoT, Internet of Things; IIoT, Industrial Internet of Things; PaaS, Product as a Ser-
vice; RFID, Radio-frequency Identification; SDG, Sustainable Development Goals.
∗
Corresponding author. .
E-mail address: thalestavaresd@gmail.com (T.E.T. Dantas).
ket advantage (EC, 2015; Filippini et al., 2019; Ruiz, 2020). Ac-
cording to Rashed and Shah (2020), businesses are critical stake-
holders capable of accelerating the implementation of sustainable
practices described in the United Nations Agenda 2030 (UN, 2015).
The private sector’s contribution to the Agenda is often related
to innovation, trained personnel and responsiveness. However,
research shows that private engagement provides win-win sit-
uations for their own business, society, and the environment
(Scheyvens et al., 2016). In this context, the search for path-
ways to promote sustainability through private business models
led industries to abandon the classic methods of production and
turn to new market demands such as the use of innovative tech-
nologies to achieve the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)
(Nerini et al., 2019) (Table 1). This global initiative recognizes the
interrelated nature of issues such as poverty, inequality, gender
equality and conservation (Le Blanc, 2015), as well as the neces-
sity for cross-sectorial and intergovernmental cooperation towards
systemic change (Salvia et al., al.,2019). Thus, it can be argued that
the 169 targets that compose the SDGs form a “blueprint” to guide

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.005
2352-5509/© 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Table 1
Sustainable Development Goals, adapted from UN (2015).
SDG 1 – No poverty
SDG 2 – Zero hunger
SDG 3 – Good health and well-being
SDG 4 – Quality education
SDG 5 – Gender equality
SDG 6 – Clean water and sanitation
SDG 7 – Affordable and clean energy
SDG 8 – Decent work and economic growth
SDG 9 – Industry, innovation and infrastructure
SDG 10 – Reduced inequalities
SDG 11 – Sustainable cities and communities
SDG 12 – Responsible consumption and production
SDG 13 – Climate action
SDG 14 – Life Below water
SDG 15 – Life on land
SDG 16 – Peace, justice and strong institutions
SDG 17 – Partnerships for the goals
decision makers towards sustainable strategies (for the full list of
SDG targets, please refer to Supplementary Material).
According to Silvestre and Ţîrcă (2019), sustainable performance
cannot be achieved without innovations. Technological progress
and innovation result in transformations ranging from the in-
dividual sphere to whole supply chains and communities. In
this setting, cutting-edge technologies embedded in the Industry
4.0 (I4.0) context may drive development towards the achieve-
ment of the SDG targets, especially regarding the industrial sector
(Hidayatno et al., 2019). Likewise, the new possibilities unlocked
by the I4.0 technologies can leverage the Circular Economy (CE)
and help address several SDG targets (Schroeder et al., 2019).
The term I4.0 refers to a radical disruption towards an in-
telligent industry with autonomous and interconnected manufac-
turing technologies (Bai et al., 2020). According to Drath and
Horch (2014), the purpose of I4.0 is to connect the industry to
the internet, turning factories more economical, smart, and effi-
cient. It is believed that this new technological scenario will revo-
lutionize the current industrial modus operandi (Ramakrishna et al.,
2020), and possibly will affect all sectors by transforming the
design, operations and transportation of products and materi-
als (Hofmann and Rüsch, 2017). I4.0 describes the use of in-
tegrative and interconnected technologies for production opti-
mization (Wan et al., 2016), for example: Cyber-physical Sys-
tems (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), Big Data (BD), Additive Man-
ufacturing (AM), and Internet of Services (IoS) (Berawi, 2019;
Ramakrishna et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2017). Other advanced tech-
nologies encompassed by I4.0 are Cloud Computing (CC), Aug-
mented Reality (AR), Sytems Integration, Simulation, Cybersecurity,
and Autonomous Robots (Lu, 2017; Zhong et al., 2017). Accord-
ing to Kagermann et al. (2013), this new concept is the result of
the combination of distinguished technological pillars, which later
were structured by Rüssmann et al. (2015) and here illustrated in
Fig. 1.
These nine technological pillars are the basis for the develop-
ment of new interconnections technologies. They can be applied
individually, but when they are implemented simultaneously I4.0
shows the true potential, resulting in cutting-edge technological
solutions based on data collection and intelligent manufacturing
processes (Hofmann and Rüsch, 2017), i.e. Radio-frequency Identifi-
cation (RFID), Cyber-Physical Production Systems (CPPS), Industrial
Internet of Things (IIoT), and Data Driven Analytics (DDA). How-
ever, these technologies not only beneficial due to their manufac-
turing advantages, but also because they can be used to reduce
waste generation, minimize environmental impacts, and help push
industrial development to cleaner production processes (Halse and
Jæger, 2019; Lopes de Sousa Jabbour et al., 2018; Yadav et al.,
214
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
2020). After all, sustainable development relies deeply on its rela-
tionship with technological development (Bashtannyk et al., 2020).
From this perspective, the development of I4.0 can drive a new
type of progress that excels at resource optimization, waste man-
agement and other sustainable practices (Machado et al., 2020),
topics vastly addressed in the Agenda 2030. However, investing
in technology is not enough to achieve the SDG (Rashed and
Shah, 2020). According to Bashtannyk et al. (2020), a single fo-
cus on technology development may lead to industrial growth,
but at the same time, can increase greenhouse gas emissions and
further diminish the availability of natural resources (Lieder and
Rashid, 2016). Thus, new technologies and practices should be used
in line with other initiatives to fetch the SDG, such as the rising CE.
CE is a concept that describes the paradigm shift regarding
the use and disposal of materials and resources. It fundamen-
tally opposes the production and consumption behaviors and pat-
terns that our society is embedded in (EMF, 2015). The current
system is based on the linear rationale that sustained global in-
dustrial development in the last decades (de Souza Junior et al.,
2020; Stahel, 2007). This way of thinking is grounded on the large-
scale use of extraction, use, and disposal of materials, which is
the root to various intergenerational and intergovernmental issues,
like waste disposal in natural areas, resource scarcity, and climate
change (EMF, 2019; Korhonen et al., 2018). Contrary to this unsus-
tainable system, CE proposes an innovative pathway to sustainable
development by introducing a different way of perceiving value in
the handling of natural resources (Kirchherr and Piscicelli, 2019).
Although CE has recently become an emerging topic, its dis-
semination is hampered due to the diffusion of concepts and pro-
posals for its evaluation (Kalmykova et al., 2018; Kirchherr et al.,
2017). Despite the lack of an unified concept, different authors
converge by addressing it as a systematic shift to an economic
feasible, but yet regenerative model, grounded in the reinsertion
of used resources through material cycles (technological and bi-
ological) (EMF, 2015; Geissdoerfer et al., 2017; Ghisellini et al.,
2016). The CE would promotes the minimization of resource con-
sumption, waste generation, and emissions, while still ensuring
socioeconomic development (Ghisellini et al., 2018). Furthermore,
Lieder and Rashid (2016) pointed out that the three main top-
ics related to CE are resource scarcity, environmental impacts,
and economic benefits – areas that directly relate productive ac-
tivities to current environmental issues, and were previously ad-
dressed under the sustainable development flag. This new model
aims to minimize waste generation, resource consumption and
other environmental impacts throughout the life cycle of ser-
vices and products while still ensuring socioeconomic development
(Ghisellini et al., 2018; Murray et al., 2017). In such a way, CE is de-
veloped around the idea of a system-wide change directly linked to
resource extraction, waste generation, product design, environmen-
tal consciousness, innovative business models, and integrative poli-
cies (Bocken et al., 2017; Kalmykova et al., 2018; Korhonen et al.,
2018).
The development of new cutting-edge technologies, as pro-
posed by I4.0, presents new opportunities for closing production
cycles, maximizing the use of already applied resources, and there-
fore minimize extraction of raw material (Garcia-Muiña et al.,
2018; Lopes de Sousa Jabbour et al., 2018; Pham et al., 2019).
Therefore the exploration of the convergence points between these
two themes through a sustainability-focused lens shows great rel-
evance not only to the academic community, but also for decision
and policy-makers.
The convergence and combination between the I4.0 and cir-
cular systems, hereby referred to as CE-I4.0 nexus, is a current
emerging topic in the scientific literature (Garcia-Muiña et al.,
2018; Lopes de Sousa Jabbour et al., 2018; Pham et al., 2019).
Dev et al. (2020) analyzed the potential of implementing I4.0
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Fig. 1. I4.0 technological pillars, adapted from Rüssmann et al. (2015).
tools in order to increase the performance of the reverse sup-
ply chain. Belaud et al. (2019) addressed the benefits brought by
BD implementation on agricultural supply chains. Chiappetta Jab-
bour et al. (2020) and Pham et al. (2019) analyzed how I4.0
can further promote the resource sharing within the technolog-
ical cycles. Ramakrishna et al. (2020) performed a study linking
these two main topics in a university environment. The work of
Hatzivasilis et al. (2018) described the potential of IoT as a facilita-
tor for CE. Hence, it is clear that the CE-I4.0 nexus is a promising
research topic that links groundbreaking technologies to system-
wide shifts in our economic and industrial models. In this context,
the goal of this article is to perform a literature review in order to
identify the main SDG and targets addressed by the combination
of I4.0 and CE, as well as to understand how the CE-I4.0 nexus
contributes to them. As far as the authors are aware, this publi-
cation is the first to simultaneously address CE, I4.0, and the SDG.
Thus, the innovation of this article is in the crossroads between the
Fourth Industrial Revolution, the fundamental shifts brought by CE,
and the efforts towards sustainable development.
The remainder of the article presents as follows: Section 2 pre-
sented the methodology used in the study. Bibliometric and
content-specific results are present in Section 3. Section 4 ex-
plores SDG and targets addressed by the CE-I4.0 nexus. Closing the
manuscript, Section 5 provides final remarks and future research
trends.
2. Methodology
This article proposes a simultaneous analysis of the existing lit-
erature regarding SDG, CE, and I4.0 through the following research
question: “How the combination of CE practices and I4.0 technolo-
gies contribute to the achievement of the SDG?”. A review was
conducted to answer this question. According to Fink (2005), a lit-
215
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
erature review is a systematic and reproducible study design to
identify, evaluate, and interpret the existing body of scientific pub-
lications. Additionally, this type of study provides an overview of a
research topic and help researchers develop conceptual content re-
garding a specific scientific area (Meredith, 1993). The review was
performed through the adaption of the step procedures proposed
by Barros et al. (2019) and Coutinho et al. (2019). Fig. 2 illustrates
the literature review methodology.
2.1. Topic delimitation
According to the research question, the articles included in this
review analyze how CE and/or I4.0 assist in achieving the SDG.
Only peer-reviewed papers published in English were considered.
Since all subjects addressed by this study are emerging topics, no
time delimitation was set for this review. The search was con-
ducted in June 2020 and includes all articles published until now.
2.2. Portfolio definition
Step 1: Definition of keywords
This research phase was divided into two parts: first, the ar-
ticles focused on the link between CE or I4.0 with the SDG
were addressed; and second, the mutual implementation of
CE practices and I4.0 technologies towards sustainable prac-
tices were approached. Thus, the keywords used in the two
searches are:
• Group A: ("ODS" OR "SGD" OR "sustainable development goals")
AND ("industry 4.0 OR "smart manufacturing" OR "industrie
4.0 OR "circular economy").
• Group B: ("circular economy" OR "CE") AND ("sustainability" OR
"sustainable development") AND ("industry 4.0 OR "industrie
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227

Fig. 2. Literature review procedure, adapted from Barros et al. (2019) and Coutinho et al. (2019).

