Industry 4.0 Implementation - Environmental and Social Susteainability in Manufacturing

Journal of Cleaner Production 404 (2023) 136841
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
Industry 4.0 implementation: Environmental and social sustainability in

manufacturing multinational enterprises
João J. Ferreira a, b, *, João M. Lopes c, Sofia Gomes d, Hussain G. Rammal e
a
Department of Management and Economics & NECE-UBI – Research Unit in Business Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal
b
QUT Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research, Brisbane, Australia
c
Miguel Torga Institute of Higher Education & NECE-UBI – Research Unit in Business Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal
d
Portucalense University, Research on Economics, Management and Information Technologies, REMIT, Porto, Portugal
e
Adelaide Business School, The University of Adelaide, Australia
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Handling editor: Cecilia Maria Villas Bôas de By introducing digital technologies, Industry 4.0 may be transforming the traditional systems of the
Almeida manufacturing industries, which are often blamed for high environmental degradation and social inequalities.
Due to their power, size, and scope, manufacturing multinational enterprises (MNEs) are considered by other
Keywords: organizations as best practice references. If there is already evidence that digitalization favours environmental
Industry 4.0
sustainability, social sustainability still needs to be explored. This study aims to analyze the contribution of the
Manufacturing MNEs
implementation of digital technologies in promoting environmental and social sustainability in European
Environmental and social sustainability
Digital technologies manufacturing MNEs using the Resource-Based View (RBV). A research model was formulated comprising five
Resource-based view digital technologies (Artificial Intelligence, Cloud Computing, Robotics, Big Data Analytics, and Blockchain) and
Digitalization sustainable environmental and social practices. To test the model, the Partial Least Squares method was applied
to a sample of 764 European manufacturing MNEs. The results show that European MNEs still have a low
implementation of digital technologies in their business models. Digital technologies positively contribute to
achieving these companies’ environmental and social sustainability. However, the contributions of implementing
each digital technology to environmental and social sustainability are not equal, allowing investment prioriti
zation by manufacturing MNEs according to the strategically defined return. This study contributes to the
evolution of RBV considering digital technology as a strategic resource. It focuses on assessing the contribution of
five digital technologies to achieving environmental and social sustainability and demonstrates the importance of
the digital transition towards greener manufacturing production in environmental and social terms. It also
suggests practices managers and policymakers can implement to accelerate digitalization and achieve the United
Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
1. Introduction Association (EFTA) countries. Moreover, 20 per cent of MNE groups are
present in at least six countries (Eurostat, 2022).
We live in a globalized world where multinational enterprises The environmental and social impact of MNEs’ activities worldwide
(MNEs) dominate business activities and are considered, by other or has come under increased scrutiny. Between 2000 and 2020, carbon
ganizations, as a reference for good practices and a model to replicate dioxide (CO2) emissions from global combustion caused by industrial
(López et al., 2019). In the European Union, 36% of manufacturing processes and fossil fuels rose by around 35% (34.07 billion tons)
companies are multinationals (Eurostat, 2022). According to the Euro (Deloitte, 2021), resulting in increased resource consumption, pollution,
Groups Register (EGR), in 2020, there were 135,450 multinational en and ecological degradation, and contributed to climate change (Tseng
terprise groups represented by 468,000 companies and employed over et al., 2018). Traditional manufacturing systems also cause social
42 million people in European Union and European Free Trade problems such as low income, poverty, wage disparity, lack of unity, and
* Corresponding author. Department of Management and Economics & NECE-UBI – Research Unit in Business Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Covilhã,
Portugal.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J.J. Ferreira), [email protected] (J.M. Lopes), [email protected] (S. Gomes), [email protected]
(H.G. Rammal).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136841
Received 27 October 2022; Received in revised form 10 March 2023; Accepted 17 March 2023
Available online 20 March 2023
0959-6526/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
J.J. Ferreira et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 404 (2023) 136841
social disharmony (Mohamed, 2018). In this context, manufacturing competitiveness and improved production lines’ quality. However, they
companies have experienced challenges in meeting consumers’ de identified difficulties in changing the organizational culture due to the
mands and growing preferences (Satyro et al., 2022), who have difficulty in hiring/training human resources in digital technologies and
increasingly changed their buying habits toward more sustainable the high investments that need to be made. The authors also state that
products (Esmaeilian et al., 2020). Manufacturing companies must environmental sustainability is considered secondary in formulating
preserve more natural resources that are essential for production (Satyro companies’ strategies, and the social dimension is little considered.
et al., 2022), and there is a belief that the development of technologies Grybauskas et al. (2022), through a systematic review of academic and
and their implementation will enable manufacturing companies to gray literature, analyze the social implications of Industry 4.0. The au
improve their performance (Amjad et al., 2021), and simultaneously thors conclude that the academic literature indicates that Industry 4.0
achieve environmental, social, and economic sustainability to meet the needs internal mechanisms to develop ways to achieve social sustain
UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. ability. The authors also state that Industry 4.0 does not necessarily
According to Kagermann et al. (2013), technology is the main extend the corporation’s social responsibility to the entire value chain.
contribution to implementing Industry 4.0 in manufacturing companies. Furthermore, in the Industry 4.0 scenario, the delivery of social devel
Industry 4.0 is also described as the fourth industrial revolution, and opment values has never been among the main objectives of corporate
represents the current trend of automation technologies in the governance (Grybauskas et al., 2022).
manufacturing industry and especially covers enabling technologies (e. Despite this, only some authors agree that Industry 4.0 should have
g. Internet of Things (IoT), cyber-physical systems (CPS), cloud environmental and social sustainability as its primary goal (Ghobakhloo
computing) (Kagermann et al., 2013; Xu et al., 2018). The First Indus et al., 2021). However, policymakers have emphasized Industry 4.0 and
trial Revolution (Industry 1.0) introduced mechanical manufacturing its potential implications for sustainable development (Grybauskas
systems using steam and water power. Mass production through elec et al., 2022). In this context, the scientific community has recently
trical energy describes the Second Industrial Revolution (Industry 2.0). shown much interest in assessing the implications that Industry 4.0 has
In the Third Industrial Revolution (Industry 3.0), the application of on environmental, social, and economic sustainability (Oztemel and
microelectronic technology and automation in manufacturing emerged. Gursev, 2020). There is also a disconnect in the extant literature be
The implementation of Information and Communication Technologies tween sustainability and technologies in the context of manufacturing
(ICT) by manufacturing companies contributes a lot to this technological companies in Industry 4.0 (Nascimento et al., 2019). Hence, further
advance (e.g. made computer integrated manufacturing, studies are needed to analyze how different technologies can be applied
computer-aided processing planning, computer-aided manufacturing, to improve organizational social practices. Furthermore, there is a gap in
technologies for computer-aided design, industrial robots made flexible the literature regarding how implementing Industry 4.0 technologies
manufacturing systems, computer numerical control) (Feng et al., can lead to environmental sustainability (Ajwani-Ramchandani et al.,
2001). Although the Third Industrial Revolution focuses on the auto 2021) and a deficit of research studying the impact of digitized in
mation of machines and processes, Industry 4.0 focuses more on dustries on social and environmental sustainability (Chauhan et al.,
end-to-end digitization and the incorporation of digital industrial eco 2022). In this context, how can the role and effectiveness of each tech
systems, looking for fully integrated solutions (Tan et al., 2010; Xu et al., nology be evaluated in achieving social and environmental
2018). Industry 4.0 is based on nine technological pillars: Big Data, sustainability?
Cloud, Industrial Internet, Horizontal and Vertical Integration, Simula The present study aims to analyze the impact of digital technologies
tion, Augmented Reality, Additive Manufacturing, Cyber Security and in promoting environmental and social sustainability in manufacturing
Advanced Manufacturing. Therefore, Industry 4.0, by implementing MNEs, considering sustainability as a source of competitiveness in this
continuous improvement methodologies and new advanced technolo type of business organization. This study is analyzed from the Resource-
gies, can provide an increasingly sustainable future (Jayashree et al., Based View (RBV) perspective considering digital technologies as re
2022). sources and capabilities. The RBV has been used to explain how the use
In the pursuit of sustainability, and with the implementation of In of digital technologies contributes to the superior performance of firms
dustry 4.0, several benefits can be achieved, such as i) increasing the in specific markets (Huber et al., 2022). This study is expected to help
production of circular products (Yadav et al., 2020); ii) improving effi manufacturing MNEs achieve environmental and social sustainability.
ciency and quality, decreasing resource consumption, and increasing To this end, through a quantitative methodology, five multiple linear
productivity (Asif, 2020; Satyro et al., 2022); and iii) produce particu regressions were estimated using the Partial Least Squares (PLS)
larized products with a shorter lead time (Asif, 2020; Satyro et al., method. This method is the most suitable for this study because it is
2022). However, there are difficulties in implementing Industry 4.0 based on variance, combining factor analysis with regression estimation.
resulting from: i) the difficulty in training and hiring human resources in The data were collected from Gesis - Leibniz Institute for Social Sciences
digital technology (Birkel et al., 2019); ii) new management skills being database in Flash Eurobarometer 486 published in 2020 (European
required (Winter, 2020); and iii) the complexity of changing an orga Commission, 2020). The sample consists of 764 manufacturing MNEs.
nizational culture (Satyro et al., 2022). Five digital technologies were included in the study (Artificial Intelli
Recent studies show that companies aiming to achieve environ gence (AI), Cloud Computing, Robotics, Big Data Analytics (BDA), and
mental sustainability must implement Industry 4.0 technologies Blockchain). The choice of digital technologies to be studied in this
(Jayashree et al., 2022; Kamble et al., 2018; Müller et al., 2018). paper was due to the frequency with which they are implemented in the
Jayashree et al. (2021) study the relationship between implementing multinational manufacturing industries participating in the database
Industry 4.0 technologies and the objectives for environmental sus sample.
tainability. The authors conclude that the characteristics of technolog This study makes three main contributions. First, this study con
ical innovation have a positive effect on the implementation of Industry tributes to recent work on implementing an Industry 4.0 strategy.
4.0 and on the objectives of environmental sustainability. Jayashree Currently, there are no known studies that analyze simultaneously the
et al. (2022) analyze the dynamics in adopting Industry 4.0 to achieve contributions of five digital technologies to environmental and social
environmental sustainability. The authors state that management lead sustainability. Previous studies have focused on presenting theoretical
ership, external support, teamwork, and Information technology (IT) sustainable 4.0 business models (see, for example, Godina et al., 2020;
resources are relevant to implement Industry 4.0 and to achieve envi Martin et al., 2021), while this study highlights that digital technologies
ronmental sustainability. Satyro et al. (2022) identify the challenges and AI, Cloud Computing, Robotic, BDA, and Blockchain) have positive
benefits of implementing Industry 4.0, analyzing potential social im impacts on the environmental and social sustainability of manufacturing
pacts. The authors conclude that Industry 4.0 has increased companies’ MNEs, which in turn can be sources of competitiveness creation.
2
Second, in contrast to previous studies that did not include any manufacturing in a sustainable way has been circuitous since most of
theory as a perspective of analysis (García-Muiña et al., 2020), in this these companies find it difficult to safely manage the use of large
study, we examine the impact of digital technologies on promoting the quantities of highly environmentally hazardous chemicals due to envi
environmental and social sustainability of manufacturing MNEs from ronmental and safety impositions (Mao et al., 2019).
the RBV perspective. With this approach, we expand the resources and In addition, mass production, lack of early risk detection and safety-
capacities traditionally proposed in RBV, considering digital technolo oriented decision-making systems in processes, the multiplicity of in
gies as a specific capacity of companies based on Resources. Further formation and data, and classification of information in isolation were
more, we conclude that digital technologies are valuable for identified as the main problems preventing manufacturing industries
manufacturing MNEs to achieve strategic objectives and social and from achieving a green manufacturing process (Mao et al., 2019). AI can
environmental sustainability. Finally, this study provides insights into help solve these problems and decision-making through error detection,
how managers can accelerate environmental and social sustainability the fusion of diverse data, and early detection of alert situations,
through digitalization. We also verified that there is an unequal enabling companies to achieve green manufacturing (Cioffi et al., 2020;
contribution of different digital technologies to achieve the goals of Mao et al., 2019). It becomes clear that including tools, techniques and
social and environmental sustainability since we identified the proba methods involving AI is an essential step for the exploration of com
bility that digital technology has greater value in the strategic context of panies’ data and for the creation of applications that allow the efficient
manufacturing MNEs. To achieve environmental sustainability goals, use of natural resources in productive and organizational systems (Onu
manufacturing MNEs must invest in digital technologies that contribute and Mbohwa, 2021). Studies are still very scarce regarding the appli
more to the environmental practices already implemented in companies, cation of AI to achieve social sustainability (Lee, 2021), even though
prioritizing: (1) cloud computing, (2) blockchain, (3) robotic, (4) BDA some authors consider it the most pertinent type of sustainability to
and, (5) AI. With regard to social sustainability, manufacturing MNEs achieve (Khakurel et al., 2018).
should prioritize: (1) cloud computing, (2) BDA, (3) robotic, (4) AI, and According to Joung et al. (2013), social well-being translated by
(5) blockchain. health and safety practices and the promotion of human rights is social
indicators that can be improved through AI in manufacturing com
2. Literature review panies’ manufacturing processes, which can ensure that this type of
industry’s operations is socially sustainable. AI can promote social sus
2.1. Resource-Based View theory tainability, namely when it increases work efficiency, reduces working
hours, improves workers’ physical and mental health, enables
The Resource-Based View (RBV) has been used to explain a com multi-tasking, automates routines, and promotes social and ethical ac
pany’s superior performance in markets, and the application and use of tions (Khakurel et al., 2018). In this context, it is important to assess how
digital technologies can contribute to this (Huber et al., 2022). RBV is manufacturing companies can benefit from sustainability indicators
applied in strategic management studies to explain the relationships when implementing AI.
between companies’ performance and their resources (Barney, 1991;
H1a. The application of AI in manufacturing industries positively in
Szalavetz, 2022). With the RBV, it is possible to relate companies’
fluences the environmental sustainability indicators of these industries.
competitive advantages with the characteristics of the resources (valu
able, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable) that they possess or control H1b. The application of AI in manufacturing industries positively in
(Barney, 1991; Lopes et al., 2021; Szalavetz, 2022). fluences the social sustainability indicators of these industries.
For the present study, we consider digital technologies (Artificial
Intelligent, Cloud Computing, Robotics, Big Data Analytics, and Block 2.3. Cloud computing
chain) as resources and capabilities that a manufacturing MNE has to
implement, integrate, assemble, and connect manufacturing processes. Cloud computing involves a networked system that enables simple,
By enabling the application of an Industry 4.0 strategy (Huber et al., easy, and comprehensive access to information and data, creating added
2022), companies can also identify new business opportunities (Khin value for organizations by reducing operational costs and physical and
and Kee, 2022). Recent literature has studied the impact of digitization human resources and boosting business opportunities (Chang et al.,
on firms. However, the literature focuses on identifying the resources 2010). According to Kusiak (2018), smart manufacturing industries are
and ways in which digitization (see, for example, Monostori et al., built on six pillars: technological manufacturing processes, materials,
2016), whereas, the present study takes a different approach as it uses data, predictive-type engineering, sustainability, and networked
RBV as a theoretical lens and analyzes the potential impacts of digital resource sharing. The future trend is for cloud computing to be energy
technology implementation on the environmental and social sustain efficient, sustainable, and suited to the dictates of the manufacturing
ability of manufacturing MNEs, considering sustainability as a source of industry. To this end, Gill and Buyya (2019) presented a sustainable
future competitiveness. cloud computing model with applications and sustainability measures
that enable energy management, virtualization, thermal recognition
2.2. Artificial intelligence programs, renewable energy management, and the reuse of natural re
sources. Although the cloud computing solution has been used as a
The concept of AI involves the application of computational skills to support for intelligent decisions in order to obtain more sustainable and
solve problems and achieve goals (Nishant et al., 2020). Studies on AI for efficient manufacturing, its application and objectives in manufacturing
sustainability have mainly focused on environmental sustainability, industries are still unclear (Fisher et al., 2018). In this way, it becomes
demonstrating the application of AI to improve biodiversity by assessing important to evaluate the contribution of the application of cloud
ecosystem systems (Nuortimo and Harkonen, 2018), conserving natural computing to environmental sustainability in manufacturing industries.
species and water resources (Russell and Norvig, 2016). Primarily, the However, most studies on assessing the impact of cloud computing in
focus has been on energy conservation and renewable energy, with more Industry 4.0 do not yet consider the sustainability aspect to evaluate the
than 250 papers published between 2015 and 2019 on the latter issue performance of cloud computing, especially at the social level (Azadi
(Nishant et al., 2020). At the Industry 4.0. level, AI has been used as a big et al., 2021). More recently, in the manufacturing industries, a new
data technology that collects, processes, and stores large amounts of concept of “Social Manufacturing” has emerged, in which producers and
data and is a source of industry competitiveness. One of the biggest individuals work in a collaborative way (Hamalainen and Karjalainen,
challenges is how to endow the industry with sustainable production 2017). Cloud computing complements this new concept by allowing and
(Mathiyazhagan et al., 2019). In the case of manufacturing companies, treating collective data and information and simulating more innovative
3
projects (Ren et al., 2015), being indicated as a solution that can pro H3b. The application of robotics in manufacturing industries posi
mote the sustainability of manufacturing companies (Bi and Wang, tively influences the social sustainability indicators of these industries.
2013). Furthermore, the introduction of cloud computing in industry 4.0
and other technologies is transforming the labor market since there are 2.5. Big data analytics (BDA)
costs (economic, social and environmental) of migrating to the cloud,
and the social aspect is receiving increasing attention (Mohammed et al., BDA is the ability to rapidly generate and analyze a large volume of
2020). Cloud computing leads to many traditional professions tending to diverse data and is characterized by the five V’s: variety, volume, ve
disappear, being replaced by smart technologies, but also causing new locity, value, and veracity (Duan and Xiong, 2015). BDA can be defined
professionals with the skills to maneuver these new technologies to as a superior capability of organizations, based on the conditions of their
emerge (Bologa et al., 2017). These negative consequences of the operation, to realize a pooling of strategic resources (human and
implementation of cloud computing, especially in manufacturing com managerial and technical skills) that can improve their performance
panies with standardized and typified work functions, call into question (Akter et al., 2016; Wamba et al., 2017). Exploiting this superior orga
its contribution to the social sustainability of this sector of activity. nizational capability can achieve a sustainable competitive advantage at
the environmental and social levels (Dubey et al., 2019). In
H2a. Information migration to cloud computing in manufacturing in
manufacturing industries, BDA can transform the practices of these
dustries positively influences the environmental sustainability in
companies by making them more environmentally sustainable. BDA has
dicators of these industries.
already been shown to positively impact operations at the green supply
H2b. Information migration to cloud computing in manufacturing chain level (Doolun et al., 2018) and sustainable manufacturing level
industries positively influences the social sustainability indicators of (Kaur and Singh, 2018). At the green supply chain level, BDA has
these industries. allowed the creation of new tools to support decision-making, allowing
to monitor of the supply chain in real-time and in an accurate way,
managing risks and streamlining processes, allowing to achieve a
2.4. Robotics
competitive advantage at the sustainable level (Wamba et al., 2017).
Sustainable manufacturing aims to optimize resource use, reduce waste,
The application of robotics in the industry has allowed to decrease
carbon, and toxic emissions, and save energy (Piyathanavong et al.,
production costs, improve industrial performance, satisfy
2019). In social terms, the BDA can manage and monitor labor issues
manufacturing quality requirements, customize the product, make
such as the functions performed in the supply chain, the use of supple
production more flexible and apply sustainable practices (Gadaleta
mentary and continuous work, compensation and wage processing,
et al., 2019; Ogbemhe et al., 2017). In the case of manufacturing in
safety standards, among others (Mageto, 2021). However, the contri
dustries, robotics allows tasks to be performed faster, makes workers
bution of BDA in terms of social sustainability is still little studied and
more skilled, saving time and money; reduces supervision time,
the results of more exploratory studies have shown that the application
increasing productivity; allows 24h production processes, reducing
of BDA can bring social uncertainty and as such, its application in pro
production costs and making the production system more sustainable;
moting social sustainability is not a priority for companies (Gangwar
improves product quality (Enyoghasi and Badurdeen, 2021; Ogbemhe
et al., 2022). Despite the various benefits that manufacturing companies
et al., 2017). Several studies have demonstrated the contribution of the
can obtain from the application of the BDA, there is still little evidence
application of robotics in manufacturing industries, despite the high
that demonstrates how the application of the BDA can contribute to the
investment involved in implementing this digital solution. As main
environmental and social sustainability of manufacturing companies,
contributions, these studies have highlighted the implementation of a
focusing essentially on economic benefits (Mageto, 2021).
more sustainable production process with reduced consumption of
electricity, gas and water since operations are more efficient, there is a H4a. The use of BDA in manufacturing industries positively influences
reduction in CO2 emissions and the use of raw materials, waste reduc the environmental indicators of these industries.
tion and (Ajwani-Ramchandani et al., 2021; Yamamoto et al., 2020). In
H4b. The use of BDA in manufacturing industries positively influences
social terms, robotics in manufacturing industries can improve human
the sustainability indicators of these industries.
working conditions by changing employment structures, decreasing
routine and monotonous tasks, boosting workers’ skills and qualifica
2.6. Blockchain
tions through training to handle and deal with robotics applications, and
boosting social sustainability practices (Radić et al., 2020). According to
Blockchain technology is an innovation characterized by being
Gajšek et al. (2020), the addition of robotics in manufacturing industries
disruptive and based on continuous advances in information computing
can improve employees’ physical and mental health, work productivity,
that uses a central agent that coordinates data in a reliable, transparent,
and support better work decisions. Despite these benefits, the imple
and shared way, being increasingly used in Industry 4.0. Recent studies
mentation of robotics applications often has economic sustainability
on the link between blockchain technology and sustainability have
objectives, neglecting environmental and social sustainability. Espe
focused primarily on supply chain management, technological infra
cially because robotics does not only have positive effects in social
structure, energy, smart money, climate change, and technology inte
terms, depending on how it is implemented. Guenat et al. (2022) in their
gration (Parmentola et al., 2022). Blockchain technology can facilitate
study concluded that the reinforcement of inequalities, the diversion of
the sustainable production model, handle, monitor, and store data about
resources from already improved solutions, the reduction of freedom
the activities that enhance pollution and environmental devastation,
and privacy can be threats resulting from the implementation of ro
and collect real-time data about green activities, helping in the man
botics. Job loss and rising unemployment is another of the negative ef
agement’s decision-making (Parmentola et al., 2022). In addition, it can
fects (Frey and Osborne, 2017; Lloyd and Payne, 2019). However,
favor implementing a green supply chain (Mora et al., 2021).
several studies have shown that the correct implementation of robotics
We can conclude that these studies have evaluated the contribution
solutions can contribute to the social and environmental sustainability
of using blockchain in order to optimize production processes and sup
of manufacturing companies, these companies can optimize and make
ply chains for economic purposes, and it is unknown whether there are
their implementation more efficient.
really environmental concerns in its implementation to ensure greater
H3a. The application of robotics in manufacturing industries posi sustainability in this dimension. However, there are studies that have
tively influences the environmental sustainability indicators of these shown that the implementation of blockchain technology does not only
industries. have positive effects in environmental terms. Traditional blockchain
4
systems require high energy costs, high CO2 emissions and to accom Big Data Analytics, and Blockchain) (i) in environmental sustainability
modate large servers, large installations are required, posing a threat in and (ii) in social sustainability. To this end, this study uses a sample of
terms of forest devastation and the squandering of natural resources manufacturing MNEs selected from the Gesis - Leibniz Institute for So
(Parmentola et al., 2022). cial Sciences database in Flash Eurobarometer 486 published in 2020
Also, blockchain technology has contributed to promoting social (European Commission, 2020). Data were collected by telephone and
sustainability in manufacturing industries, with the main contributions computer-assisted interviewing between February 19, 2020, and May
being working conditions, human rights, societal engagement, customer 05, 2020. The geographical coverage of the companies interviewed
issues, and business practices (Khanfar et al., 2021). At the level of covers all 27 member states of the EU and Bosnia and Herzegovina,
working conditions, blockchain technology contributes to promoting the Brazil, Canada, Iceland, Japan, North Macedonia, Norway, Serbia,
development of human capital in manufacturing industries, dissemi Turkey, the UK, the USA, and Kosovo. The original database contains 16,
nating safety and health practices, reducing safety gaps, tracking and 365 companies from various industries, and a filter was used to restrict
monitoring companies’ health and safety certificates, improving work the sample for this study to manufacturing MNEs, resulting in 764
ing conditions, and tracking workers’ work activity (working hours, companies. The criteria for determining the MNE belonging to the
salaries, benefits, overtime work among others) (Venkatesh et al., 2020). sample were: i) dimension measured by the number of employees (more
The defense and promotion of human rights can also be promoted by the than 250 employees) and ii) activity in more than one country.
use of blockchain technology through the tracking and monitoring of The oldest company in the sample was registered in 1850, and the
human rights, the prevention of social abuse and alarmism, the reduc newest was in 2018. 78% of the companies had 250 employees or more
tion and identification of situations of worker exploitation, forced labor, in the last three years. In terms of turnover, in 2019, 66% of the com
and child labor (Park and Li, 2021). Regarding societal engagement, panies’ turnover of more than 50 million and 32% between 10 and 50
blockchain technology can enable new business opportunities, make the million euros. Since 2016, in terms of turnover, 82% of these companies
business model more efficient, reduce costs and boost the social services grew by less than 30%, and in terms of the number of full-time em
(Schulz et al., 2020). Regarding customer issues, this technology can ployees, 74% of companies grew by more than 30%.
facilitate product customization, promote product innovation, optimize
production and delivery processes and enable a direct relationship be 3.2. Variables
tween stakeholders (Leng et al., 2020). Finally, blockchain can promote
business practices by tracking and monitoring corruption situations and 3.2.1. Independent variables and control variables
promoting a fair and balanced trade (Katsikouli et al., 2021). Thus, In the Flash Eurobarometer 486 survey, in question Q23, companies
among the digital technologies evaluated in this study, blockchain seems were asked (Appendix A): “Which digital technologies has your com
to be the one that has contributed the most to social sustainability, and pany adopted so far?“. The following possible answers were presented
its role should be reinforced. (Table 1), and companies could choose more than one option. The an
H5a. The application of blockchain technology in manufacturing industries swers are binary: 1 – yes, 0 – no.
positively influences the environmental sustainability indicators of these
industries. Table 1
Options of digital technologies’
H5b. The application of blockchain technology in manufacturing industries
1 - Artificial intelligence, for example, machine learning or technologies for
positively influences the social sustainability indicators of these industries. identifying objects or people, etc.
The research model for this study is presented in Fig. 1. 2 - Cloud computing, i.e. storage and processing of files or data on remote servers
hosted on the Internet
3. Methods 3 - Robotics, i.e. robots used to automate processes, for example in construction or
design, etc.
4 - Smart devices, e.g. smart sensors, smart thermostats, etc.
3.1. Sample and data 5 - Big data analytics, for example, data mining and predictive analytics
6 - High speed infrastructure
The objective of this study is to evaluate the contribution of five 7 - Blockchain
digital technologies (Artificial Intelligent, Cloud Computing, Robotics, 8 - None of the above
Fig. 1. Research model.
5
The choice of digital technologies to be studied in the present study Table 3

