Proceedings of the 35th European Safety and Reliability & the 33rd Society for Risk Analysis Europe

Conference
Edited by Eirik Bjorheim Abrahamsen, Terje Aven, Frederic Bouder, Roger Flage, Marja Ylönen
©2025 ESREL SRA-E 2025 Organizers. Published by Research Publishing, Singapore.
doi: 10.3850/978-981-94-3281-3_ESREL-SRA-E2025-P0757-cd

A roadmap to integrate the sustainable impact of Industry 4.0 technologies in mainte-

nance policies

Mouhamadou Mansour DIOP

Université de technologie de Compiègne, Roberval, Compiègne, France.
Polytechnique Montréal, Mathematics and Industrial engineering department, Montreal, Canada.
E-mail: mouhamadou.diop@utc.fr

Amélie PONCHET DURUPT

Université de technologie de Compiègne, Roberval, Compiègne, France.
E-mail: amelie.durupt@utc.fr

Christophe DANJOU
Polytechnique Montréal, Mathematics and Industrial engineering department, Montreal, Canada.
E-mail: christophe.danjou@polymtl.ca

Yacine BAOUCH
Université de technologie de Compiègne, Roberval, Compiègne, France.
E-mail: yacine.baouch@utc.fr

Nassim BOUDAOUD
Université de technologie de Compiègne, Roberval, Compiègne, France.
E-mail: nassim.boudaoud@utc.fr

Maintenance decision-making has traditionally focused on economic criteria, yet the growing demand for carbon
neutrality highlights the need to address all three dimensions of sustainability (economic, environmental, and social)
within manufacturing industries. Although Industry 4.0 (I4.0) enabling technologies are widely recognized for their
potential benefits, their full sustainability impacts remain poorly understood. Existing studies often emphasize their
positive contributions but lack precise quantification of both their positive and negative effects. Moreover, these
analyses tend to focus exclusively on the use phase, neglecting impacts during manufacturing and end-of-life stages.
This article proposes a structured roadmap for evaluating the lifecycle impact of I4.0 technologies on maintenance
policies. By considering multiple scenarios, this approach quantifies their effects across all dimensions of sustain-
ability, ensuring that the benefits realized during use outweigh the negative impacts from manufacturing and disposal.
To illustrate its applicability, a preliminary use case is presented using a vibration test bench equipped with IoT
sensors. Looking ahead, these sensors are set to generate fault data under varying conditions, which will be used to
test maintenance scenarios. Additionally, as outlined in the roadmap, a life cycle assessment (LCA) is planned for the
sensor to provide a comprehensive assessment of its sustainability impact. This case study serves to demonstrate the
roadmap’s relevance and its potential to support sustainable maintenance decision-making, laying the foundation for
integrating I4.0 enabling technologies into maintenance strategies while avoiding undesirable rebound effects that
could compromise sustainability goals.

Keywords: Maintenance policies, industry 4.0, sustainability, economic-environmental and social impacts.

1. Introduction tion is driven by the adoption of cyber-physical

Industry 4.0 (I4.0), often associated to the Fourth systems (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), cloud
Industrial Revolution, represents a major transfor- computing, big data analytics (BDA), and artifi-
mation in manufacturing and industrial operations cial intelligence (AI), which enable better connec-
through the integration of advanced digital tech- tivity and smarter decision-making in industrial
nologies Ertz and Gasteau (2023). This revolu- processes Waghanna et al. (2024). This conver-