4.0 OR "internet of things" OR "iot" OR "smart manufacturing"

OR "smart industry").

According to Purvis et al. (2019), the term sustainability is often

used as a synonym for sustainable development, which ex-
plains the use of this keyword in Group B. The term “ODS”
is the abbreviated translation for SDG in Iberian languages
(Spanish, Portuguese, and other Latin languages). “Industrie
4.0 represents the German term Industry 4.0. Such key-
words were chosen to broaden the analysis and collect more
insights from the assembled publications.
Step 2 and 3: Database definition and document collection
The Scopus and Web of Science databases were chosen due
to their comprehensiveness and relevance in this field of re-
search. Compared to other databases, these had significantly
more results. The search was made according to the criteria
mentioned in the previous topic.
Step 4: Portfolio screening
Following the search conduction, duplicates were removed
Fig. 3. Review screening process.
with the help of the Endnote software. The Filtering hap-
pened by reading the title, abstract, introduction, results,
and conclusion of all articles. The documents that addressed carried out within the CE context were selected and classified. Fol-
the research question were selected to compose the final lowing, based on the portfolio’s content, the main SDG addressed
portfolio. by the combination of CE and I4.0 were identified. Subsequently, it
Step 5: Final portfolio definition was possible to highlight how the CE-I4.0 nexus contributes to the
Once all articles were identified, the items were collected achievement of specific SDG targets.
and managed through the software Zotero v5.0. The publi-
cations were then transferred to spreadsheets and organized
based on the selected criteria for the further extraction of 3. Results
results and content analysis.
The performed literature search resulted in 141 publications.
2.3. Descriptive analysis Fig. 3 shows the selection process that resulted in the research
portfolio. Duplicates accounted for 59 excluded studies, followed
A quantitative analysis was performed to characterize the fi- by exclusion of another 32 papers during full-text reading. A total
nal portfolio. The selected articles were inspected according to the of 50 articles were selected after the application of the review pro-
year of publication, journals, and the type of study applied to each tocol and the three-round exclusion process. It is noteworthy that
article. Publications were divided in four different types of stud- both CE and I4.0 are emerging topics (Abbasi and Kamal, 2020;
ies: review articles, case study, methodological development and Korhonen et al., 2018), and recently scholars started to address the
mixed study. The latter refers to the papers that combined two of hidden linkages between such areas (Dev et al., 2020; Lopes de
the beforementioned sort of analysis (i.e. literature review com- Sousa Jabbour et al., 2018). Therefore, this study presents the se-
bined with case study, or methodological development combined lection of cutting-edge studies and solutions that address the SDG
with case study). via the combination of CE and I4.0.
Subsequently, the bibliometric results and publication trends
2.4. Content analysis are examined, followed by the results regarding the CE prac-
tices and I4.0 technologies showcased in this literature portfolio.
The complete analysis of the final portfolio refers to the results The next section of this article highlights the SDG that are more
of this research. The applied I4.0 technologies and the practices strongly and directly affected by the new CE-I4.0 nexus. For the

216
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Fig. 4. Distribution of publications over the years.
full list of publications analyzed, please refer to the Supplementary
Material.
3.1. Bibliometric results
The analysis of publication trends occurred based on the tem-
poral evolution of articles that focused on I4.0 technologies and/or
CE practices under a sustainability perspective, the publication dis-
tribution by peer-reviewed journals, and the type of study.
Fig. 4 shows the evolution of the topic over the years. As the
review had no temporal restrictions, articles published up to the
date of search (June/2020) were selected. Results shows that the
first attempt to link either of the two pillar topics of this re-
search with sustainable development or the SDG was made by
Reuter (2016). The author’s work addressed simultaneously CE and
I4.0 by analyzing the digitalization potential of CE through the im-
plementation of IoT in the metallurgical sector. Interest in the ad-
dressed scientific area followed in 2017 through the publication of
two studies, both presenting CE as pathway to sustainable devel-
opment (Mestre and Cooper, 2017; Velenturf and Purnell, 2017).
The number of publications quadrupled in 2018 (eight publica-
tions), and then doubled in 2019 (16 publications). By then, the
linkages of both CE and I4.0 with sustainable development and
their potential to contribute to achieving the SDG targets had be-
come an emerging topic between scholars (Manavalan and Jayakr-
ishna, 2019; Schroeder et al., 2019). The year 2020 seems to mark
the consolidation of the addressed items as pathways to a more
sustainable and effective industrial sector and overall society. Since
this review was conducted in June/2020, the portfolio only gath-
ered articles published in the first semester of the mentioned year.
Albeit the shorter time window in comparison to the other years,
23 of the collected articles were published in 2020. The exponen-
tial growth of interest in the topics discussed in this work hints at
the CE-I4.0 nexus as an emerging scientific topic that presents in-
numerous applications and potential growth as our society slowly
shift its production, consumption, and technological development
patterns.
The assembled publications spread throughout journals with
different scientific backgrounds. Since both CE and I4.0 feature op-
tions and solutions that can be applied in a variety of sectors and
scales, the journals range from technological and computational re-
search platforms to environmental and sustainability focused re-
search. However, only four journals had more than one publication
that fitted the selected scope of this research (International Jour-
nal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology – two articles,
Journal of Cleaner Production – four articles, Resource, Conservation,
and Recycling – five articles, and Sustainability – nine articles). All
other papers are scattered throughout 30 other journals. These re-
217
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
Table 2
Distribution of publications according to study
classification.
Type of article Publications
Case study 17
Methodological development 9
Mixed study 20
Review 4
sults show that CE and I4.0 are in the research schedule of scholars
from different backgrounds, hinting at the importance given to the
topics, and the broadness that solutions built under this scope can
achieve.
Table 2 shows the article classification distribution. Nine pa-
pers, accounting for 18% of the selected portfolio, have theoretical
purposes. This cluster mainly focuses on the proposition of novel
frameworks, business models, or methodological explorations re-
garding the individual applications. However, most of the reviewed
publications had a practical objective. 17 articles (35%) had a strict
goal of displaying case studies. Four articles focused on present-
ing systematic literature reviews on the given topics. Lastly, 20
papers, accounting for 40% of the studied publications, coupled
the presentation of case study with either a literature review, or
a piece of methodological development (commonly a framework
proposal). These findings shows that scholars focused on the CE-
I4.0-sustainability background are currently interested in the prac-
tical potential that the CE and I4.0 concepts, as well as their pos-
sible implications for the sustainability agenda.
3.2. CE practices and I4.0 technologies
In order to link this new model directed by the principles of
CE and embedded in highly functional systems operationalized by
I4.0 technologies, first it is necessary to distinguish which prac-
tices and technologies have been applied in the current context.
Table 3 compiles the CE practices and I4.0 technologies correlated
to each publication analyzed in the literature review. In order to
direct the reader, it is relevant to stress that the conducted lit-
erature search focused on papers that applied either CE practices
and/or I4.0 technologies in order to seek more sustainable system,
hence contributing to achieving the SDG. It is also noteworthy that
some of the collected papers simultaneously addressed I4.0 and CE,
both intentionally, or unintentionally (i.e. papers that present the
benefits of I4.0 technologies regarding waste prevention, reuse, or
recycle, but not particularly mention CE).
The majority of the evaluated publications consisted of papers
that link CE to notions of sustainability. This group accounts for
24 papers, almost half of the investigated cohort (48%). These re-
sults contributes to the work of several authors that argue that CE
presents a deep connection to the sustainability agenda by pro-
viding the opportunity for the operationalization of many sustain-
able practices (Ghisellini et al., 2016; Ghosh and Agamuthu, 2018;
Kirchherr et al., 2017). In contrast, only five publications addressed
solely I4.0 practices and their potential to support the Agenda 2030
goals, accounting for 10% of the portfolio. However, 34% of the in-
spected papers (17 publications) either had a mutual focus on CE
and I4.0, or presented the benefits of the implementation of I4.0
technologies, which ultimately lead to practices and business mod-
els linked to CE. These findings contributes to the results presented
in Section 3.1 by highlighting the growing scientific interest to-
wards the CE-I4.0 nexus and the potential of these synergies to
contribute to sustainable development. Lastly, four review papers
(8%) were examined in this study, and therefore do not show any
specific I4.0 technology or CE practice.
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227

Table 3
CE practices and I4.0 technologies applied in a sustainability context in the analyzed publications.

Ref CE practices I4.0 technologies

(Bai et al., 2020) – AM, AI, AM, autonomous robots, BD, blockchain, CC,
cybersecurity, IoT, mobile technology, nanotechnology,
RFID, simulation
(Oláh et al., 2020) – –
(Tolstykh et al., 2020) Industrial symbiosis –
(Chen et al., 2020) Redesign, reduce, recover, recycle, reuse, waste to energy, IoT
industrial symbiosis
(Khan and Kabir, 2020) Waste to energy –
(Priyadarshini and Abhilash, 2020) Waste to energy, composting, recycle –
(Guerra-Rodríguez et al., 2020) – –
(Linser and Lier, 2020) – –
(Šebestová and Sroka, 2020) Reuse, repair, recycle –
(Sadhukhan et al., 2020). Nutrient cycling –
(Arora et al., 2020) Recovery, reuse –
(Pohlmann et al., 2020) Nutrient cycling, reuse, and recycling –
(Lee, 2020) Reduce –
(Hahn, 2020) – IoT, blockchain, CPS, AM
(Udugama et al., 2020) Waste to energy, nutrient cycling, recover, recycling –
(D’Amato et al., 2020a) Circular business models –
(Chiappetta Jabbour et al., 2020) Sharing economy, product as service, circular design IoT, BD, AI
(Yadav et al., 2020) Digitalization, reuse, recycle redesign, remanufacture, IoT, CPS, BD, AI
reduce, recover
(Abbasi and Kamal, 2020) Repair, reduce, reuse, remanufacture, and recycling CPS, IoT, BD, autonomous robots, AM, CC, augmented
reality
(Inoue et al., 2020) – IoT
(Modgil et al., 2020) – Horizontal and vertical system integration, CC, BD,
simulation, autonomous robots, IoT, AI, cybersecurity
(Dev et al., 2020) Recycle, reverse logistics, digitalization, remanufacturing IoT, IoS, CPS, RFID
(Ramakrishna et al., 2020) Reuse, recycle, redesign, remanufacture, reduce recover IoT, AI, nanotechnology, blockchain
(Rodriguez-Anton et al., 2019) Renewable energy, reduce, recycle, reuse, composting –
(Valenzuela-Levi, 2019) Recycle –
(Venkata Mohan et al., 2019) Renewable energy, reduce, recycle, reuse, repair –
(Fuldauer et al., 2019) Reuse, reduce –
(Principato et al., 2019) Nutrient cycling –
(Türkeli et al., 2019) Repair –
(Schroeder et al., 2019) Reduce, reuse, recycling, repair, composting –
(Gravagnuolo et al., 2019) Waste to energy, reuse, recycle, circular business models, –
circular design
(Jabbour et al., 2019) Reduce BD
(Zhang et al., 2019) Reduce, reuse, recycle IoT, BD, CC, CPS, AI
(Kerdlap et al., 2019) Reuse, recycle IoT, AM, CPS
(Pham et al., 2019) Reduce IoT, CC, CPS, BD, AI
(Belaud et al., 2019) Waste to energy BD
(Nascimento et al., 2019) Reuse, Recycle AM
(Fassio and Tecco, 2019) Reduce, upcycling, nutrient cycling, composting –
(Pla-Julián and Guevara, 2019) Reduce, reuse, recycle –
(Muñoz-Torres et al., 2018) Waste prevention –
(V et al., 2018) – –
(Bonilla et al., 2018) – Automation, digitalization, IoT, CPS, BD, AM, blockchain,
on-demand production, sensors
(Goyal et al., 2018) Circular business models, reuse, recycle, reuse –
(Stock et al., 2018) Renewable energy, reuse, remanufacture, recycle CPS, BD, blockchain, IoT, RFID, high-performance
microchips
(Beier et al., 2018) Renewable energy IoT, CPS, BD, Blockchain, AM
(Garcia-Muiña et al., 2018) Circular Business Models IoT, Enterprise Resource Planning, Manufacturing
Execution Systems
IoT, CPS, RFID
(Esmaeilian et al., 2018) Waste prevention, reuse, remanufacture, recycle MQ Telemetry Transport, Representational State
Transfer
(Velenturf and Purnell, 2017) Recover, reuse, recycle, circular design, circular business –
models
(Mestre and Cooper, 2017) Circular design, reuse, recycle, repair –
(Reuter, 2016). Reduce, recycle IoT, BD

Regarding the CE practices funded, the investigated processes
were separated focused on their relation to the “R’s”, as this
approach is vastly defended by many authors as mechanisms
presented in the core of CE (Blomsma and Brennan, 2017;
Ghisellini et al., 2018; Sihvonen and Ritola, 2015). Other activi-
ties or techniques strongly linked to CE and broadly disseminated
in the scientific community were also applied a screening criteria
in Table 3. Examples are industrial symbiosis (Brondi et al., 2018;
Geng et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2016), waste-to-energy (Khan and
Kabir, 2020; Sadhukhan et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2019), and com-
posting (Aziz et al., 2016; Fassio and Tecco, 2019; Filippini et al.,
2019). The majority of publications relates to the technologi-
cal cycles of CE, rather than the biological cycles. The inclina-
tion towards the technological context was expected, since many
of the articles deal with a combined setting between CE and
I4.0, where the industrial and manufacturing processes are in

218
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Fig. 5. Interconnections between the SDG, adapted from
Sukhdev (2016).