resulted from the frequency with which they are implemented in the Indicators of environmental and social sustainable practices.
multinational manufacturing industries that participated in the database Environmental practices
sample of the Flash Eurobarometer 486 questionnaire was greater than
Recycling or reuse of materials
10% (Table 2). Reducing consumption or impact on natural resources (e.g. saving water or
Firm age and size were used as control variables similar to other switching to sustainable resources
studies (e.g., Adomako et al. (2019). The firm age is measured by the age Energy saving or switching to renewable energy sources
of the company (since initial registration) until 2019 and the firm size by Sustainable product development
Social practices
the number of employees in the company three years ago. Improvement of employees’ working conditions
Promotion and improvement of diversity and equality in the workplace
3.2.2. Dependent variables Assessing your company’s impact on society
The indicators of the dependent variables, environmental and social Employee involvement in the management of the company
None of the previous
sustainability, were measured by the answers of the surveyed companies
to the following question (Appendix A): Which of the following sus
tainability measures is your company actively adopting? The answers
are binary: 1 – yes, 0 – no. Response items are shown in Table 3. Table 4
Variables and indicators.
3.2.3. Resume of variables and indicators Variables Items
Table 4 shows the resume of items that measure the dependent, in Dependent
dependent, and control variables. Environmental ES1 - Recycling or reuse of materials
Sustainability ES2 - Reducing consumption or impact on natural
resources (e.g. saving water or switching to sustainable
3.3. Data analysis resources
ES3 - Energy saving or switching to renewable energy
First, a statistical analysis was performed on the variables and in sources
dicators that measure the variables contained in the research model ES4 - Sustainable product development
Social Sustainability SS1 - Improvement of employees’ working conditions
using the SPSS (v.25) software. Afterwards, the Partial Least Squares
SS2 - Promotion and improvement of diversity and
(PLS) method in Smart PLS3.0., as Hair et al. (2017) suggested, was used equality in the workplace
to test the relationships established in the research model between the SS3 - Assessing your company’s impact on society
variables. The sample consists of indicators collected through a ques SS4 - Employee involvement in the management of the
company
tionnaire and there is no normal distribution of data confirmed by
Independent
kurtosis and skewness statistics. The PLS method has already been used Artificial Intelligence DT1 - Artificial Intelligence, e.g., machine learning or
in other studies to assess the relationship between digital technologies technologies for identifying objects or people, etc.
and sustainability such as Sun et al. (2022), Li et al. (2022) and Haseeb Cloud Computing DT2 - Cloud computing, i.e., storing and processing files or
et al. (2019). The PLS method comprises two models: the outer model, a data on remote servers hosted on the internet
Robotics DT3 - Robotics, i.e., robots used to automate processes, e.
measurement model, and the inner model, a structure model. Since the
g., construction or design, etc.
PLS method is a variance-based method, it combines factor analysis with Big Data Analytics DT4 - Big Data Analytics, e.g., data mining and predictive
regression estimation, which is beneficial for the present study. analytics
Furthermore, PLS regression is computed separately for measurement Blockchain DT5 - Applying Blockchain Technology
and structural models. Control Variables
Firm Age Length of time (in years) of the company from the initial
Thus, the data from this study were analyzed in three steps. registration of activity until 2019
Firm Size Number of employees in the company three years ago
i) Statistical analysis of variables and items that measure them;
Note: ES – Environmental Sustainability; SS – Social Sustainability; DT – Digital
ii) Analysis of the items that measure the constructs to ensure
Technology.
measurement validity and reliability;
iii) Testing the research model and hypotheses via bootstrapping.
sustainability, we apply the PLS method to two models separately: i)
model 1 whose dependent variable is environmental sustainability and
Since in this study we have two dependent variables because we
which includes five regressions referring to a digital technology and ii)
want to assess the individual contribution of each of the five digital
model 2 whose dependent variable is social sustainability and which
technologies separately in environmental sustainability and social
also includes five regressions referring to a digital technology.
Table 2
Frequency of implementation of digital technologies in multinational 4. Results
manufacturing companies in the sample.
4.1. Descriptive analysis
Digital Technologies’ Frequency
(%)
The sample of this study is composed of 764 manufacturing MNE. In
1 - Artificial intelligence, for example, machine learning or 12.2%
technologies for identifying objects or people, etc.
terms of digital technologies, Table 5 shows the percentages of multi
2 - Cloud computing, i.e. storage and processing of files or data on 45.3% national manufacturing companies in the sample that use each of the
remote servers hosted on the Internet digital technologies under study. Cloud computing is the most used
3 - Robotics, i.e. robots used to automate processes, for example in 19.3% digital technology (45.3%), followed by robotics (19.3%). 29.7% of
construction or design, etc.
companies have not implemented any of the digital technologies under
4 - Smart devices, e.g. smart sensors, smart thermostats, etc. 8.1%
5 - Big data analytics, for example, data mining and predictive 13.8% analysis.
analytics In terms of sustainability, the most of companies already implement
6 - High speed infrastructure 8.4% environmentally sustainable practices (Table 6). Only 6% of companies
7 - Blockchain 11.7% do not have any environmental and social sustainability practices.
8 - None of the previous 29.7%
Manufacturing companies use, and reuse materials is the most adopted
6
Table 5 4.2. Measures of reliability and validity