1610
 Proc. of the 35th European Safety and Reliability & the 33rd Society for Risk Analysis Europe Conference 1611

gence of physical and digital technologies creates policies through a lifecycle perspective.
interconnected and intelligent systems, promising The structure of this paper is as follows: the
enhanced efficiency, productivity, and flexibility next section presents a comprehensive literature
across various industrial sectors Franciosi et al. review, examining the current state of research
(2020). on I4.0, maintenance 4.0, and their connection
One of the key areas where I4.0 has had a to sustainability. Following this, the proposition
major impact is maintenance, leading to the con- section details the development of the proposed
cept of Maintenance 4.0 Mabaso et al. (2024). roadmap and its illustration through a specific case
Traditional maintenance methods, such as reac- study. The paper concludes by summarizing key
tive maintenance, are being replaced by predictive contributions, practical recommendations, and di-
approaches made possible by IoT sensors and AI rections for future research in this evolving field.
Mabaso et al. (2024); Vrignat et al. (2022). These
2. Literature review
technologies allow real-time monitoring of equip-
ment to identify potential faults before they cause This section explores the current state of research
breakdowns Saraswat and Agrawal (2023). on the integration of I4.0 technologies into main-
Moreover, the integration of I4.0 technologies tenance strategies, with a focus on their role in
in maintenance also plays a critical role in advanc- promoting sustainability. It aims to understand
ing sustainability goals (Madreiter et al. (2024). what has been documented about the impact of
Maintenance 4.0 helps industries address envi- I4.0 technologies on maintenance policies for sus-
ronmental challenges and align with global sus- tainable management, specifically in relation to
tainability frameworks by reducing costs linked the three pillars of sustainability: economic, envi-
to equipment failures, conserving energy, mini- ronmental, and social. The key research questions
mizing waste, and promoting circular economy driving this study are:
practices Turner et al. (2020). Additionally, it en-
(i) RQ1: How do Industry 4.0 technologies in-
hances workplace safety and supports workforce
fluence maintenance policies in terms of sus-
development by requiring specialized skills for
tainability outcomes across their lifecycle?
managing advanced digital tools Tomasoni et al.
(ii) RQ2: What indicators and/or quantification
(2024); Almeida et al. (2023).
models are employed to evaluate the impact
However, despite these benefits, the sustain-
of Industry 4.0 technologies on the sustain-
able adoption of I4.0 technologies in maintenance
ability of maintenance practices?
policies poses several challenges Franciosi et al.
(2020). While their operational advantages, such To address these questions, a systematic litera-
as cost reduction and improved reliability, are ture review (SLR) was conducted to examine cur-
well-documented, their broader sustainability im- rent research, highlight gaps, and provide insights.
pacts across the entire lifecycle remain under- The findings will be used to develop a roadmap to
explored Franciosi et al. (2018); Orosnjak et al. assess the impact of these technologies on sustain-
(2021); Madreiter et al. (2024). Then, a more com- able maintenance practices.
prehensive understanding of the lifecycle implica-
2.1. Methodology
tions of I4.0 technologies is therefore critical for
the development of truly sustainable maintenance Two databases are used for the SLR: Scopus and
policies Vrignat et al. (2022). Web of Science. Then, the search was organized
To address these challenges, this paper proposes around 4 main categories of keywords: digital
a roadmap for integrating and quantifying the transformation, maintenance, sustainability, and
sustainable impacts of I4.0 technologies in main- impact assessment, as identified in table 1. a
tenance policies. The roadmap focuses on eval-
a ”*”in some words in table 1 is a truncation operator used to
uating the economic, environmental, and social
search for all variations of a word from a common root, e.g.,
dimensions of I4.0 sustainability in maintenance ”industr*” includes industry, industrial, industries, etc.
1612 Proc. of the 35th European Safety and Reliability & the 33rd Society for Risk Analysis Europe Conference

Table 1. Groups of keywords.

Digital transformation Maintenance Sustainability Impact

Industr* 4.0 Maintenance Sustainab* Impact

Industry 5.0 Asset management Circular economy Evaluation
Smart Factory Life cycle assessment Quantification
Digital manufacturing LCA Measurement
Smart manufacturing Environmental Assessment
Industrial Internet Green Metrics
Smart production
Factor* of the future
Advanced Manufacturing
Intelligent Manufacturing
Industr* of the future
High value manufacturing
Smart Industry
Manufacturing 4.0
Integrated industry
Digital Factory
Manufacturing Renaissance

Moreover, the search was targeted to find ar- these elements alone. The second stage was a full
ticles written in english, and duplicates were re- text review for the articles selected at the initial
moved to ensure the integrity of the dataset. screening. At this stage, the second, third, and
Next, we applied a filtering based on four ex- fourth exclusion criteria were considered for each
clusion criteria (EC) to narrow down the selection article. Articles not available as full texts were
toward the most relevant articles. also excluded during this stage.