focus, and the practices directed to the biological cycle are not as
critical.
With respect to the analyzed I4.0 technologies, the applications
presented in the paper were screened according to the I4.0 pil-
lars proposed by Rüssmann et al. (2015), presented in Fig. 1. It
can be noticed that the majority of the studies either focused on
a specific technology (i.e. IoT, AM, or BD), or took a broader ap-
proach by highlighting the potential of a variety of I4.0 related
technologies. These findings stress the integrative characteristics of
I4.0 (Wang et al., 2017), in which different interconnected tech-
nologies can be simultaneously applied in order to promote higher
efficiency and control over a specific manufacturing, industrial,
or complex system (Belaud et al., 2019; Halse and Jæger, 2019;
Lu, 2017).
3.3. SDG addressed in the literature portfolio
The SDG are interconnected goals underlined in the UN Agenda
2030 (UN, 2015). This model revolutionizes the view at develop-
ment, moving away from the current setting where social, eco-
nomic, and ecological sectors are seen as separated parts. This ap-
proach proposes transitioning towards an economy that serves so-
ciety, while still safeguarding the environment (Rockström et al.,
2009). The relation between the SDG and the three areas they con-
nect (Biosphere, Society, and Economy) is illustrated in Fig. 5. The
links between the SDG were directly and indirectly approached in
the reviewed portfolio, showing differing opinions regarding which
SDG are contemplated by CE or I4.0.
The analyzed publications showed often contrasting options
concerning the CE-related SDG. However, they converge by relating
this model shift to the economy and biosphere sectors of Fig. 5.
According to Rodriguez-Anton et al. (2019), CE is directly related
to SDG 8, 9, 11, and 12, and indirectly pertinent to SDG 13 and 14.
This analysis gives CE an economic focus with respect to the SDG,
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
as the majority of the mentioned goals are linked to the economic
sector of the before mentioned figure. In contrast, Venkata Mo-
han et al. (2019) argue that CE is deeply connected with SDG 11,
and in second hand deals with sociological and ecological goals.
Principato et al. (2019), on the other hand, points out that CE can
be an accelerator to the targets set in the Agenda 2030, especially
by playing a vital role as a key solution towards production and
consumption behaviors and patterns, addressed in SDG 12. Addi-
tionally, Schroeder et al. (2019) argue that the strongest link be-
tween the SDG targets and CE are linked to the SDG 6, 7, 8 and
12. The inconsistencies regarding the scholar’s opinion in relation
to which SDG does CE contributes can be extended to the full an-
alyzed portfolio. Nonetheless, a strong link between the economy
and biosphere directed SDG seems unanimous between the ana-
lyzed articles.
A similar approach can be found while analyzing the SDG ad-
dressed in the I4.0 related articles. Bonilla et al. (2018) suggest that
I4.0 has the potential to strongly affect the SDG 7, 9, 12, and 13.
The work of Modgil et al. (2020) attests that I4.0 can contribute
to SDG 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Furthermore, a study developed by
Oláh et al. (2020) points that I4.0 is a driver towards achieving the
goals set by SDG 7, 8, 12, and 13. This trend follows to the other
I4.0 related studies in the studied portfolio. Hence, in general, the
authors agree on the potential of I4.0 to address the issues set by
the societal and economic sectors presented in Fig. 5.
Drawing from the before mentioned results, this study sets out
to analyze the effects of the combination between CE practices and
I4.0 technologies with the following SDG:
Rockström and
• SDG 7
• SDG 8
• SDG 9
• SDG 11
• SDG 12
• SDG 13
It is the opinion of the authors that the application of I4.0 tech-
nologies in circular systems can strongly benefit the beforemen-
tioned SDG. The following section presents discussions related to
this set list of SDG in order to better comprehend the hidden links
between these three movements of structural shift in our society,
dentify the specific SDG targets covered by the CE-I.40 nexus, and
lay out future research agendas.
4. SDG and targets addressed by the CE-I4.0 nexus
Sustainable development is an underlining goal common to all
nations and formally structured into the SDG. Innovative technolo-
gies, behavioral changes, and systematic shifts related to the means
of production and consumption are critical to seek such objectives.
In this way, this topic aims to present the results found in the per-
formed literature review regarding the CE-I4.0 nexus and provide
insights whether and how it contributes to the achievement of the
targets set in the SDG. However, due to the systemic perspective
applied to both the addressed subjects, the combination between
CE and I4.0 can both bring positive and negative feedbacks.
One of the mutually shared problems faced by I4.0 and CE is re-
lated to the impact on the social aspects of sustainability caused by
a cultural reflex intrinsic to these new global proposals (Bai et al.,
2020; Lee, 2020). The main discussion is associated with job gen-
eration (Korhonen et al., 2018; Romero et al., 2020). CE represents
an economic shift with repercussions along the employment mar-
ket like no other. For example, it can allegedly generate more than
3 million jobs only in the European Union by 2030 (WRAP et al.,
2015). However, these new jobs would come at the cost of old jobs,
which due to technological progress and business models changes,
219
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Table 4
SDG targets directly addressed by the CE-I4.0 nexus.
SDG SDG targets directly affected by the combination of CE and I4.0
SDG 7 7.1 – Promote global access to affordable and reliable energy.
7.2 – Expand the proportion of renewable energy in the global energy mix.
7. B – Enhance technology and infrastructure to provide modern energy
services for all, especially developing and least developed countries, following
with their respective programs of support.
SDG 8 8.2 – Secure higher levels of economic productivity through technological
upgrading, innovation, diversification, and the inclusion of labor-intensive
sectors.
8.4 – Improve worldwide resource efficiency in consumption and production,
and seek to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation, in
accordance with the 10-year framework of programs, with developed countries
taking the lead.
8.5 – Secure decent employment and equal pay for work of equal value for all,
including persons with disabilities and young people.
8.6 – Substantially reduce youth unemployment, and increase education and
training.
SDG 9 9.1 – Establish quality, reliable, and resilient infrastructure to support
economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and
equitable access for all.
9.2 – In accordance with national circumstances, promote inclusive
industrialization by increasing industrial employment share and gross
domestic product, and double its share in developing countries.
9.4 – In consonance with national capabilities, promote sustainable industrial
infrastructure sustainable, focusing on resource-use efficiency and
environmentally clean technologies and processes.
SDG 11 11.6 – Reduce the urban negative environmental impact, especially regarding
air pollution and waste management.
11. B – Increase the number of cities communities that adopt and implement
integrated policies and action plans regarding inclusion, resource efficiency,
climate change mitigation and adaption, and develop comprehensive disaster
risk management at all levels.
SDG 12 12.2 – Achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural
resources.
12.3 – Halve the per capita global food waste throughout supply chains,
including post-harvest losses.
12.5 – Minimize waste generation through recycling, reuse, reduction and
waste prevention.
12. A – Support developing countries to strengthen their scientific and
technological capacity to move towards more sustainable patterns of
consumption and production.
SDG 13 13.2 – Introduce climate change initiatives and actions into policies, strategies
and planning.
would substitute the workforce needed in the current setting. Ad-
ditionally, it is estimated that around 8.5% of the global manufac-
turing workforce will be replaced by I4.0 technologies by 2030,
accounting for 14 million manufacturing jobs lost only in China
(Oxford Economics, 2019). To couple with this problematic, the
transition to CE and I4.0 has to be supported by learning environ-
ments capable of promoting the adaption needed by the workforce
in this new highly technological and sustainability-driven world
(Kirchherr and Piscicelli, 2019; Quint et al., 2015).
Nevertheless, there are several points of positive convergence
between CE, I4.0, and the SDG. These convergences are mainly
directed to the overall promotion of environmental sustainability
through the implementation of technologies for the benefit of cir-
cular practices that could lead to a path to achieve sustainability
(Oláh et al., 2020). That alliance could enhance the optimization of
processes, implementation of cost-efficiently technologies, reduc-
tion of emissions and excessive use of resources (Dev et al., 2020;
Pham et al., 2019). Thus, the synergy between I4.0 technologies
and CE seems evident.
In this way, it can be noticed there are several ways to make
the best of each innovative technology in favor of CE and sustain-
ability. Therefore, the following topics comprehensively approach
the main SDG related to CE and I4.0. Through that analysis, specific
SDG targets addressed by the CE-I4.0 nexus are listed in Table 4
and discussed in the following text.
220
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
CE-I4.0 nexus effect
• Optimization in energy use
• Promotion of renewable energy
• Reduction of fossil fuel use
• Development of new and more efficient practices and technologies
• Opportunity of economic growth
• New circular business models
• Reinsertion of waste as a valuable resource in the economy
• Higher and optimized productivity
• Job creation and reallocation
• Development of cutting-edge technologies capable of promoting
inclusive, reliable and sustainable production
• Higher and optimized productivity
• Efficient material and energy use
• Innovative technologies to promote inclusive, safer, and smart
waste management
• Optimization of energy and resource use by the public sector
• Optimization of energy and resource use throughout supply chains
• New circular business models
• Minimization of waste generation
• Reinsertion of waste as a valuable resource in the economy
• News consumption and behavioral patterns
• Climate mitigation
• Promotion of renewable energy
4.1. SDG 7 - Affordable and clean energy
SDG 7 seeks to ensure the availability of reliable and renew-
able energy for all. Along the same line, CE encourages the transi-
tion to a model based on economic, natural and social capital, un-
derpinned by the use of renewable energy (EMF, 2015; Khan and
Kabir, 2020). By decoupling society from the use of fossil fuels, CE
endorses the broad use of greener energy sources in order to re-
duce pollution, raw materials use, and waste generation. Moreover,
CE links this topic with the issue of organic waste management. By
addressing waste-to-energy practices, such as energy production
via biomass, CE simultaneously promotes the use of renewables,
guarantee energy access to remote areas where energy networks
might be difficult to reach (particularly in developing countries)
(Khan and Kabir, 2020; Padilla-Rivera et al., 2019), and tackles
the inefficient disposal of valuable organic resources (Belaud et al.,
2019; Udugama et al., 2020).