Implementation of digital technologies in multinational manufacturing com
panies in the sample. In order to assess the reflective nature of the research model, we first
Digital Technologies’ Frequency performed a confirmatory factorial (CFA). According to Hair et al.
(%) (2019), in reflective PLS models, the constructs are the common causes
1 - Artificial intelligence, for example, machine learning or 12.2% of the items or indicators that measure them and the observed constructs
technologies for identifying objects or people, etc. do not have causality effects on the corresponding constructs. All items
2 - Cloud computing, i.e. storage and processing of files or data on 45.3% that measure the variables have a high confirmatory factor loads
remote servers hosted on the Internet
(>0.70), as shown in Table 7. Goodness-of-fit (GoF) was also used to
3 - Robotics, i.e. robots used to automate processes, for example in 19.3%
construction or design, etc. assess the goodness of fit of the model according to the formula by
4 - Big data analytics, for example, data mining and predictive 13.8% Tenenhaus et al. (2005). According to the criteria of Wetzels et al.
analytics (2009), if the GoF is between 0 and 1, the model fit is small, 0.25 is
5 - Blockchain 11.7% medium and 0.36 is large. As the GoF for model 1 is 0.361 and for model
6 - None of the previous 29.7%
2 it is 0.381, we can conclude that both models present an excellent fit.
The Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) is 0.058 for model
1 and 0.073 for model 2, below the reference value of 0.080 (Hair et al.,
Table 6 2017), proving the general adequacy of the research models. Addition
Practices of environmental and social sustainability in multinational ally, the following model fit indices were calculated for models 1 and 2:
manufacturing companies in the sample.
i) the Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) (Model 1: 0.934 and Model 2: 0.965;
Environmental practices Frequency reference value > 0.90); ii) Comparative Fit Index (CFI) (Model 1: 0.937
(%)
and Model 2: 0.945; reference value > 0.90); iii) Incremental Fit Index
Recycling or reuse of materials 64.6% (IFI) (Model 1: 0.939; Model 2: 0.948; reference value > 0.90) and iv)
Reducing consumption or impact on natural resources (e.g. saving 51.2% Root Mean Square Approximation Error (RMSEA) (Model 1: 0.067;
water or switching to sustainable resources
Energy saving or switching to renewable energy sources 54.6%
Model 2: 0.072; reference value < 0.08). The results of all these mea
Sustainable product development 36.7% surements are above the reference values, so we can conclude that
Social practices models 1 and 2 have an excellent fit.
Improvement of employees’ working conditions 70.7% According to Hair et al. (2019), to assess the reliability and validity
Promotion and improvement of diversity and equality in the 53.5%
of the constructs, three measures should be used: Cronbach’s Alpha (Cα
workplace
Assessing your company’s impact on society 28.5% > 0.70), Composite Reliability (CR > 0.70) and Average Variance
Employee involvement in the management of the company 42.8% Extracted (AVE >0.50). The Fornell-Larcker criterion should be used to
None of the previous 6.0% assess the discriminant and R2 validity of endogenous latent variables to
assess their predictive prediction. The results of evaluation of reflective
measurement model in terms of reliability, convergence and discrimi
practice (64.6%), followed by energy saving (54.6%). In social terms,
nant validity are shown in Table 7. The model presents reliability and
the results are no longer so uniform. Improving working conditions is
convergence (Cα > 0.70, CR > 0.70 and AVE >0.50). Through the
the most implemented practice in manufacturing industries (70.7%),
Fornell-Larcker criterion, we concluded that it also presents discrimi
followed by promoting equal diversity in the workplace (52.5%). Only
nant validity between the latent variables and the way they are
28.5% of manufacturing companies evaluate their company’s social
measured.
impact on society.
Considering that the questions that gave rise to the indicators that
Table 7
Reliability, convergence and discriminant of constructs.
Confirmatory Factor Loads Cα CR AVE ES SS IA Rob CC BDA Bchain FA FS
ES 0.772 0.803 0.508 0.713

ES1 0.783
ES2 0.810
ES3 0.715
ES4 0.723
SS 0.762 0.797 0.597 0.540 0.773
SS1 0.775
SS2 0.784
SS3 0.766
SS4 0.787
IA 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.173 0.049 1.000
DT1 1.000
Rob 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.197 0.142 0.213 1.000
DT2 1.000
CC 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.310 0.313 0.159 0.159 1.000
DT3 1.000
BDA 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.200 0.255 0.187 0.187 0.191 1.000
DT4 1.000
Bchain 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.144 0.104 0.075 0.075 0.190 0.180 1.000
DT5 1.000
FA 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.139 0.021 0.055 0.098 − 0.004 0.015 − 0.029 1.000
FA 1.000
FS 1.000 1.000 1.000 − 0.003 − 0.049 − 0.064 − 0.020 − 0.051 − 0.029 − 0.073 0.011 1.000
FS 1.000
Note: ES – Environmental Sustainability; SS – Social Sustainability; IA – Artificial Intelligenc; Rob – Robotic; CC – Cloud Computing; BDA – Big Data Analitic; Bchain –
Blockchain; FA – Firm Age; FS – Firm Size.
7
measure the variables were collected through questionnaires, we carried
P-Value
P-Value
out a common method bias (CMB) through the Harman one-factor test to
0.000
0.000
0.080
0.000
0.072
0.015
assess whether there was any type of consistency in the responses or any
bias. The research model contains six constructs with an accumulated
variance of 60.8%. The largest factor explains only the 27.4% variance.
T Statistic
T Statistic
17.201
Individually, no single factor explains a variance greater than 50%, so
3.994
0.280
6.549
0.424
0.234
our data are unlikely to be affected by the CMB.
Regression 5
Regression 5
Finally, the R2 of the dependent variables (environmental and social
sustainability) and the Stone-Geisser (Q2) were also evaluated to vali
− 0.004
Coeff.
Coeff.
0.266
0.070
0.005
0.117
0.008
date their predictive relevance based on the cross-redundancy approach.
The results are shown in Table 8. The independent variables explain
25.7% of the dependent variable environmental sustainability (model 1)
P-Value
P-Value
0.000
0.000
0.066
0.000
0.087
0.059
and 24.3% of the dependent variable social sustainability (model 2),
thus having a “substantial effect” (Cohen, 1988). As Q2 is greater than
zero (ES – Q2: 0.750 and SS – Q2: 0.680), the models are relevant to
T Statistic
T Statistic
12.430
13.486
predict the dependent variables.
3.754
0.432
0.017
0.178
Regression 4
Regression 4
4.3. Research model testing
− 0.003
Coeff.
Coeff.
0.198
0.064
0.007
0.217
0.001
Table 8 shows the estimation results of the two models (model 1 -
environmental sustainability and model 2 - social sustainability)
contemplating a total of five regressions for each model referring to
P-Value
P-Value
0.000
0.001
0.053
0.000
0.866
0.072
digital technologies. The objective is to evaluate the contribution of each
digital technology separately in social sustainability and environmental
sustainability.
T Statistic
T Statistic
12.856
12.058
In environmental terms, the results reveal a positive and significant
3.349
0.594
0.169
0.035
impact of digital technologies on the environmental sustainability of
Regression 3
Regression 3
manufacturing companies, confirming hypotheses H1a, H2a, H3a, H4a,
− 0.001
and H5a. However, the dimensions of this impact need to be balanced.
Coeff.
Coeff.
0.210
0.061
0.009
0.199
0.003
Cloud computing is the digital technology that most positively in
fluences the environmental sustainability indicators (β = 0.277), fol
lowed by blockchain (β = 0.266), robotics (β = 0.210), big data analytics
P-Value
P-Value
0.000
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.084
0.049
(β = 0.198) and artificial intelligence (β = 0.162). The control variables
also significantly influence manufacturing firms’ adoption of environ
mentally sustainable practices.
T Statistic
T Statistic
In social terms, the adoption of digital technologies by
16.143
19.381
3.871
0.849
0.020
0.191
Regression 2
manufacturing companies positively influences social sustainability in
Regression 2
dicators, confirming hypotheses H1b, H2b, H3b, H4b, and H5b. The use
of cloud computing is the digital technology that has the most impact on
Coeff.
Coeff.
0.277
0.065
0.012
0.314
0.003
0.003
the sustainable social practices adopted by manufacturing companies (β
= 0.314), followed by big data analytics (β = 0.217), robotics (β =
P-Value
P-Value
0.199), artificial intelligence (β = 0.159) and blockchain (β = 0.117).