When analyzed in an industrial setting, the combination of
CE and I4.0 towards SDG 7 can result in greater achievements
(Halse and Jæger, 2019; Oláh et al., 2020). The implementation
of technologies like IIoT, BD, DDA, and CPPS can transform an in-
dustrial environment through the intensive collection and commu-
nication of data, which, when directed to energy and resource-
related issues, can largely improve its efficiency and increase the
capacity of clean energy use and production (Modgil et al., 2020;
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Oláh et al., 2020). Therewith, the optimization brought by I4.0
deeply contribute to the understanding and promotion of cleaner
energy systems by allowing the tracking and interpretation of pop-
ulational and industrial consumption patterns, followed by the de-
velopment of solutions through innovative technologies to adapt
such backgrounds to a sustainability-driven society.
In this regard, the combination of the renewable-intensive
paradigm shift brought by CE with optimized resource and energy
employment enabled by I4.0 can directly contribute to achieving
the SDG 7. More specifically, the CE-I4.0 nexus addresses SDG 7
targets 7.1, 7.2, and 7.B, as shown in Table 4. Guided these spe-
cific targets, policymakers can seek to develop laws and incentives
aimed at renewable energy sector, which would not only min-
imize the amount of fossil fuels consumed worldwide, but also
create new jobs and accelerate the transition to CE. Moreover, as
I4.0 technologies expand and become accessible to all sorts of
industrial sectors, the use of renewable fuels to power the au-
tonomous and interconnected machinery needed for optimization-
focused fourth industrial revolution will grow. Therefore, to com-
bine with the energy-intensive needs of both circular systems and
I4.0, renewable and affordable energy becomes imperative. This
rationale is especially true to the developing countries, as high-
lighted by target 7.B.
4.2. SDG 8 – decent work and economic growth
SDG 8 is directed to the promotion of economic growth while
still inclusively providing employment and fair work for all. This
SDG is the most controversial one between the six chosen goals
analyzed in Section 4. That happens due to the divergences al-
ready mentioned in this study. Both CE and I4.0 provide pathways
to a new setting of economic development. However, the combi-
nation of CE and I4.0 directly affects the job market. According
to Smit et al. (2016), I4.0 it brings a significant transformation
in jobs and skills profiles by blurring the traditional clear divi-
sion of labor in manufacturing. Quint et al. (2015) foresees that
this new scenario will not only requires workers to be trained ef-
ficiently, but also to understand the principles and paradigms of
a digitalized and fully connected factory. Moreover, as noted by
Schlaepfer et al. (2014), groundbreaking technologies require a dif-
ferent set of skills, potentially influencing the job market, lead-
ing then to income disparity and uncertainty. Faced by this new
context in which old jobs may become obsolete and leave many
workers unemployed (especially low-income and formally unedu-
cated workers in developing countries), business and training bod-
ies need to rapidly adapt to better support the working class in the
transition to a technology intensive CE (Phung, 2019).
Although several international organizations argue that CE has
the potential of creating millions of jobs throughout the next
decade (EMF, 2015; IISD, 2018; WRAP et al. 2015), other authors
indicate that this model shift focusses on the environment and
economic benefits only, lacking care for societal issues like the
reinsertion of workers into the market, or the job quality it pro-
vides (D’Amato et al., 2020b; Lee, 2020). As a response to that
problematic, Kirchherr and Piscicelli (2019) pioneered by address-
ing the topic of Education for Circular Economy, that could help fill
this gap left in the early development of this paradigm shift. Sim-
ilarly, several I4.0-focused authors have explored how to further
the technological development caused by I4.0 while still ensur-
ing that the overall social sustainability is addressed (Hahn, 2020;
Romero et al., 2020; Stock et al., 2018). On those premises, it can
be noticed that although the CE-I4.0 nexus brings several chal-
lenges to the job market, collaborations and developments needed
in order to bridge that gap are in course, what could significantly
aid in the race towards achieving SDG 8.
221
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
In terms of economic growth, the joined forces of I4.0 and
CE strongly contribute to the development of economies and so-
cieties. As stressed by D’Amato et al. (2020b), the economic de-
velopment is in the core of CE, which now, differently than in
the Linear Economy is intrinsically connected with environmen-
tal precautions and practices (Nasir et al., 2017). According to
Lacy and Rutqvist (2015), shifting to a circular system offers a
$4.5 trillion economic opportunity, which would increase our eco-
nomic resilience while reducing the reliance on scarce resources.
Therefore, as both CE and I4.0 propose the emergence of novel
business models and the maximization and optimization of the
means of production, this higher-efficiency system makes com-
panies more competitive and, consequently, positively influences
overall economic development.
The SDG 8 targets that better translate how the combination
of CE and I4.0 can propel sustainable economic growth are tar-
gets 8.2 and 8.4, which clearly connects economic development to
the systematic shift that CE and I4.0 may cause if implemented
together (Table 4). However, the CE-I4.0 nexus can also address
the employment-linked targets 8.5 and 8.6 if the beforementioned
measures directed to learning and training are adopted in order
to support the population in the awakening to this economic new
model. In order to extract the maximum value from the CE-I4.0
nexus, decision makers should not only focus on the gains the cir-
cular systems connected through I4.0 technologies could bring. It
is crucial to follow the “leave no one behind” motto of the SDG and
create employment and learning platforms to accommodate work-
ers in this high-tech world, and also to reallocate the many that
will, inevitably, be substituted but autonomous machines. The CE-
I4.0 shows tremendous opportunities for economic growth, but in
order to seek a more prosperous and sustainable future, the eco-
nomic development has to be attached to social issues, as stated in
the forenamed targets.
4.3. SDG 9 – industry, innovation and infrastructure
According to the performed literature review, the targets and
compromises set by SDG 9 are the most aligned with I4.0, since
it aims at building the structure necessary to foster inclusive and
sustainable industrialization. SDG 9 is also the one most linked
with technological advancements, which are the core of the I4.0.
These systems promote the achievement of this particular SDG by
translating the technological and innovative development to the
industrial settings, optimizing manufacturing processes and bet-
ter applying energy and material resources in the industrial level
(Modgil et al., 2020). Therewith, I4.0 helps in the development of
a resilient industrial infrastructure through the implementation of
cutting-edge technologies that can ensure lean and safer produc-
tion systems, further contributing to the overall sustainability of
urban areas (Luthra et al., 2020). Additionally, both the work of
Bonilla et al. (2018) and Oláh et al. (2020) argue that I4.0 assists
in the decrease in energy and material flows in the industrial envi-
ronment. That happens mainly through the implementation of IIoT,
CPPS, DDA, BD, AM, and new business models grounded in new
technologies and frameworks (Belaud et al., 2019; Cruz Sanchez
et al., 2020; Panetto et al., 2019). The same authors also state that,
in consideration of SDG 9, I4.0 enhances opportunities towards en-
vironmental sustainability by promoting an extended integration
with CE. Thus, I4.0 not only is in the core of SDG 9, acting as a
valuable driver to achieving the set targets, but also contributes to
the promotion of CE, which, in turn, also fosters the compromises
set by the same SDG.
The mutually positive combination of I4.0 and CE in the con-
text of SDG 9 contributes directly to the achievement of the SDG 9
targets 9.1, 9.2, and 9.4 (Table 4). Hence, the goals set by this SDG
represent the elements of facilities and infrastructures for a new
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
circular model (Schroeder et al., 2019), while the I4.0 represents
the new background in which SDG 9 is handled and worked upon
(Berawi, 2019). Against that background, target 9.4 advocates the
for sustainable use of resources and environmentally clean tech-
nologies. This target is especially important to the CE-I4.0 nexus,
as it reminds decision makers the industrial sector has to oper-
ate within current the environmental constrains and serve as a
driver to the implementation of greener technologies. Accordingly,
most of the future research needs in the CE-I4.0 nexus is aligned
with this SDG, as the industry and infrastructure sectors can work
as great platforms for the implementation of circular solutions
boosted by I4.0 tech. Therefore, we argue that the industrial activ-
ity is one crucial driver for the CE-I4.0, being the perfect environ-
ment to link these two growing trends and scale up circular and
sustainable solutions.
4.4. SDG 11 – sustainable cities and communities
SDG 11 was created to ensure that communities should be in-
clusive, resilient, and sustainable. The combination between CE and
I4.0 directly contributes to two of the SDG 11 targets presented
in the Agenda 2030, namely, 11.6 and 11.B. Other targets can be
indirectly affected, such as 11.2 and 11.7. However, as previously
pointed out, this analysis focus on the stronger links between the
SDG and the CE-I4.0 nexus.
In this setting, the role of I4.0 towards SDG 11 lies in provid-
ing the technological tools to better enhance sustainability of cities
and communities through the implementation of CE practices. Ad-
ditionally, I4.0 technologies like automatization, CC, BD and Cyber-
security can also contribute to city-wide systems like transport,
lighting, logistics and security (Bai et al., 2020; Chiappetta Jabbour
et al., 2020; Pham et al., 2019). However, the beforementioned tar-
gets make it clear that better air quality, waste management and
climate change mitigation are critical for a sustainable and resilient
urban scenario. As highlighted by the performed literature review,
CE practices optimized by I4.0 technologies can address all of these
issues, and provide a pathway to achieving SDG 11 (Hossain et al.,
2020; Lausselet et al., 2017). An example is brought by the work
of Kerdlap et al. (2019), that through a case study in Singapore, ar-
gues that CE practices can be integrated through IoT and a collab-
orative industrial symbiosis platform in order to endorse the de-
velopment of Zero Waste Management ecosystems. Similarly, the
studies carried by Gutierrez et al. (2015), Omar et al. (2016), and
Cheng et al. (2017) further exemplify how I4.0 has become a crit-
ical asset to CE practices by promoting smart, interconnected, and
data-driven waste management around the world.
On those premises, the combination of CE and I4.0 seems to be
the future of human settlements and cities. In this future, cities
are even more interconnect, and work efficiently through the use
of cutting-edge technologies to provide inclusion and better qual-
ity of life for all (Velenturf et al., 2018). That being said, the CE-
I4.0 nexus is a valuable asset towards the achievement of SDG 11,
especially by the targets indicated in Table 4. The urban environ-
ment and public services (i.e. waste collection and treatment) are
also platforms to scale up sustainable solutions based on the CE-
I4.0 nexus, although the majority of studied and applications focus
on the industrial sector. Future policies and research can be di-
rected to the implementation of I4.0 technologies in public sectors
to boost circular initiatives, what would contributes to disseminate
such concepts in non-industrial contexts.
4.5. SDG 12 – responsible consumption and production
SDG 12 may be one of the most aligned goals regarding CE
guidelines. For instance, the European Union published an action
plan that clearly states that CE is a system-wide solution strongly
222
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
directed to promoting sustainable consumption and production
modalities, and therefore contributing to the achievement the tar-
gets set by this particular SDG (EC, 2015; Rodriguez-Anton et al.,
2019). Thereby, CE practices like reuse, recycling, recovery, waste
prevention, and safe disposal approaches are treasured assets to
SDG 12 (Priyadarshini and Abhilash, 2020), especially concerning
targets 12.2, 12.3, and 12.5 (Table 4). However, I4.0 is also an im-
portant tool towards this goal, particularly with respect to respon-
sible and sustainable production, addressed by target 12.A. Cutting-
edge technologies, such as the ones showcased in Fig. 1, are revo-
lutionizing the way corporations operate their manufacturing lines.
There is a growing investment in the optimization of the operat-
ing systems, transforming the industrial environment in high-tech
data-driven installations interconnected by communication devices
(Bai et al., 2020; Hatzivasilis et al., 2019; Manavalan and Jayakr-
ishna, 2019). In this new framework, excess in the use of resources,
energy, and waste generation are minimalized by data gathering
and monitoring, which indicates a convergence with the CE prin-
ciples of reducing raw resource use and designing out waste and
pollution (Andrews, 2015; Inoue et al., 2020)
Additionally, CE goes beyond sustainable production and acts on
responsible consumption as well. A growing trend can be found re-
garding circular business models structed around digitalization and
the Product as a Service (PaaS) rationale (Bressanelli et al., 2018;
Geissdoerfer et al., 2018; Goyal et al., 2018). Through PaaS, con-
sumers pay for services that they momentarily use without having
to ever own the product, which then can be used by multiple cos-
tumers and further promote a sharing economy (Chiappetta Jab-
bour et al., 2020). Therefore, this business model helps reducing
the amount of raw materials necessary to produce goods and prod-
ucts. As mentioned by Reuter (2016), business models built upon
PaaS often rely on the digitalization of services, further reducing
the amount of resources needed to serve a larger group of individ-
uals. These new CE-related companies rely also on I4.0 technolo-
gies to deliver their services. For instance, CPS, IoT, Blockchain and
AI are now tools employed by the majority of worldwide known
high-tech start-ups, large corporation, and emerging companies
in the new finance markets (Christidis and Devetsikiotis, 2016;
Lu, 2017; Stock et al., 2018). Therefore, a large array of problems
related to linear patterns may be addressed by combining CE prac-
tices with I4.0 technologies, which, in turn, directly contributes to
achieving the SDG 12 targets 12.2, 12.3, 12.5, and 12.A, as indicated
by Table 4.
4.6. SDG 13 – climate action
SDG 13 urges governments, corporations and the civil society
to take climate action and proactively cut down greenhouse gas
emission in order to tackle climate change. There is no doubt that
a transition from the current Linear Economy to CE would in-
tensively contribute to a more environmentally sustainable world
(Geissdoerfer et al., 2017; Ghisellini et al., 2016), in which soci-
ety can prosper while reducing the anthropogenic pressure applied
onto the natural systems (Rockström et al., 2009). In fact, the Ellen
MacArthur Foundation, a leading organization focused on acceler-
ating the transition to CE, published in 2019 its report “Complet-
ing the Picture – How the Circular Economy Tackles Climate Change”
(EMF, 2019). This publication highlights that a circular model has
the potential to tackle 45% of global greenhouse gas emissions by
addressing five key areas – steel, plastic, aluminum, cement, and
food. The capacity of CE to contribute to targets set SDG 13 is also
stressed by the work of several authors (D’Amato et al., 2020b;
Inoue et al., 2020; Schroeder et al., 2019).
Objectively, CE practices have the potential to boost climate ac-
tion and contribute to climate mitigation by restructuring energy
and resource inefficient supply chains and extracting the maxi-
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
mum value out of a product or service throughout its life cycle
(Ghisellini et al., 2016). For example, by promoting the reuse, re-
cycling and remanufacturing of products, instead of pushing for
the manufacturing of new goods, CE assists in the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions and waste generation (Lausselet et al.,
2017; Sadhukhan et al., 2020). Additionally, circular systems
are underlined by the use and promotion of renewable energy
(Hossain et al., 2020; Linser and Lier, 2020), decoupling society
from the use of carbon-intensive fossil fuels.
Nonetheless, it is crucial to stress that circular systems are
not necessarily the most sustainable option or are responsible for
fewer emissions. As highlighted by de Souza Junior et al. (2020),
circular systems can present negative relationships regarding
sustainability and circularity. Geissdoerfer et al. (2017) and
Liu et al. (2017) corroborate with that view by stressing the possi-
bility of trade-offs between environmental impacts. Therefore, in
order to understand the overall benefits of circular systems and
better design end-of-life strategies, it is import to apply a system-
atic perspective based on life cycle thinking and environmental
accounting methodologies (Elia et al., 2017; Homrich et al., 2018;
Kalmykova et al., 2018). In this context, I4.0 brings solutions to
CE issues by optimizing its practices through the use of innovative
technologies (Oláh et al., 2020). Although a circular system is not
always less emission-intensive, the implementation of IoT, BD, AM
or Blockchain may help reducing the energy and material flow nec-
essary to a certain production by better monitoring the amounts
of resource applied (Andoni et al., 2019; Bonilla et al., 2018), and
thereby reducing emissions generation and emissions.
Differently than the other five discussed SDG, it is difficult to
pinpoint specific targets that the combination of I4.0 and CE could
contribute in this setting, even though this relationship strongly
assists in tackling climate change and promoting climate action.
The target that more closely addresses the CE-I4.0 nexus is tar-
get 13.2 (Table 4). Here, the macro scale of circular economy and
governmental incentives for I4.0 development and implementa-
tion can be emphasized. However, as corroborated by the stud-
ies of Schroeder et al. (2019), Rodriguez-Anton et al. (2019) and
Oláh et al. (2020), the real benefits of the CE-I4.0 nexus towards
SDG 13 go beyond the targets set, and lie in the potential of these
systematic shifts in aiding climate change mitigation.
As the adherence to CE and I4.0 grows worldwide, it is up to
researchers and governmental institutions to monitor the progress
and impact of the CE-I4.0 nexus towards climate change. Future
research could apply environmental accounting methodologies like
Life Cycle assessment, Material Flow Analysis and Energy Analy-
sis to systems embedded in the CE-I4.0 nexus with the propose to
continuously track and mitigate the impacts of the systems shifts.
Accordantly, decision makers should consider this analytical ap-
proach when implementing the actions and strategies displayed by
target 13.2.\
4.7. SDG indirectly affected by the combination of CE and I4.0
Although the objective of this research was to highlight how the
application of I4.0 technologies to circular systems can directly aid
towards the achievements of the SDG targets, the executed system-
atic review also provides complementary results. Apart from the
SDG mentioned in Table 4, the association of CE concepts and prac-
tices to the new technologies developed under the I4.0 umbrella
indirectly benefit an alternative list of SDG. Due to these secondary
relationships, the effects of the CE-I4.0 nexus according to specific
targets of indirectly affected SDG were not deeply perused in this
research.
Based on the review’s findings, three of the SDG related to the
Biosphere sector of Fig. 5 could benefit from a stronger develop-
ment between I4.0 and circular systems. In this context, we argue
223
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
the alignment between SDG 8, SDG 9, SDG 11, and SDG 12 could
be of service to the targets set by SDG 14 and 15, which are di-
rected to the conservation and restoration of ecosystems. That rela-
tion is built on the fact that, currently, these natural environments
suffer immense pressure from the anthropogenic factors, leading
to issues like marine plastic pollution and deforestation (Li et al.,
2016; Linser and Lier, 2020). Through more environmentally sus-
tainable production, consumption, and behavioral patterns, the im-
pact on these ecosystems may be eased. Smart waste manage-
ment, waste minimization, and the restorage of natural systems
advocated by CE are practices and solutions that can contribute
to this problematic. As stated throughout this paper, I4.0 can im-
prove CE strategies and methods by amplifying its positive impacts,
and, in this case, contributing to the biosphere-related SDG. This
analysis is corroborated by the research carried out by Rodriguez-
Anton et al. (2019) and Schroeder et al. (2019).
Regarding the Societal and Economic sectors of Fig. 5, the CE-
I4.0 nexus may improve the current global contexts tackled by SDG
1, SDG 2, and SDG 10. The reasons for that lies in the controver-
sial revolution that CE and I4.0 might impose onto the job market
(Hahn, 2020; Phung, 2019). In the case these drastic shifts promote
job creation and reallocation worldwide due to the need to suffice
new technologies and business models, the new positions created
could imply in reduced inequalities and poverty in a sustainability-
drive workspace, while also tackling the hunger-related issues
(Chhipi-Shrestha et al., 2015; Milica and Milica, 2020). Moreover,
CE is posed as a treasured solution to food security (Flynn et al.,
2019; Hidalgo et al., 2020). If powered by I4.0, food scarcity can
also be addressed through the comprehensive implementation of
CE practices and principles.
Lastly, we argue that although the indirect links cited above
may sound fragile due to the many linkages presented between
the SDG set in Agenda 2030, several authors emphasize that the
SDG are an interconnected strategy for sustainable development
(Alcamo, 2019; Meurs et al., 2019; Santika et al., 2019). All the 17
SDG tackle complex and systemic issues that have hidden linkages
with other deeper problematics. Consequently, by contributing to
a specific goal, one might encounter difficulties related to a sec-
ond SDG. That is also the reason for the creation of SDG 17, which
urges for the revitalization and implementation of global partner-
ships in order to address the sustainability agenda. Against that
background, we argue that CE and I4.0 are also indirectly related
to this last SDG, as both topics depend on the intersectoral agree-
ments and engagement to power the crossing to a sustainability-
driven and highly technological society.
5. Conclusions
The Agenda 2030 was created as an instrument to promote
worldwide action regarding the most important pressing issues.
With the objective to leave no one behind, the 17 SDG, an in-
terconnected list of goals, targets, and indicators were created to
guide governments, intuitions and the civil society towards sus-
tainable development. At the same time, two emerging systematic
shifts are currently in progress – the development of I4.0 and the
transition to CE. Against that background, this research set out to
link these three topics through a systematic literature review and
investigate if and how the combination of CE and I4.0 can con-
tribute to achieving the targets set in the SDG.
Results show that there is a rising interest in the practical ap-
plications of both CE and I4.0 as pathways to achieving sustain-
able solutions. The CE-I4.0 nexus directly responds to targets set
by SDG 7, SDG 8, SDG 9, SDG 11, SDG 12 and SDG 13 (Table 4),
which addresses the three main areas handled by the SDG (bio-
sphere, economy and society). We conclude that the CE-I4.0 nexus
holds a large array of opportunities for the further development of
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
sustainable practices and solutions, ultimately contributing to the
achievement of the SDG. Thereby, this research serves as a guide
to decision and policymakers. The findings and discussion put for-
ward in Section 4 identify specific targets that can be addressed
by the CE-I4.0 nexus and provide stakeholders with broader per-
spective of how can CE and I4.0 can form a joint platform for the
development of sustainable practices.
As far as the authors are aware, this research is the first
one to simultaneously link the SDG to CE and I4.0. Therefore,
there are still several gaps that could be further investigated.