0.000
0.000
0.055
0.000
0.002
0.001
Regarding control variables, firm age has a positive, albeit residual,
impact on social sustainability indicators. However, firm size has a
T Statistic
T Statistic
negative, albeit residual, impact on adopting sustainable social

practices.
9.708
3.651
0.591
9.109
0.981
0.501
Regression 1
Regression 1
5. Discussion and theorical and practical implications

− 0.001
Coeff.
0.162
0.063
0.010
0.159
0.002
Coeff
5.1. Discussion of results
This study considered AI, Cloud Computing, Robotics, BDA, and

Model 1 - Dependent Variable: Environmental
Blockchain digital technologies for Industry 4.0 implementation. In

Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence
Sustainability (Adj R2 = 0.243/Q2 = 0.680)
general, it was found that all these digital technologies positively impact
Sustainability (Adj R2 = 0.257/Q2 = 0.750)
Big Data Analytics
Big Data Analytics

Cloud Computing
Cloud Computing
the environmental and social sustainability of manufacturing MNEs and

Output of multiple linear regressions.
Model 2 - Dependent Variable: Social
drive their competitiveness. These findings show that manufacturing

Blockchain
Blockchain
Firm Size
Firm Size
Firm Age
Firm Age
Robotics
Robotics
MNEs have to increasingly consider environmental and social sustain

ability in their corporate strategy and objectives. Your decisions in these
two areas will have an impact on the company’s competitiveness. Our
results are in line with that indicated by Müller et al. (2018), Kamble
Independent Variables
Independent Variables
et al. (2018), Jayashree et al. (2022). The studies of these authors state
Control Variables
Control Variables
that for companies to achieve environmental sustainability, and to be

increasingly competitive, they have to implement Industry 4.0 tech
nologies. Our results are complementary to those indicated by Huber
Table 8
et al. (2022). According to Huber et al. (2022). there is evidence that

digital technologies in sectors such as healthcare, financial services,
8
media, or telecommunications are a source of creating competitive environmental and social sustainability indicators positively. Regarding
advantage. However, only some technologies can equally contribute to environmental sustainability, this result means that through program
environmental and social sustainability for manufacturing MNEs. mable robots it will be possible for the company to carry out tasks in a
As far as AI is concerned, it is found to influence environmental and totally autonomous or semi-autonomous way. This will allow companies
social sustainability indicators positively. This means that, with the to reduce production costs, improve industrial performance, meet
implementation of AI, manufacturing MNEs can achieve their goals and manufacturing quality requirements, customize the product, make
simultaneously contribute to fulfilling the SDGs. Regarding environ production more flexible and apply sustainable practices. This result is
mental sustainability, our results are in line with that indicated by Onu in line with that indicated by Ogbemhe et al. (2017) and Gadaleta et al.
and Mbohwa (2021). The authors state that the inclusion of tools, (2019). Robotics is widely recognized for encouraging environmentally
techniques and methods that involve AI are fundamental for the sustainable practices while optimizing the production of manufacturing
exploration of companies’ data, as well as for the creation of applica companies (Gadaleta et al., 2019; Ogbemhe et al., 2017). Through ro
tions that allow the efficient use of natural resources in the productive botics, it is possible to make production processes more efficient,
and organizational systems, thus making the company increasingly decrease resource usage (e.g., electricity, gas, water), reduce CO2
environmentally sustainable. This has recently been a significant chal emissions without compromising the quality and quantity of goods
lenge for manufacturing MNEs (Mathiyazhagan et al., 2019). In partic produced, and decrease industrial waste and reusing waste in producing
ular, since companies are currently facing an exponential increase in new circular products (Ajwani-Ramchandani et al., 2021; Yamamoto
energy costs, the implementation of AI can help reduce the large number et al., 2020). Regarding social sustainability, our results mean that Ro
of resources (e.g., energy, water, chemicals) used in production while botics brings social benefits. This result is different from that indicated
maintaining the number of products produced (Mao et al., 2019; Nishant by Ogbemhe et al. (2017) and Enyoghasi and Badurdeen (2021), but is
et al., 2020). Regarding social sustainability, our results are in line with in line with what Radić et al. (2020). Ogbemhe et al. (2017) and
that indicated by Joung et al. (2013) and Khakurel et al. (2018). Social Enyoghasi and Badurdeen (2021) afirmam que organizations and in
well-being, which can consist of health and safety practices, as well as stitutions need to ensure that they manage the negative aspects of
the promotion of human rights, are social indicators that can be increased robotics, including social problems, such as unemployment.
improved through the implementation of AI in companies (Joung et al., However, according to Radić et al. (2020) the application of robotics in
2013). Furthermore, according to Khakurel et al. (2018) the imple manufacturing industries can improve human working conditions,
mentation of AI can increase work efficiency, reduce working hours, reducing monotonous and routine tasks, increasing the qualifications
improve the physical and mental health of workers, allow multitasking, and skills of workers to be able to handle and deal with robotics appli
automate routines and promote social and ethical actions. The results of cations, which will boost social sustainability practices.
this study concerning AI are still complementary to those indicated by It was found that BDA positively influences the environmental and
Mao et al. (2019). One of the main problems identified in the literature is social sustainability indicators of manufacturing MNEs. Este reultado
the lack of early risk detection and safety-oriented decision-making significa que ao implementar a BDA as manufacturing MNEs ficam com
systems in processes, the diversity and abundance of available data in uma capacidade maior de criar e analisar de uma forma mais rápida um
formation, and the related classification of information (Mao et al., maior volume de diversos dados. As manufacturing MNEs ficam também
2019). The results of our study highlight that implementing AI can help com uma capacidade superior de realizarem um agrupamento de
manufacturing MNEs overcome such problems while achieving envi recursos estratégicos (humanos e habilidades gerenciais e técnicas) que
ronmental and social sustainability. By optimizing all production pro podem melhorar seu desempenho. Explorando essa capacidade organ
cesses with the help of AI, companies achieve efficiencies, can decrease izacional superior, as manufacturing MNEs pode alcançar uma vanta
employee work hours without the company losing competitiveness, gem competitiva environmental and social sustainability. These findings
improve working conditions resulting in increased employee satisfac are in line with that indicated by Akter et al. (2016), Wamba et al.
tion, and contribute to social sustainability (Joung et al., 2013; Khakurel (2017) and Dubey et al. (2019), but different from that indicated by
et al., 2018). Gangwar et al. (2022). An example of the good applicability of BDA, in
The results also demonstrate that cloud computing positively in terms of environmental sustainability, is its impact on the green supply
fluences environmental and social sustainability indicators. This means chain (Doolun et al., 2018). By implementing BDA, manufacturing
that the implementation of cloud computing will allow companies to MNEs could develop new tools that accurately monitor the supply chain
increase their computing capacity and data storage, without the need for in real-time, decreasing risks and making processes more agile, allowing
active and direct management by the company, which can improve their these companies to have an environmentally sustainable competitive
performance in terms of environmental and social sustainability. The advantage. Regarding social sustainability, Dubey et al. (2019) argue
implementation of cloud computing will allow companies to reduce that with the implementation of BDA, manufacturing MNEs promote
operating costs, physical or material resources, and human resources, improved facilities, training for workers, gender equality, elimination of
which is in line with what was indicated by Chang et al. (2010), Gill and child labor, and greater social benefits, which is in line with the results
Buyya (2019) and Bologa et al. (2017). According to Gill and Buyya of the present study. On the other hand, Gangwar et al. (2022) the
(2019) a sustainable cloud computing model, with applications and application of the BDA can bring social insecurity. Therefore, its appli
sustainability measures, will enable more efficient energy management, cation in promoting social sustainability has been a priority for com
virtualization, thermal recognition programs, renewable energy man panies (Gangwar et al., 2022).
agement, and even reuse of natural resources. Regarding social sus The present study it was found that the application of blockchain
tainability, increased information sharing through cloud computing can technology in manufacturing industries positively influences the envi
advance employee performance (Bologa et al., 2017), but may also ronmental sustainability. This means that blockchain technology allows
result in some of the more traditional professions being replaced by manufacturing MNEs to make continuous advances in the computation
smart technologies. Simultaneously, there is a need to develop and of information, using a central agent that coordinates data in a reliable,
implement smarter technologies, and new professions will emerge from transparent and shared way, thus allowing to improve efficiency.
developing these new smart technologies (Bologa et al., 2017). How Therefore, blockchain technology contributes to manufacturing MNEs
ever, Bologa et al. (2017) state that the implementation of cloud being increasingly environmentally sustainable. Our results are in line
computing may not be consensual for society since it may increase un with that indicated by Parmentola et al. (2022), Alles and Gray (2020),
employment for those who do not have skills directed toward new Saberi et al. (2019), Manupati et al. (2020) and Upadhyay et al. (2021).
digital technologies. The implementation of blockchain technology allows, for example, to
Regarding Robotics, it is found to influence manufacturing MNEs’ implement a sustainable production model, a green supply chain (Mora
9
et al., 2021), monitor, manipulate and store data about activities that contribution from the implementation of digital technologies to achieve
can increase pollution and environmental devastation, and also collect the environmental and social sustainability of manufacturing MNEs and,
real-time data about green activities. It also helps managers in as such, the resources digital technologies have to be a component of
decision-making (Parmentola et al., 2022). Contrary to the results of the business strategies in order for companies to achieve sustainable
present study, Parmentola et al. (2022) states that traditional blockchain development goals; (ii) the implementation of digital technologies in
systems require high CO2 emissions and high energy costs. Furthermore, European manufacturing MNEs is still low and, consequently, private
to store large servers, large facilities are needed, which poses a threat in investment by companies must be channeled towards the digitization of
terms of wasted natural resources and forest devastation (Parmentola manufacturing activities, with government officials playing an impor
et al., 2022). These results are not in line with those of the present study. tant role, namely in terms of granting subsidies for a faster digital
The results of the present study reinforce the relevance of blockchain transition and efficient design of tax benefits on expenses incurred in
technology being implemented in manufacturing MNEs. Blockchain investing in these technologies; (iii) the different digital technologies
technology brings multiple advantages such as i) in reducing the haz contribute in an unequal way to achieving environmental and social
ardousness of outputs, inputs, and waste (e.g., monitoring and tracking sustainability objectives and as such, companies must prioritize their
of raw material used, products, and waste) (Alles and Gray, 2020); ii) in implementation strategies and invest in the training of workers in the
environmental management (e.g., certification and enforcement of technologies that contribute most to achieving the intended objectives;
environmental compliance, environmental budgeting, and employee (iv) manufacturing MNEs should include environmental and social di
implications) (Saberi et al., 2019); iii) natural environment (e.g., serves mensions in their corporate strategy (Luthra et al., 2020) to promote
to support decisions regarding natural resource use, waste management, their benefits to society (Ghobakhloo, 2020), and the implementation of
tracking the impact of manufacturers’ activities on the ecosystem) digital technologies (Industry 4.0) should not be motivated only to in
(Manupati et al., 2020); iv) reducing land, air, and water pollution (e.g., crease productivity and performance and, consequently, competitive
facilitating the use of renewable energy; v) combating wasted inputs in ness. Companies with high investments in Industry 4.0 cannot neglect or
production; saving resources; reducing the application of fossil fuels) encourage the increase in unemployment, nor can they only be con
(Saberi et al., 2019); vi) optimizing resource and energy use (e.g., pro cerned with reducing waste and consumption of raw materials (Satyro
moting the use of renewable energy, motivating recycling) (Upadhyay et al., 2022). In addition, the effects of digital technology depend on how
et al., 2021). it is implemented and as such, companies must consider the direct and
Finally, this study confirms that the application of blockchain tech immediate consequences, but also the indirect consequences that may
nology in manufacturing industries positively influences the social sus make the implementation of digital technologies unfeasible or amplify
tainability. This means that blockchain technology contributes to the positive effects (Lioukas et al., 2016). Thus, these results can
promoting social sustainability in manufacturing MNEs. Therefore, its contribute to the improvement of the implementation of digital tech
implementation can, for example, improve working conditions, identify nologies and to the search for continuous updating of the same, allowing
possible violations of human rights, and increase social engagement. the manufacturing industries to produce more environmentally friendly
Our results are in line with that indicated by Khanfar et al. (2021), and socially sustainable, with the creation of value not only for this
Katsikouli et al. (2021), Venkatesh et al. (2020) and Park and Li (2021). industry but for the stakeholders and society in general.
According to Khanfar et al. (2021), blockchain technology can
contribute to improving working conditions (e.g., disclosing safety and 6. Conclusion
health practices); business practices (e.g., promoting fair and balanced
trade; tracking and monitoring corruption situations) (Katsikouli et al., Manufacturing MNEs have been under increasing pressure to
2021)); reduce safety failures; promote product innovation) track and implement Industry 4.0. in their business models to accelerate envi
monitor companies’ health and safety certificates; improve working ronmental and social sustainability and simultaneously become more
conditions, and track workers’ work activity) (Venkatesh et al., 2020); competitive. In this context, the present study aimed to analyze the
customer issues (e.g., optimizing production and delivery processes; contribution of digital technologies to promoting environmental and
enabling a direct relationship between stakeholders; facilitating product social sustainability in manufacturing MNEs. The literature review
customization; societal engagement (e.g., making the business model carried out demonstrates that the implementation of digital technologies
more efficient; reducing costs; creating new business opportunities; in manufacturing MNEs has been carried out essentially to pursue eco
boosting social services) (Schulz et al., 2020); and human rights (e.g., nomic objectives of better performance and value creation, and as such,