Section 4.7 presents a second list of SDG that are indirectly af-
fected by the combination of CE-I4.0 nexus, representing an option
for future research. Moreover, further investigations could focus on
case studies of systems inserted in the CE-4.0 nexus to access its
impact regarding greenhouse gas emission, job creation and reallo-
cation, production models etc. Although the combination of these
two topics is growing in the industrial sector, we identified the
need for further research and implementation of I4.0 tech in cir-
cular system connected to urban environments and the public sec-
tors. Furthermore, as the economic pillar is often referred to as
the decisive factor in sustainability dialogues, economic feasibility
studies focused on the CE-I4.0 nexus are essential. Future inves-
tigation regarding policymaking and the governmental incentives
to boost combination of this sustainability-driven model along-
side with the current rising high-technological revolution is recom-
mended. Lastly, as the three main areas addressed by this research
are emerging topics, future systematic reviews with similar goals
could point out the SDG responses to the further development of
the CE-I4.0 nexus.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior –
Brasil (CAPES) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientí-
fico e Tecnológico (CNPq).
Supplementary materials
Supplementary material associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.005.
References
Abbasi, A., Kamal, M.M., 2020. Adopting industry 4.0 technologies in citi-
zens’ electronic-engagement considering sustainability development. Lecture
Notes in Business Information Processing 381 LNBIP 304–313. doi:10.1007/
978- 3- 030- 44322- 1_23.
Alcamo, J., 2019. Water quality and its interlinkages with the Sustainable Devel-
opment Goals. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Environmental
Change Assessment 36, 126–140. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.11.005.
Andoni, M., Robu, V., Flynn, D., Abram, S., Geach, D., Jenkins, D., McCallum, P., Pea-
cock, A., 2019. Blockchain technology in the energy sector: a systematic re-
view of challenges and opportunities. Renew. Sustain. Eng. Rev. 100, 143–174.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.10.014.
Andrews, D., 2015. The circular economy, design thinking and education for sustain-
ability: local Economy. 10.1177/0269094215578226
Arora, M., Raspall, F., Cheah, L., Silva, A., 2020. Buildings and the circular economy:
estimating urban mining, recovery and reuse potential of building components.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 154. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104581.
Aziz, R., Chevakidagarn, P., Danteravanich, S., 2016. Life cycle sustainability assess-
ment of community composting of agricultural and agro industrial wastes. J.
Sustain. Sci. Manag. 11, 57–69.
Bai, C., Dallasega, P., Orzes, G., Sarkis, J., 2020. Industry 4.0 technologies assess-
ment: a sustainability perspective. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 229. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.
107776.
224
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
Barros, M.V., Salvador, R., Piekarski, C.M., de Francisco, A.C., 2019. Mapping of
main research lines concerning life cycle studies on packaging systems in
Brazil and in the world. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess 24, 1429–1443. doi:10.1007/
s11367- 018- 1573- 2.
Bashtannyk, V., Buryk, Z., Kokhan, M., Vlasenko, T., Skryl, V., 2020. Financial, Eco-
nomic and Sustainable Development of States Within the Conditions of Industry
4.0. International Journal of Management 11 (4), 406–413.
Beier, G., Niehoff, S., Xue, B., 2018. More sustainability in industry through Industrial
Internet of Things? Applied Sciences (Switzerland) 8. doi:10.3390/app8020219.
Belaud, J.-.P., Prioux, N., Vialle, C., Sablayrolles, C., 2019. Big data for agri-food 4.0:
application to sustainability management for by-products supply chain. Comput.
Ind. 111, 41–50. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2019.06.006.
Berawi, M.A., 2019. The role of industry 4.0 in achieving Sustainable Develop-
ment Goals. International Journal of Technology 10, 644–647. doi:10.14716/
ijtech.v10i4.3341.
Blomsma, F., Brennan, G., 2017. The Emergence of Circular Economy: a New Framing
Around Prolonging Resource Productivity. J. Ind. Ecol. 21, 603–614. doi:10.1111/
jiec.12603.
Bocken, N.M.P., Olivetti, E.A., Cullen, J.M., Potting, J., Lifset, R., 2017. Taking the Cir-
cularity to the Next Level: a Special Issue on the Circular Economy. J. Ind. Ecol.
21, 476–482. doi:10.1111/jiec.12606.
Bonilla, S.H., Silva, H.R.O., Silva, M.T., Gonçalves, R.F., Sacomano, J.B., 2018. Industry
4.0 and sustainability implications: a scenario-based analysis of the impacts and
challenges. Sustainability (Switzerland) doi:10.3390/su10103740.
Bressanelli, G., Adrodegari, F., Perona, M., Saccani, N., 2018. The role of digital tech-
nologies to overcome Circular Economy challenges in PSS Business Models: an
exploratory case study. Presented at the Procedia CIRP 216–221. doi:10.1016/j.
procir.2018.03.322.
Brondi, C., Cornago, S., Ballarino, A., Avai, A., Pietraroia, D., Dellepiane, U., Niero, M.,
2018. Sustainability-based Optimization Criteria for Industrial Symbiosis: the
Symbioptima Case. Procedia CIRP 69, 855–860. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.026.
Chen, T.-.L., Kim, H., Pan, S.-.Y., Tseng, P.-.C., Lin, Y.-.P., Chiang, P.-C., 2020. Imple-
mentation of green chemistry principles in circular economy system towards
sustainable development goals: challenges and perspectives. Sci. Total Environ.
716. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136998.
Cheng, G., Huang, G., Dong, C., Xu, Y., Chen, J., Chen, X., Li, K., 2017. Distributed
mixed-integer fuzzy hierarchical programming for municipal solid waste man-
agement. Part II: scheme analysis and mechanism revelation. Environ. Sci. Pol-
lut. Res. 24, 8711–8721. doi:10.1007/s11356- 017- 8574- 8.
Chhipi-Shrestha, G.K., Hewage, K., Sadiq, R., 2015. “Socializing” sustainability: a
critical review on current development status of social life cycle impact as-
sessment method. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 17, 579–596. doi:10.1007/
s10098- 014- 0841- 5.
Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J., De Camargo Fiorini, P., Wong, C.W.Y., Jugend, D., Lopes
De Sousa Jabbour, A.B., Roman Pais Seles, B.M., Paula Pinheiro, M.A., Ribeiro
da Silva, H.M., 2020. First-mover firms in the transition towards the sharing
economy in metallic natural resource-intensive industries: implications for the
circular economy and emerging industry 4.0 technologies. Resour. Policy 66.
doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101596.
Christidis, K., Devetsikiotis, M., 2016. Blockchains and Smart Contracts for the Inter-
net of Things. IEEE Access 4, 2292–2303. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2566339.
Coutinho, R.M., Ceryno, P.S., Campos, L.M., de, S., Bouzon, M., 2019. A critical re-
view on lean green product development: state of art and proposed conceptual
framework. Environ. Eng. Manage. J. 18, 2319–2333.
Cruz Sanchez, F.A., Boudaoud, H., Camargo, M., Pearce, J.M., 2020. Plastic recycling in
additive manufacturing: a systematic literature review and opportunities for the
circular economy. J. Clean. Prod. 264, 121602. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121602.
D’Amato, D., Gaio, M., Semenzin, E., 2020a. A review of LCA assessments of forest-
based bioeconomy products and processes under an ecosystem services per-
spective. Sci. Total Environ. 706, 135859. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135859.
D’Amato, D., Veijonaho, S., Toppinen, A., 2020b. Towards sustainability? Forest-based
circular bioeconomy business models in Finnish SMEs. Forest Policy and Eco-
nomics 110. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2018.12.004.
de Souza Junior, H.R.A., Dantas, T.E.T., Zanghelini, G.M., Cherubini, E., Soares, S.R.,
2020. Measuring the environmental performance of a circular system: emergy
and LCA approach on a recycle polystyrene system. Sci. Total Environ., 138111
doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138111.
Dev, N.K., Shankar, R., Qaiser, F.H., 2020. Industry 4.0 and circular economy: op-
erational excellence for sustainable reverse supply chain performance. Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 153. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104583.
Drath, R., Horch, A., 2014. Industrie 4.0: hit or Hype? [Industry Forum]. IEEE Ind.
Electron. Mag. 8, 56–58. doi:10.1109/MIE.2014.2312079.
EC, 2015. Closing the Loop – An EU action plan for Circular Economy. Euro-
pean Comission. Available at: https://eur- lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/
?uri=CELEX:52015DC0614
Elia, V., Gnoni, M.G., Tornese, F., 2017. Measuring circular economy strategies
through index methods: a critical analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 2741–2751.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.196.
, 2015. Towards a Circular Economy: Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transi-
tion. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, pp. 1–20.
, 2019. Completing the Picture: How the Circular Economy Tackles Climate Change.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, pp. 1–62.
Esmaeilian, B., Wang, B., Lewis, K., Duarte, F., Ratti, C., Behdad, S., 2018. The future
of waste management in smart and sustainable cities: a review and concept
paper. Waste Manage. (Oxford) 81, 177–195. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2018.09.047.
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Fassio, F., Tecco, N., 2019. Circular Economy for Food: a Systemic Interpretation of
40 Case Histories in the Food System in Their Relationships with SDGs. Systems
7, 43. doi:10.3390/systems7030043.
Filippini, R., Mazzocchi, C., Corsi, S., 2019. The contribution of Urban Food Policies
toward food security in developing and developed countries: a network anal-
ysis approach. Sustainable Cities and Society 47, 101506. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2019.
101506.
Fink, A., 2005. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From Paper to the Internet.
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Flynn, K., Villarreal, B.P., Barranco, A., Belc, N., Björnsdóttir, B., Fusco, V., Rainieri, S.,
Smaradóttir, S.E., Smeu, I., Teixeira, P., Jörundsdóttir, H.Ó., 2019. An introduction
to current food safety needs. In: Trends in Food Science & Technology, Keeping
Food Safety on the Agenda for 15 years – The SAFE consortium, 84, pp. 1–3.
doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2018.09.012.
Fuldauer, L.I., Ives, M.C., Adshead, D., Thacker, S., Hall, J.W., 2019. Participatory plan-
ning of the future of waste management in small island developing states to
deliver on the Sustainable Development Goals. J. Clean. Prod. 223, 147–162.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.269.
Garcia-Muiña, F.E., González-Sánchez, R., Ferrari, A.M., Settembre-Blundo, D., 2018.
The paradigms of Industry 4.0 and circular economy as enabling drivers for the
competitiveness of businesses and territories: the case of an Italian ceramic tiles
manufacturing company. Soc. Sci. 7. doi:10.3390/socsci7120255.
Geissdoerfer, M., Morioka, S.N., de Carvalho, M.M., Evans, S., 2018. Business models
and supply chains for the circular economy. J. Clean. Prod. 190, 712–721. doi:10.
1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.159.
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N.M.P., Hultink, E.J., 2017. The Circular Economy
– A new sustainability paradigm? J. Clean. Prod. 143, 757–768. doi:10.1016/j.
jclepro.2016.12.048.
Geng, Y., Liu, Z., Xue, B., Dong, H., Fujita, T., Chiu, A., 2014. Emergy-based assess-
ment on industrial symbiosis: a case of Shenyang Economic and Technologi-
cal Development Zone. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 21, 13572–13587. doi:10.1007/
s11356- 014- 3287- 8.
Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., Ulgiati, S., 2016. A review on circular economy: the ex-
pected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic sys-
tems. Journal of Cleaner Production, Towards Post Fossil Carbon Societies: Re-
generative and Preventative Eco-Industrial Development 114, 11–32. doi:10.
1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007.
Ghisellini, P., Ripa, M., Ulgiati, S., 2018. Exploring environmental and economic costs
and benefits of a circular economy approach to the construction and demolition
sector. A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production 178, 618–643. doi:10.
1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.207.