preventing social abuse and alarmism; reducing and identifying situa economic sustainability. The contribution of digital technologies to
tions of worker exploitation) (Park and Li, 2021). achieving environmental and social sustainability goals has been
neglected. However, in the present study we demonstrate that digital
5.2. Theoretical and practical implications technologies (AI, Cloud Computing, Robotics, BDA, and Blockchain)
positively impact manufacturing MNEs’ environmental and social sus
In theoretical terms, the findings of this study are a good opportunity tainability. Thus, digital technologies can be vital for manufacturing
for the evolution of the RBV theory, since: (i) we expand the capabilities MNEs to be more competitive and simultaneously be environmentally
and resources traditionally considered in the RBV, by considering digital and socially sustainable, thus contributing to sustainable development
technologies as a specific capability of companies based on resources; goals. In addition, this study demonstrates, through the diagnosis of 764
(ii) we conclude that digital technologies are valuable to achieve stra manufacturing MNEs in Europe, that the implementation of digital
tegic goals of companies in the field of environmental and social sus technologies is still low and that the contribution of the implementation
tainability and (iii) we specify the unequal contribution of different of digital technologies is uneven, leading companies to prioritize in
digital technologies to achieve environmental and social sustainability vestment in a certain technology (over another) to achieve environ
goals, allowing us to determine the probability of a digital technology to mental and social sustainability. This conclusion is possible because in a
have greater value in the strategic context of manufacturing MNEs. single study we were able to compare the contribution of five different
Furthermore, as far as we know, it is the first study to explore the in digital technologies to economic and social sustainability. Thus, in order
dividual contribution of five digital technologies to environmental and to achieve environmental sustainability goals, companies should invest
social sustainability at the same time, allowing to reach the interests of in digital technologies that can contribute more to the environmental
different stakeholders. practices already implemented in companies, prioritizing cloud
In practical terms, some implications can be inferred from the results computing, then blockchain, robotic, BDA and, finally, the AI. In terms
of this study: (i) how it has been demonstrated that there is a positive of social sustainability, the implementation of cloud computing is also
10
the digital technology that contributes the most to social well-being, Alles, M., Gray, G.L., 2020. The first mile problem”: deriving an endogenous demand for
auditing in blockchain-based business processes. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 38,
followed by BDA, robotics, AI and finally blockchain.
100465 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2020.100465.
This study is not without limitations. As limitations of the study, we Amjad, M.S., Rafique, M.Z., Khan, M.A., 2021. Leveraging optimized and cleaner
can point out the fact that we used only secondary data from a single production through industry 4.0. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 26, 859–871. https://doi.
database and as such, we are restricted to the sample of indicators org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.01.001.
Asif, M., 2020. Are QM models aligned with Industry 4.0? A perspective on current
collected by this database. Data goes back to 2020 and includes practices. J. Clean. Prod. 258, 120820 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
manufacturing companies from all 27 Member States. Therefore, more jclepro.2020.120820.
recent data can be included in future studies, the comparison of different Azadi, M., Moghaddas, Z., Cheng, T.C.E., Farzipoor Saen, R., 2021. Assessing the
sustainability of cloud computing service providers for Industry 4.0: a state-of-the-
sectors of activity, as well as the inclusion of other variables from other art analytical approach. Int. J. Prod. Res. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/
databases. Future studies can also consider other digital technologies 00207543.2021.1959666.
such as smart devices, high-speed infrastructure, augmented reality, and Barney, J., 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 17,
99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108.
IoT. Bi, Z.M., Wang, L., 2013. Manufacturing paradigm shift towards better sustainability. In:
New studies can also be analyzed from the perspective of other Li, W., Mehnen, J. (Eds.), Cloud Manufacturing: Distributed Computing
theories, such as sustainability theory, stakeholder theory, and theory of Technologies for Global and Sustainable Manufacturing. Springer London, London,
pp. 99–119.
everything. However, it was only possible to answer some questions, and Birkel, H.S., Veile, J.W., Müller, J.M., Hartmann, E., Voigt, K.-I., 2019. Development of a
the following should be considered for future studies: How quickly is the risk framework for industry 4.0 in the context of sustainability for established
investment made in digital technologies recovered? When implementing manufacturers. Sustainability 11, 384. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020384.
Bologa, R., Lupu, A.-R., Boja, C., Georgescu, T.M., 2017. Sustaining employability: a
digital technologies, what percentage of costs can be reduced? What are
process for introducing cloud computing, big data, social networks, mobile
the first order and second order effects of the implementation of digital programming and cybersecurity into academic curricula. Sustainability 9, 2235.
technologies in companies? What impacts does the deployment of dig https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122235.
ital technologies have on the brand of manufacturing MNEs? Do workers Chang, V., Bacigalupo, D., Wills, G., Roure, D., 2010. A Categorisation of Cloud
Computing Business Models. In: Paper Presented at the 2010 10th IEEE/ACM
with robotics systems have better working conditions than traditional International Conference on Cluster. Cloud and Grid Computing, Melbourne,
occupations? More study needs to be done on the social impacts that Australia, 17-20 May 2010.
manufacturing MNEs have when migrating to cloud computing (Azadi Chauhan, C., Parida, V., Dhir, A., 2022. Linking circular economy and digitalisation
technologies: a systematic literature review of past achievements and future
et al., 2021; Mohammed et al., 2020). Additionally, we should replicate promises. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 177, 121508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
the questions from this study and broaden the range of digital technol techfore.2022.121508.
ogies (e.g. include smart devices, high-speed infrastructure, augmented Cioffi, R., Travaglioni, M., Piscitelli, G., Petrillo, A., De Felice, F., 2020. Artificial
intelligence and machine learning applications in smart production: progress, trends,
reality, and IoT) in MNCs from various countries to collect primary data and directions. Sustainability 12, 492. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020492.
and reinforce the results of this research. Cohen, J., 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Lwrence
Earlbaum Associates, New York.
Deloitte, 2021. Sustainable Manufacturing: from Vision to Action. Retrieved from
CRediT authorship contribution statement London, UK. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/
Energy-and-Resources/gx-eri-sustainable-manufacturing-2021.pdf.
João J. Ferreira: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision. Doolun, I.S., Ponnambalam, S.G., Subramanian, N., Kanagaraj, G., 2018. Data driven
hybrid evolutionary analytical approach for multi objective location allocation
João M. Lopes: Data curation, Writing – original draft, preparation. decisions: automotive green supply chain empirical evidence. Comput. Oper. Res.
Sofia Gomes: Visualization, Investigation, Software. Husain G. Ram 98, 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2018.01.008.
mal: Validation, Writing – review & editing. Duan, L., Xiong, Y., 2015. Big data analytics and business analytics. J. Manag. Anal. 2,
1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/23270012.2015.1020891.
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S.J., Papadopoulos, T., Luo, Z., Wamba, S.F.,
Declaration of competing interest Roubaud, D., 2019. Can big data and predictive analytics improve social and
environmental sustainability? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 144, 534–545.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.020.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial Enyoghasi, C., Badurdeen, F., 2021. Industry 4.0 for sustainable manufacturing:
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence opportunities at the product, process, and system levels. Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
166, 105362 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105362.
the work reported in this paper. Esmaeilian, B., Sarkis, J., Lewis, K., Behdad, S., 2020. Blockchain for the future of
sustainable supply chain management in Industry 4.0. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 163,
Data availability 105064 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105064.
European Commission, 2020. Flash Eurobarometer 486 (SMEs, Start-Ups, Scale-Ups and
Entrepreneurship). https://doi.org/10.4232/1.13639. Retrieved from Brussels:
Data will be made available on request. Eurostat, 2022. Structure of Multinational Enterprise Groups in the EU. Retrieved from.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Structure_of_
multinational_enterprise_groups_in_the_EU#Multinational_enterprise_groups_in_th
Appendix A. Supplementary data e_EU_and_EFTA_are_mainly_active_in_the_manufacturing_sector.2C_and_employ
ment_is_concentrated_in_a_small_number_of_sectors.
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. Feng, S., Li, L.X., Cen, L., 2001. An object-oriented intelligent design tool to aid the
design of manufacturing systems. Knowl. Base Syst. 14, 225–232. https://doi.org/
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136841.
10.1016/S0950-7051(01)00100-9.
Fisher, O., Watson, N., Porcu, L., Bacon, D., Rigley, M., Gomes, R.L., 2018. Cloud
References manufacturing as a sustainable process manufacturing route. J. Manuf. Syst. 47,
53–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2018.03.005.
Frey, C.B., Osborne, M.A., 2017. The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to
Adomako, S., Amankwah-Amoah, J., Danso, A., Konadu, R., Owusu-Agyei, S., 2019.
computerisation? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 114, 254–280. https://doi.org/
Environmental sustainability orientation and performance of family and nonfamily
10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019.
firms. Bus. Strat. Environ. 28, 1250–1259. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2314.
Gadaleta, M., Pellicciari, M., Berselli, G., 2019. Optimization of the energy consumption
Ajwani-Ramchandani, R., Figueira, S., Torres de Oliveira, R., Jha, S., 2021a. Enhancing
of industrial robots for automatic code generation. Robot. Comput. Integrated
the circular and modified linear economy: the importance of blockchain for
Manuf. 57, 452–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2018.12.020.
developing economies. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 168, 105468 https://doi.org/
Gajšek, B., Stradovnik, S., Hace, A., 2020. Sustainable move towards flexible, robotic,
10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105468.
human-involving workplace. Sustainability 12, 6590. https://doi.org/10.3390/
Ajwani-Ramchandani, R., Figueira, S., Torres de Oliveira, R., Jha, S., Ramchandani, A.,
su12166590.
Schuricht, L., 2021b. Towards a circular economy for packaging waste by using new
Gangwar, H., Mishra, R., Kamble, S., 2022. Adoption of big data analytics practices for
technologies: the case of large multinationals in emerging economies. J. Clean. Prod.
sustainability development in the e-commercesupply chain: a mixed-method study.
281, 125139 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125139.
Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-07-2021-0224
Akter, S., Wamba, S.F., Gunasekaran, A., Dubey, R., Childe, S.J., 2016. How to improve
ahead-of-print.
firm performance using big data analytics capability and business strategy
García-Muiña, F.E., Medina-Salgado, M.S., Ferrari, A.M., Cucchi, M., 2020. Sustainability
alignment? Int. J. Prod. Econ. 182, 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
transition in industry 4.0 and smart manufacturing with the triple-layered business
ijpe.2016.08.018.
11
model canvas. Sustainability 12, 2364. Retrieved from. https://www.mdpi.com/ Li, Y., Sun, H., Li, D.K., Song, J., Ding, R.G., 2022. Effects of digital technology adoption
2071-1050/12/6/2364. on sustainability performance in construction projects: the mediating role of
Ghobakhloo, M., 2020. Industry 4.0, digitization, and opportunities for sustainability. stakeholder collaboration. J. Manag. Eng. 38, 04022016. Artn 0402201610.1061/
J. Clean. Prod. 252, 119869 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119869. (Asce)Me.1943-5479.0001040.
Ghobakhloo, M., Fathi, M., Iranmanesh, M., Maroufkhani, P., Morales, M.E., 2021. Lioukas, C.S., Reuer, J.J., Zollo, M., 2016. Effects of information technology capabilities
Industry 4.0 ten years on: a bibliometric and systematic review of concepts, on strategic alliances: implications for the resource-based view. J. Manag. Stud. 53,
sustainability value drivers, and success determinants. J. Clean. Prod. 302, 127052 161–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12179.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127052. Lloyd, C., Payne, J., 2019. Rethinking country effects: robotics, AI and work futures in
Gill, S.S., Buyya, R., 2019. A taxonomy and future directions for sustainable cloud Norway and the UK. New Technol. Work. Employ. 34, 208–225. https://doi.org/
computing: 360 degree view. ACM Comput. Surv. 51, 1–33. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/ntwe.12149.
10.1145/3241038. Lopes, J., Ferreira, J.J., Farinha, L., 2021. Entrepreneurship and the resource-based view:
Godina, R., Ribeiro, I., Matos, F., Ferreira, B.T., Carvalho, H., Pecas, P., 2020. Impact what is the linkage? A bibliometric approach. Int. J. Entrepreneurial Ventur. 13,
assessment of additive manufacturing on sustainable business models in industry 4.0 137–164. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijev.2021.114408.
context. Sustainability 12, 7066. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12177066. López, L.-A., Cadarso, M.-Á., Zafrilla, J., Arce, G., 2019. The carbon footprint of the U.S.
Grybauskas, A., Stefanini, A., Ghobakhloo, M., 2022. Social sustainability in the age of multinationals’ foreign affiliates. Nat. Commun. 10, 1672. https://doi.org/10.1038/
digitalization: a systematic literature Review on the social implications of industry s41467-019-09473-7.
4.0. Technol. Soc. 70, 101997 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101997. Luthra, S., Kumar, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Mangla, S.K., Garza-Reyes, J.A., 2020. Industry
Guenat, S., Purnell, P., Davies, Z.G., Nawrath, M., Stringer, L.C., Babu, G.R., 4.0 as an enabler of sustainability diffusion in supply chain: an analysis of influential
Balasubramanian, M., Ballantyne, E.E.F., Bylappa, B.K., Chen, B., De Jager, P., Del strength of drivers in an emerging economy. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58, 1505–1521.
Prete, A., Di Nuovo, A., Ehi-Eromosele, C.O., Eskandari Torbaghan, M., Evans, K.L., https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1660828.
Fraundorfer, M., Haouas, W., Izunobi, J.U., Jauregui-Correa, J.C., Kaddouh, B.Y., Mageto, J., 2021. Big data analytics in sustainable supply chain management: a focus on
Lewycka, S., MacIntosh, A.C., Mady, C., Maple, C., Mhiret, W.N., Mohammed- manufacturing supply chains. Sustainability 13, 7101. https://doi.org/10.3390/
Amin, R.K., Olawole, O.C., Oluseyi, T., Orfila, C., Ossola, A., Pfeifer, M., su13137101.
Pridmore, T., Rijal, M.L., Rega-Brodsky, C.C., Robertson, I.D., Rogers, C.D.F., Manupati, V.K., Schoenherr, T., Ramkumar, M., Wagner, S.M., Pabba, S.K., Inder Raj
Rougé, C., Rumaney, M.B., Seeletso, M.K., Shaqura, M.Z., Suresh, L.M., Sweeting, M. Singh, R., 2020. A blockchain-based approach for a multi-echelon sustainable supply
N., Taylor Buck, N., Ukwuru, M.U., Verbeek, T., Voss, H., Wadud, Z., Wang, X., chain. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58, 2222–2241. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Winn, N., Dallimer, M., 2022. Meeting sustainable development goals via robotics 00207543.2019.1683248.
and autonomous systems. Nat. Commun. 13, 3559. https://doi.org/10.1038/ Mao, S., Wang, B., Tang, Y., Qian, F., 2019. Opportunities and challenges of artificial
s41467-022-31150-5. intelligence for green manufacturing in the process industry. Engineering 5,
Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M., 2019. When to use and how to report 995–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2019.08.013.
the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 31, 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11- Martin, M.G., Alvarez, A.P., Ordieres-Mere, J., Villalba-Diez, J., Morales-Alonso, G.,
2018-0203. 2021. New business models from prescriptive maintenance strategies aligned with
Hair Jr., J.F., Matthews, L.M., Matthews, R.L., Sarstedt, M., 2017. PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: sustainable development goals. Sustainability 13, 216. https://doi.org/10.3390/
updated guidelines on which method to use. Int. J. Multi. Data Anal. 1, 107–123. su13010216.
https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmda.2017.10008574. Mathiyazhagan, K., Sengupta, S., Mathivathanan, D., 2019. Challenges for implementing
Hamalainen, M., Karjalainen, J., 2017. Social manufacturing: when the maker movement green concept in sustainable manufacturing: a systematic review. Opsearch 56,
meets interfirm production networks. Bus. Horiz. 60, 795–805. https://doi.org/ 32–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12597-019-00359-2.
10.1016/j.bushor.2017.07.007. Mohamed, M., 2018. Challenges and benefits of industry 4.0: an overview. Int. J. Supply
Haseeb, M., Hussain, H.I., Ślusarczyk, B., Jermsittiparsert, K., 2019. Industry 4.0: a Oper. Manag. 5, 256–265.
solution towards technology challenges of sustainable business performance. Soc. Mohammed, F., Olayah, F., Ali, A., Gazem, N.A., 2020. The effect of cloud computing
Sci. 8, 154. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8050154. adoption on the sustainability of e-government services: a review. Int. J. Adv. Sci.
Huber, R., Oberländer, A.M., Faisst, U., Röglinger, M., 2022. Disentangling capabilities Technol. 29, 2636–2642.
for industry 4.0 - an information systems capability perspective. Inf. Syst. Front Monostori, L., Kádár, B., Bauernhansl, T., Kondoh, S., Kumara, S., Reinhart, G., Sauer, O.,
1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10260-x. Schuh, G., Sihn, W., Ueda, K., 2016. Cyber-physical systems in manufacturing. CIRP
Jayashree, S., Hassan Reza, M.N., Malarvizhi, C.A.N., Maheswari, H., Hosseini, Z., Annals 65, 621–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.06.005.
Kasim, A., 2021. The impact of technological innovation on industry 4.0 Mora, H., Mendoza-Tello, J.C., Varela-Guzmán, E.G., Szymanski, J., 2021. Blockchain
implementation and sustainability: an empirical study on Malaysian small and technologies to address smart city and society challenges. Comput. Hum. Behav.
medium sized enterprises. Sustainability 13, 10115. https://doi.org/10.3390/ 122, 106854 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106854.
su131810115. Müller, J.M., Kiel, D., Voigt, K.-I., 2018. What drives the implementation of industry 4.0?
Jayashree, S., Reza, M.N.H., Malarvizhi, C.A.N., Gunasekaran, A., Rauf, M.A., 2022. The role of opportunities and challenges in the context of sustainability.
Testing an adoption model for Industry 4.0 and sustainability: a Malaysian scenario. Sustainability 10, 247. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010247.
Sustain. Prod. Consum. 31, 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.02.015. Nascimento, D.L.M., Alencastro, V., Quelhas, O.L.G., Caiado, R.G.G., Garza-Reyes, J.A.,
Joung, C.B., Carrell, J., Sarkar, P., Feng, S.C., 2013. Categorization of indicators for Rocha-Lona, L., Tortorella, G., 2019. Exploring Industry 4.0 technologies to enable
sustainable manufacturing. Ecol. Indicat. 24, 148–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. circular economy practices in a manufacturing context. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag.
ecolind.2012.05.030. 30, 607–627. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-03-2018-0071.
Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., Helbig, J., 2013. Recommendations for Implementing the Nishant, R., Kennedy, M., Corbett, J., 2020. Artificial intelligence for sustainability:
Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0: Final Report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. challenges, opportunities, and a research agenda. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 53, 102104
Retrieved from Berlin, Germany. https://en.acatech.de/wp-content/uploads/sites https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102104.
/6/2018/03/Final_report__Industrie_4.0_accessible.pdf. Nuortimo, K., Harkonen, J., 2018. Opinion mining approach to study media-image of
Kamble, S.S., Gunasekaran, A., Gawankar, S.A., 2018. Sustainable Industry 4.0 energy production. Implications to public acceptance and market deployment.
framework: a systematic literature review identifying the current trends and future Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 96, 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
perspectives. Process Saf. Environ. Protect. 117, 408–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/ rser.2018.07.018.
j.psep.2018.05.009. Ogbemhe, J., Mpofu, K., Tlale, N.S., 2017. Achieving sustainability in manufacturing
Katsikouli, P., Wilde, A.S., Dragoni, N., Hogh-Jensen, H., 2021. On the benefits and using robotic methodologies. Procedia Manuf. 8, 440–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/
challenges of blockchains for managing food supply chains. J. Sci. Food Agric. 101, j.promfg.2017.02.056.
2175–2181. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.10883. Onu, P., Mbohwa, C., 2021. Industry 4.0 opportunities in manufacturing SMEs:
Kaur, H., Singh, S.P., 2018. Heuristic modeling for sustainable procurement and logistics sustainability outlook. Mater. Today Proc. 44, 1925–1930. https://doi.org/10.1016/
in a supply chain using big data. Comput. Oper. Res. 98, 301–321. https://doi.org/ j.matpr.2020.12.095.
10.1016/j.cor.2017.05.008. Oztemel, E., Gursev, S., 2020. Literature review of Industry 4.0 and related technologies.
Khakurel, J., Melkas, H., Porras, J., 2018. Tapping into the wearable device revolution in J. Intell. Manuf. 31, 127–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-018-1433-8.
the work environment: a systematic review. Inf. Technol. People 31, 791–818. Park, A., Li, H., 2021. The effect of blockchain technology on supply chain sustainability
https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-03-2017-0076. performances. Sustainability 13, 1726. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041726.
Khanfar, A.A.A., Iranmanesh, M., Ghobakhloo, M., Senali, M.G., Fathi, M., 2021. Parmentola, A., Petrillo, A., Tutore, I., De Felice, F., 2022. Is blockchain able to enhance
Applications of blockchain technology in sustainable manufacturing and supply environmental sustainability? A systematic review and research agenda from the
chain management: a systematic review. Sustainability 13, 7870. https://doi.org/ perspective of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Bus. Strat. Environ. 31,
10.3390/su13147870. 194–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2882.
Khin, S., Kee, D.M.H., 2022. Factors influencing Industry 4.0 adoption. J. Manuf. Piyathanavong, V., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Kumar, V., Maldonado-Guzmán, G., Mangla, S.K.,
Technol. Manag. 33, 448–467. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-03-2021-0111. 2019. The adoption of operational environmental sustainability approaches in the
Kusiak, A., 2018. Smart manufacturing. Int. J. Prod. Res. 56, 508–517. https://doi.org/ Thai manufacturing sector. J. Clean. Prod. 220, 507–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
10.1080/00207543.2017.1351644. jclepro.2019.02.093.
Lee, K., 2021. A systematic review on social sustainability of artificial intelligence in Radić, I., Rupnik, B., Šinko, S., Kramberger, T., Gajšek, B., 2020. Redesign of the
product design. Sustainability 13, 2668. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052668. workplace for toolmakers towards industry 4.0. In: Karabegović, I., Kovačević, A.,
Leng, J., Ruan, G., Jiang, P., Xu, K., Liu, Q., Zhou, X., Liu, C., 2020. Blockchain- Banjanović-Mehmedović, L., Dašić, P. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Integrating
empowered sustainable manufacturing and product lifecycle management in Industry 4.0 in Business and Manufacturing. IGI Global, Hershey, PA, USA,
industry 4.0: a survey. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 132, 110112 https://doi.org/ pp. 492–511.
10.1016/j.rser.2020.110112.
12
Ren, L., Zhang, L., Tao, F., Zhao, C., Chai, X., Zhao, X., 2015. Cloud manufacturing: from Tseng, M.-L., Tan, R.R., Chiu, A.S.F., Chien, C.-F., Kuo, T.C., 2018. Circular economy
concept to practice. Enterprise Inf. Syst. 9, 186–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/ meets industry 4.0: can big data drive industrial symbiosis? Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
17517575.2013.839055. 131, 146–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.12.028.
Russell, S.J., Norvig, P., 2016. Artificial Intelligence: a Modern Approach, 3 ed. Pearson Upadhyay, A., Mukhuty, S., Kumar, V., Kazancoglu, Y., 2021. Blockchain technology and
Education Limited, London, UK. the circular economy: implications for sustainability and social responsibility.
Saberi, S., Kouhizadeh, M., Sarkis, J., Shen, L.J., 2019. Blockchain technology and its J. Clean. Prod. 293, 126130 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126130.
relationships to sustainable supply chain management. Int. J. Prod. Res. 57, Venkatesh, V.G., Kang, K., Wang, B., Zhong, R.Y., Zhang, A., 2020. System architecture
2117–2135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1533261. for blockchain based transparency of supply chain social sustainability. Robot.
Satyro, W.C., de Almeida, C.M.V.B., Pinto Jr., M.J.A., Contador, J.C., Giannetti, B.F., de Comput. Integrated Manuf. 63, 101896 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Lima, A.F., Fragomeni, M.A., 2022. Industry 4.0 implementation: the relevance of rcim.2019.101896.
sustainability and the potential social impact in a developing country. J. Clean. Prod. Wamba, S.F., Gunasekaran, A., Akter, S., Ren, S.J.F., Dubey, R., Childe, S.J., 2017. Big
337, 130456 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130456. data analytics and firm performance: effects of dynamic capabilities. J. Bus. Res. 70,
Schulz, K.A., Gstrein, O.J., Zwitter, A.J., 2020. Exploring the governance and 356–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.009.
implementation of sustainable development initiatives through blockchain Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., van Oppen, C., 2009. Using PLS path modeling for
technology. Futures 122, 102611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2020.102611. assessing hierarchical construct models: guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Q.
Sun, Y., Shahzad, M., Razzaq, A., 2022. Sustainable organizational performance through 33, 177–195. https://doi.org/10.2307/20650284.
blockchain technology adoption and knowledge management in China. J. Innov. Winter, J., 2020. The evolutionary and disruptive potential of Industrie 4.0. Hungarian
Knowledge 7, 100247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100247. Geographical Bulletin 69, 83–97. https://doi.org/10.15201/hungeobull.69.2.1.
Szalavetz, A., 2022. The digitalisation of manufacturing and blurring industry Xu, L.D., Xu, E.L., Li, L., 2018. Industry 4.0: state of the art and future trends. Int. J. Prod.
boundaries. CIRP J. Manufact. Sci. Technol. 37, 332–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/ Res. 56, 2941–2962. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1444806.
j.cirpj.2022.02.015. Yadav, G., Luthra, S., Jakhar, S.K., Mangla, S.K., Rai, D.P., 2020. A framework to
Tan, W., Xu, Y., Xu, W., Xu, L., Zhao, X., Wang, L., Fu, L., 2010. A methodology toward overcome sustainable supply chain challenges through solution measures of industry
manufacturing grid-based virtual enterprise operation platform. Enterprise Inf. Syst. 4.0 and circular economy: an automotive case. J. Clean. Prod. 254, 120112 https://
4, 283–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/17517575.2010.504888. doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120112.
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V.E., Chatelin, Y.-M., Lauro, C., 2005. PLS path modeling. Comput. Yamamoto, T., Hayama, H., Hayashi, T., Mori, T., 2020. Automatic energy-saving
Stat. Data Anal. 48, 159–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2004.03.005. operations system using robotic process automation. Energies 13, 2342. https://doi.
org/10.3390/en13092342.
13