Ghosh, S.K., Agamuthu, P., 2018. Circular economy: the way forward: waste Man-
agement & Research. 10.1177/0734242×18778444
Goyal, S., Esposito, M., Kapoor, A., 2018. Circular economy business models in devel-
oping economies: lessons from India on reduce, recycle, and reuse paradigms.
Thunderbird International Business Review 60, 729–740. doi:10.1002/tie.21883.
Gravagnuolo, A., Angrisano, M., Fusco Girard, L., 2019. Circular Economy Strategies
in Eight Historic Port Cities: criteria and Indicators Towards a Circular City As-
sessment Framework. Sustainability 11, 3512. doi:10.3390/su11133512.
Guerra-Rodríguez, S., Oulego, P., Rodríguez, E., Singh, D.N., Rodríguez-Chueca, J.,
2020. Towards the implementation of circular economy in the wastewater
sector: challenges and opportunities. Water (Switzerland) 12. doi:10.3390/
w12051431.
Gutierrez, J.M., Jensen, M., Henius, M., Riaz, T., 2015. Smart waste collection system
based on location intelligence. In: Procedia Computer Science, Complex Adap-
tive Systems San Jose, CA November 2-4, 2015, 61, pp. 120–127. doi:10.1016/j.
procs.2015.09.170.
Hahn, K., 2020. Opportunities for Socially Responsible Industry 4.s. IEEE Eng. Man-
age. Rev. 48, 63–70. doi:10.1109/EMR.2020.2969407.
Halse, L.L., Jæger, B., 2019. Operationalizing Industry 4.0: understanding Barriers of
Industry 4.0 and Circular Economy. IFIP Adv. Inf. Commun. Technol. 567, 135–
142. doi:10.1007/978- 3- 030- 29996- 5_16.
Hatzivasilis, G., Christodoulakis, N., Tzagkarakis, C., Ioannidis, S., Demetriou, G.,
Fysarakis, K., Panayiotou, M., 2019. The CE-IoT framework for green ICT organi-
zations: the interplay of CE-IoT as an enabler for green innovation and e-waste
management in ICT. In: Presented at the Proceedings - 15th Annual Interna-
tional Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems, DCOSS 2019,
pp. 436–442. doi:10.1109/DCOSS.2019.0 0 088.
Hatzivasilis, G., Fysarakis, K., Soultatos, O., Askoxylakis, I., Papaefstathiou, I.,
Demetriou, G., 2018. The Industrial Internet of Things as an enabler for a Circu-
lar Economy Hy-LP: a novel IIoT protocol, evaluated on a wind park’s SDN/NFV-
enabled 5 G industrial network. Comput. Commun. 119, 127–137. doi:10.1016/j.
comcom.2018.02.007.
Hidalgo, D., Corona, F., Martín-Marroquín, J.M., 2020. Nutrient recycling: from waste
to crop. Biomass Conv. Bioref. doi:10.1007/s13399- 019- 00590- 3.
Hidayatno, A., Destyanto, A.R., Hulu, C.A., 2019. Industry 4.0 Technology Implemen-
tation Impact to Industrial Sustainable Energy in Indonesia: a Model Conceptu-
alization. In: Energy Procedia, 5th International Conference on Power and En-
ergy Systems Engineering (CPESE 2018), 156, pp. 227–233. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.
2018.11.133.
Hofmann, E., Rüsch, M., 2017. Industry 4.0 and the current status as well as future
prospects on logistics. Comput. Ind. 89, 23–34. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2017.04.
002.
Homrich, A.S., Galvão, G., Abadia, L.G., Carvalho, M.M., 2018. The circular economy
umbrella: trends and gaps on integrating pathways. J. Clean. Prod. 175, 525–543.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.064.
225
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
Hossain, Md.U., Ng, S.T., Antwi-Afari, P., Amor, B., 2020. Circular economy and the
construction industry: existing trends, challenges and prospective framework
for sustainable construction. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 130, 109948.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.109948.
IISD, 2018. Estimating Employment Effects of the Circular Economy. The Interna-
tional Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) Background Note, Report, 1–
10.
Inoue, M., Yamada, S., Miyajima, S., Ishii, K., Hasebe, R., Aoyama, K., Yamada, T.,
Bracke, S., 2020. A modular design strategy considering sustainability and sup-
plier selection. Journal of Advanced Mechanical Design, Systems and Manufac-
turing 14. doi:10.1299/jamdsm.2020jamdsm0023.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Jabbour, A.B.L., de, S., Sarkis, J., Filho, M.G., 2019. Unlocking the cir-
cular economy through new business models based on large-scale data: an in-
tegrative framework and research agenda. Technol. Forecast Soc. Change 144,
546–552. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.010.
Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., Helbig, J., 2013. Recommendations for implementing
the strategic initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0. Final Report of the Industrie 4.0 Working
Group.
Kalmykova, Y., Sadagopan, M., Rosado, L., 2018. Circular economy – From review
of theories and practices to development of implementation tools. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, Sustainable Resource Management and the Circular
Economy 135, 190–201. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.034.
Kerdlap, P., Low, J.S.C., Ramakrishna, S., 2019. Zero waste manufacturing: a frame-
work and review of technology, research, and implementation barriers for en-
abling a circular economy transition in Singapore. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 151.
doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104438.
Khan, I., Kabir, Z., 2020. Waste-to-energy generation technologies and the develop-
ing economies: a multi-criteria analysis for sustainability assessment. Renew.
Energy 150, 320–333. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2019.12.132.
Kirchherr, J., Piscicelli, L., 2019. Towards an Education for the Circular Economy
(ECE): five Teaching Principles and a Case Study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 150,
104406. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104406.
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., Hekkert, M., 2017. Conceptualizing the circular economy: an
analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 127, 221–232. doi:10.1016/j.
resconrec.2017.09.005.
Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., Seppälä, J., 2018. Circular Economy: the Concept and its
Limitations. Ecol. Econ. 143, 37–46. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041.
Lacy, P., Rutqvist, J., 2015. Waste to Wealth: The Circular Economy Advantage. Pal-
grave Macmillan, London doi:10.1057/9781137530707.
Lausselet, C., Cherubini, F., Oreggioni, G.D., del Alamo Serrano, G., Becidan, M.,
Hu, X., Rørstad, P.Kr., Strømman, A.H., 2017. Norwegian Waste-to-Energy: cli-
mate change, circular economy and carbon capture and storage. Resour. Con-
serv. Recycl. 126, 50–61. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.025.
Le Blanc, David, 2015. Towards integration at last? The Sustainable Development
Goals as a network of targets. Sustainable Development 23 (3), 176–187. doi:10.
1002/sd.1582.
Lee, S., 2020. Role of social and solidarity economy in localizing the sustainable
development goals. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World
Ecology 27, 65–71. doi:10.1080/13504509.2019.1670274.
Li, W.C., Tse, H.F., Fok, L., 2016. Plastic waste in the marine environment: a review
of sources, occurrence and effects. Sci. Total Environ. 566–567, 333–349. doi:10.
1016/j.scitotenv.2016.05.084.
Lieder, M., Rashid, A., 2016. Towards circular economy implementation: a compre-
hensive review in context of manufacturing industry. J. Clean. Prod. 115, 36–51.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.042.
Linser, S., Lier, M., 2020. The contribution of sustainable development goals and
forest-related indicators to national bioeconomy progress monitoring. Sustain-
ability (Switzerland) 12. doi:10.3390/su12072898.
Liu, G., Hao, Y., Dong, L., Yang, Z., Zhang, Y., Ulgiati, S., 2017. An emergy-LCA analysis
of municipal solid waste management. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 120, 131–143.
doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.12.003.
Liu, Z., Geng, Y., Ulgiati, S., Park, H.-.S., Tsuyoshi, F., Wang, H., 2016. Uncovering key
factors influencing one industrial park’s sustainability: a combined evaluation
method of emergy analysis and index decomposition analysis. Journal of Cleaner
Production, Towards Post Fossil Carbon Societies: Regenerative and Preventative
Eco-Industrial Development 114, 141–149. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.149.
Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, A.B., Jabbour, C.J.C., Godinho Filho, M., Roubaud, D., 2018.
Industry 4.0 and the circular economy: a proposed research agenda and original
roadmap for sustainable operations. Ann. Oper. Res. 270, 273–286. doi:10.1007/
s10479- 018- 2772- 8.
Lu, Y., 2017. Industry 4.0: a survey on technologies, applications and open research
issues. Journal of Industrial Information Integration 6, 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.jii.
2017.04.005.
Luthra, S., Kumar, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Mangla, S.K., Garza-Reyes, J.A., 2020. Industry
4.0 as an enabler of sustainability diffusion in supply chain: an analysis of in-
fluential strength of drivers in an emerging economy. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58, 1505–
1521. doi:10.1080/00207543.2019.1660828.
Machado, C.G., Winroth, M.P., Silva, E.H.D.R.da, 2020. Sustainable manufacturing in
Industry 4.0: an emerging research agenda. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58, 1462–1484.
doi:10.1080/00207543.2019.1652777.
Manavalan, E., Jayakrishna, K., 2019. A review of Internet of Things (IoT) embedded
sustainable supply chain for industry 4.0 requirements. Comput. Ind. Eng. 127,
925–953. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2018.11.030.
Meredith, J., 1993. Theory building through conceptual methods. International Jour-
nal of Operations & Production Management.
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Mestre, A., Cooper, T., 2017. Circular product design. A multiple loops life cycle
design approach for the circular economy. Design Journal 20, S1620–S1635.
doi:10.1080/14606925.2017.1352686.
Meurs, M., Seidelmann, L., Koutsoumpa, M., 2019. How healthy is a ‘healthy econ-
omy’? Incompatibility between current pathways towards SDG3 and SDG8.
Global. Health 15, 83. doi:10.1186/s12992- 019- 0532- 4.
Milica, D., Milica, J., 2020. Productive Employment and Working Conditions as De-
terminants of Sustainable Economic Development in Serbia. Studies in Business
and Economics 14, 84–96. doi:10.2478/sbe- 2019- 0045.
Mitchell, P., James, K.WRAP, 2015. Economic growth potential of more circular
economies. Waste and Resources Action Programme Report 1–45.
Modgil, S., Gupta, S., Bhushan, B., 2020. Building a living economy through modern
information decision support systems and UN sustainable development goals.
Production Planning & Control 1–21. doi:10.1080/09537287.2019.1695916.
Muñoz-Torres, M.J., Fernández-Izquierdo, M., Rivera-Lirio, J.M., Ferrero-Ferrero, I.,
Escrig-Olmedo, E., Gisbert-Navarro, J.V., Marullo, M.C., 2018. An assessment tool
to integrate sustainability principles into the global supply chain. Sustainability
(Switzerland) 10. doi:10.3390/su10020535.
Murray, A., Skene, K., Haynes, K., 2017. The Circular Economy: an Interdisciplinary
Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context. J. Bus. Ethics
140, 369–380. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2.
Nascimento, D.L.M., Alencastro, V., Quelhas, O.L.G., Caiado, R.G.G., Garza-Reyes, J.A.,
Lona, L.R., Tortorella, G., 2019. Exploring Industry 4.0 technologies to enable
circular economy practices in a manufacturing context: a business model pro-
posal. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 30, 607–627. doi:10.
1108/JMTM- 03- 2018- 0071.
Nasir, M.H.A., Genovese, A., Acquaye, A.A., Koh, S.C.L., Yamoah, F., 2017. Comparing
linear and circular supply chains: a case study from the construction indus-
try. International Journal of Production Economics, Closed Loop Supply Chain
(CLSC): Economics, Modelling, Management and Control 183, 443–457. doi:10.