Industry 4.0 Implementation - Environmental and Social Susteainability in Manufacturing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Industry 4.0 Implementation - Environmental and Social Susteainability in Manufacturing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Industry 4.0 Implementation - Environmental and Social Susteainability in Manufacturing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Cleaner Production 404 (2023) 136841

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

Industry 4.0 implementation: Environmental and social sustainability in

Fig. 1. Research model.

The choice of digital technologies to be studied in the present study Table 3

Table 5 4.2. Measures of reliability and validity

ES 0.772 0.803 0.508 0.713

measure the variables were collected through questionnaires, we carried

0.199), artificial intelligence (β = 0.159) and blockchain (β = 0.117).

negative, albeit residual, impact on adopting sustainable social

5. Discussion and theorical and practical implications

5.1. Discussion of results

This study considered AI, Cloud Computing, Robotics, BDA, and

Blockchain digital technologies for Industry 4.0 implementation. In

Big Data Analytics

Big Data Analytics

the environmental and social sustainability of manufacturing MNEs and

Model 2 - Dependent Variable: Social

drive their competitiveness. These findings show that manufacturing

MNEs have to increasingly consider environmental and social sustain­

that for companies to achieve environmental sustainability, and to be

et al. (2022). According to Huber et al. (2022). there is evidence that

You might also like

MNEs have to increasingly consider environmental and social sustain