1016/j.ijpe.2016.06.008.
Nerini, F., Sovacool, B., Hughes, N., Cozzi, L., Cosgrave, E., Howells, M., Tavoni, M.,
Tomei, J., Zerriffi, H., Milligan, B., 2019. Connecting climate action with other
Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability 2, 674–680. doi:10.1038/
s41893- 019- 0334- y.
Oláh, J., Aburumman, N., Popp, J., Khan, M.A., Haddad, H., Kitukutha, N., 2020. Im-
pact of industry 4.0 on environmental sustainability. Sustainability (Switzerland)
12. doi:10.3390/su12114674.
Omar, M.F., Termizi, A.A.A., Zainal, D., Wahap, N.A., Ismail, N.M., Ahmad, N., 2016.
Implementation of spatial smart waste management system in malaysia. IOP
Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 37, 012059. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/37/1/012059.
Oxford Economics, 2019. How Robots Change the World What Automation Really
Means for Jobs and Productivity. Report, 1–64
Padilla-Rivera, A., Paredes, M.G., Güereca, L.P., 2019. A systematic review of the
sustainability assessment of bioenergy: the case of gaseous biofuels. Biomass
Bioenergy 125, 79–94. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.03.014.
Panetto, H., Iung, B., Ivanov, D., Weichhart, G., Wang, X., 2019. Challenges for the
cyber-physical manufacturing enterprises of the future. Annu. Rev. Control. 47,
200–213. doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2019.02.002.
Pham, T.T., Kuo, T.-.C., Tseng, M.-.L., Tan, R.R., Tan, K., Ika, D.S., Lin, C.J., 2019. Industry
4.0 to accelerate the circular economy: a case study of electric scooter sharing.
Sustainability (Switzerland) 11. doi:10.3390/su11236661.
Phung, C.G., 2019. Implications of the circular economy and digital transition on
skills and green jobs in the plastics industry. Field Actions Science Report 2019,
100–107.
Pla-Julián, I., Guevara, S., 2019. Is circular economy the key to transitioning towards
sustainable development? Challenges from the perspective of care ethics. Fu-
tures 105, 67–77. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2018.09.001.
Pohlmann, C.R., Scavarda, A.J., Alves, M.B., Korzenowski, A.L., 2020. The role of the
focal company in sustainable development goals: a Brazilian food poultry sup-
ply chain case study. J. Clean. Prod. 245. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118798.
Principato, L., Ruini, L., Guidi, M., Secondi, L., 2019. Adopting the circular economy
approach on food loss and waste: the case of Italian pasta production. Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 144, 82–89. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.01.025.
Priyadarshini, P., Abhilash, P.C., 2020. Circular economy practices within energy and
waste management sectors of India: a meta-analysis. Bioresour. Technol. 304.
doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123018.
Purvis, B., Mao, Y., Robinson, D., 2019. Three pillars of sustainability: in
search of conceptual origins. Sustainability Sci. 14, 681–695. doi:10.1007/
s11625- 018- 0627- 5.
Quint, F., Sebastian, K., Gorecky, D., 2015. A Mixed-reality Learning Environment.
Procedia Computer Science. In: 2015 International Conference Virtual and Aug-
mented Reality in Education, 75, pp. 43–48. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2015.12.199.
Ramakrishna, S., Ngowi, A., Jager, H.D., Awuzie, B.O., 2020. Emerging Industrial Rev-
olution: symbiosis of Industry 4.0 and Circular Economy: the Role of Universi-
ties. Science, Technology and Society doi:10.1177/0971721820912918.
Rashed, A.H., Shah, A., 2020. The role of private sector in the implementa-
tion of sustainable development goals. Environ. Dev. Sustain. doi:10.1007/
s10668- 020- 00718- w.
Reuter, M.A., 2016. Digitalizing the Circular Economy: circular Economy Engineering
Defined by the Metallurgical Internet of Things. Metall. Mater. Trans. B 47, 3194–
3220. doi:10.1007/s11663-016-0735-5.
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F.S., Lambin, E.,
Lenton, T.M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H.J., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C.A.,
Hughes, T., van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P.K., Costanza, R.,
Svedin, U., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Corell, R.W., Fabry, V.J., Hansen, J.,
226
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
Walker, B., Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen, P., Foley, J., 2009. Planetary
Boundaries: exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Ecol. Soc. 14.
Rockström, J., Sukhdev, P., 2016. Presentation at Stockholm Resilience Centre. Stock-
holm University Available at: https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/
research-news/2016-06-14-how-food-connects-all-the-sdgs.html .
Rodriguez-Anton, J.M., Rubio-Andrada, L., Celemín-Pedroche, M.S., Alonso-
Almeida, M.D.M., 2019. Analysis of the relations between circular economy
and sustainable development goals. International Journal of Sustainable Devel-
opment & World Ecology 26, 708–720. doi:10.1080/13504509.2019.1666754.
Romero, D., Stahre, J., Taisch, M., 2020. The Operator 4.0: towards socially sustain-
able factories of the future. Comput. Ind. Eng. 139, 106128. doi:10.1016/j.cie.
2019.106128.
Ruiz, J.J., 2020. The process towards a Global Pact for the Environment at the United
Nations: from legal ambition to political dilution. Review of European, Compar-
ative & International Environmental Law doi:10.1111/reel.12331.
Rüssmann, 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 In-
dustries. Consulting Group, Boston, pp. 1–14.
Sadhukhan, J., Dugmore, T.I.J., Matharu, A., Martinez-Hernandez, E., Aburto, J., Rah-
man, P.K.S.M., Lynch, J., 2020. Perspectives on “game changer” global chal-
lenges for sustainable 21st century: plant-based diet, unavoidable food waste
biorefining, and circular economy. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12. doi:10.3390/
su12051976.
Salvia, A.L., Leal Filho, W., Brandli, L.L., Griebeler, J.S., 2019. Assessing research trends
related to Sustainable Development Goals: local and global issues. J. Clean. Prod.
208, 841–849. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.242.
Santika, W.G., Anisuzzaman, M., Bahri, P.A., Shafiullah, G.M., Rupf, G.V., Urmee, T.,
2019. From goals to joules: a quantitative approach of interlinkages between
energy and the Sustainable Development Goals. Energy Research & Social Sci-
ence 50, 201–214. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2018.11.016.
Scheyvens, R., Banks, G., Hughes, E., 2016. The Private Sector and the SDGs: the
Need to MoveBeyond ‘Business as Usual’. Sustainable Development 24 (6), 371–
382. doi:10.1002/sd.1623.
Schlaepfer, R.C., Kock, M., Merkofer, P., 2014. Industry 4.0: challenges and solutions
for the digital transformation and use of potential technologies. Delloite Report
1–32.
Schroeder, P., Anggraeni, K., Weber, U., 2019. The Relevance of Circular Economy
Practices to the Sustainable Development Goals. J. Ind. Ecol. 23, 77–95. doi:10.
1111/jiec.12732.
Šebestová, J., Sroka, W., 2020. Sustainable development goals and sme decisions:
the czech republic vs. Poland.. Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian
Research 7, 39–50. doi:10.15549/jeecar.v7i1.418.
Sihvonen, S., Ritola, T., 2015. Conceptualizing ReX for Aggregating End-of-life Strate-
gies in Product Development. In: Procedia CIRP, The 22nd CIRP Conference on
Life Cycle Engineering, 29, pp. 639–644. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2015.01.026.
Silvestre, B.S., Ţîrcă, D.M., 2019. Innovations for sustainable development: moving
toward a sustainable future. J. Clean. Prod. 208, 325–332. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.
2018.09.244.
Smit, J., Kreutzer, S., Moeller, C., Carlberg, M., 2016. Industry 4.0 a Study For the
European Parliament. European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium.
Stahel, W.R., 2007. Sustainable Development and Strategic Thinking. Chinese Journal
of Population Resources and Environment 5, 3–19. doi:10.1080/10 042857.20 07.
10677526.
Stock, T., Obenaus, M., Kunz, S., Kohl, H., 2018. Industry 4.0 as enabler for a sustain-
able development: a qualitative assessment of its ecological and social potential.
Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 118, 254–267. doi:10.1016/j.psep.2018.06.026.
Tolstykh, T., Shmeleva, N., Gamidullaeva, L., 2020. Evaluation of circular and inte-
gration potentials of innovation ecosystems for industrial sustainability. Sustain-
ability (Switzerland) 12. doi:10.3390/su12114574.
Türkeli, S., Huang, B., Stasik, A., Kemp, R., 2019. Circular economy as a glocal busi-
ness activity: mobile phone repair in the Netherlands, Poland and China. Ener-
gies 12. doi:10.3390/en12030498.
Udugama, I.A., Petersen, L.A.H., Falco, F.C., Junicke, H., Mitic, A., Alsina, X.F., Man-
souri, S.S., Gernaey, K.V., 2020. Resource recovery from waste streams in a
water-energy-food nexus perspective: toward more sustainable food processing.
Food Bioprod. Process. 119, 133–147. doi:10.1016/j.fbp.2019.10.014.
UN, 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
United Nations, A/RES/70/1, Agenda items 15 and 116, 1–35.
Valenzuela-Levi, N., 2019. Factors influencing municipal recycling in the Global
South: the case of Chile. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 150. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.
2019.104441.
Velenturf, A.P.M., Purnell, P., 2017. Resource recovery from waste: restoring the bal-
ance between resource scarcity and waste overload. Sustainability (Switzerland)
9. doi:10.3390/su9091603.
Velenturf, A.P.M., Purnell, P., Tregent, M., Ferguson, J., Holmes, A., 2018. Co-
producing a vision and approach for the transition towards a circular econ-
omy: perspectives from government partners. Sustainability (Switzerland) 10.
doi:10.3390/su10051401.
Venkata Mohan, S., Dahiya, S., Amulya, K., Katakojwala, R., Vanitha, T.K., 2019. Can
circular bioeconomy be fueled by waste biorefineries — A closer look. Biore-
source Technology Reports 7. doi:10.1016/j.biteb.2019.100277.
Wan, J., Tang, S., Shu, Z., Li, D., Wang, S., Imran, M., Vasilakos, A.V., 2016. Software-
Defined Industrial Internet of Things in the Context of Industry 4.0. IEEE Sens.
J. 16, 7373–7380. doi:10.1109/JSEN.2016.2565621.
T.E.T. Dantas, E.D. de-Souza, I.R. Destro et al.
Wang, Y., Ma, H.-.S., Yang, J.-.H., Wang, K.-.S., 2017. Industry 4.0: a way from mass
customization to mass personalization production. Adv. Manuf. 5, 311–320.
doi:10.1007/s40436- 017- 0204- 7.
Yadav, G., Luthra, S., Jakhar, S.K., Mangla, S.K., Rai, D.P., 2020. A framework to
overcome sustainable supply chain challenges through solution measures of
industry 4.0 and circular economy: an automotive case. J. Clean Prod. 254.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120112.
227
Sustainable Production and Consumption 26 (2021) 213–227
Zhang, A., Venkatesh, V.G., Liu, Y., Wan, M., Qu, T., Huisingh, D., 2019. Barriers to
smart waste management for a circular economy in China. J. Clean. Prod. 240.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118198.
Zhong, R.Y., Xu, X., Klotz, E., Newman, S.T., 2017. Intelligent Manufacturing in the
Context of Industry 4.0: a Review. Engineering 3, 616–630. doi:10.1016/J.ENG.
2017.05.015.