(i) EC1 : Conference proceedings or book chap- 2.2. Results

ters or books.
Figure 1 reports the SLR process and its applica-
(ii) EC2 : Articles that do not establish a re-
tion. At the beginning, 280 papers were identified,
lationship between sustainability, industrial
195 from Scopus and 85 from Web of Science. Af-
maintenance, and Industry 4.0, as they fall
ter removing 78 duplicates, 202 papers remained
outside the scope of this research.
for analysis. In the first screening process, 70 arti-
(iii) EC3 : Articles in which the sustainable di-
cles were retained (28 conference articles, 42 jour-
mension of Industry 4.0 in the maintenance
nal papers), while the second screening reduced
of industries is neither the main subject nor
it to 7 (6 journal papers, 1 conference article),
the secondary subject and is not sufficiently
all published between 2019 and 2024. Table 2
developed.
presents the distribution of the selected papers by
(iv) EC4 : Articles that do not propose indica-
their year of publication.
tors and/or quantification models to assess
Furthermore, 17 papers were found relevant but
the impact of Industry 4.0 technologies on
did not fully meet EC4.
maintenance sustainability.

Following that, the selection was performed 2.3. Discussion

in two distinct steps. First, the titles, abstracts, The following section summarizes the key find-
and keywords of all articles were screened using ings from the literature review, addressing the
the first two exclusion criteria because the third research questions and highlighting the most rele-
and fourth could not be reliably assessed from vant insights.
 Proc. of the 35th European Safety and Reliability & the 33rd Society for Risk Analysis Europe Conference 1613

Table 2. Distribution of the selected papers by their Sénéchal and Trentesaux (2019). This capability
year of publication. improves the efficiency of maintenance opera-
tions, reduces travel time and associated emis-
Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 sions, and enhances overall sustainability per-
formance Chabane et al. (2023). For instance,
Number 2 0 0 1 2 2
Sénéchal and Trentesaux (2019) discuss a frame-
work for environmentally aware maintenance of
cyber-physical systems, enabled by real-time data
and diagnostics. Chabane et al. (2023) highlight
how resilient and sustainable processes in as-
set management, supported by I4.0 technologies,
contribute to positive lifecycle outcomes.
Furthermore, the integration of technologies
such as augmented reality and virtual reality can
enhance maintenance efficiency and training and
knowledge transfer for maintenance technicians
Narkhede et al. (2024); Chabane et al. (2023).
This improved training leads to more effective
maintenance practices, reducing errors and im-
proving the quality of maintenance work Cha-
bane et al. (2023). Consequently, the lifespan of
equipment is extended, and resource utilization
is optimized, contributing to both economic and
Fig. 1. SLR process and its application
environmental sustainability Patalas-Maliszewska
and Losyk (2022). Franciosi et al. (2020) discuss
how advanced maintenance services, supported by
2.3.1. Answer to RQ1 new technologies, promote sustainability. More-
The integration of I4.0 technologies into mainte- over, Samadhiya et al. (2023) explore the inte-
nance policies represents a transformative shift in gration of Total Productive Maintenance and I4.0
industrial practices, fundamentally revolutioniz- within a sustainability context, emphasizing the
ing asset management and sustainability Chabane role of technology in optimizing maintenance for
et al. (2023); Franciosi et al. (2020). circularity.
First of all, these technologies enable predic- Finally, I4.0 technologies support the imple-
tive maintenance strategies, allowing for timely mentation of circular economy principles in main-
interventions and preventing costly breakdowns tenance operations Chabane et al. (2023); Samad-
Jena et al. (2024). By leveraging data analytics hiya et al. (2023). By enabling better tracking and
and machine learning algorithms, maintenance management of spare parts, these technologies
schedules can be optimized based on real-time facilitate reuse and recycling, reducing waste and
equipment conditions, minimizing downtime and promoting resource efficiency. This integration
extending asset lifecycles Narkhede et al. (2024). of circular economy principles into maintenance
This shift towards predictive maintenance re- policies contributes to a more sustainable lifecycle
duces resource consumption and waste genera- management of assets. Munsamy and Telukdarie
tion, contributing to environmental sustainability (2018) discuss the application of I4.0 technologies
Munsamy and Telukdarie (2018). Secondly, I4.0 for achieving business sustainability, including as-
technologies facilitate remote monitoring and di- pects of energy demand in maintenance. However,
agnostics, enabling maintenance personnel to ac- it is important to note that the successful imple-
cess real-time data and insights from anywhere mentation of these technologies requires careful
1614 Proc. of the 35th European Safety and Reliability & the 33rd Society for Risk Analysis Europe Conference

consideration of human factors and organizational ronmental factors during maintenance decision-
changes Chabane et al. (2023). A human-centered making within CPS. They suggest using data gen-
approach to I4.0 implementation is important for erated by CPS to make more environmentally
achieving sustainable outcomes in maintenance aware choices, contributing to sustainable mainte-
and asset management Chabane et al. (2023). nance practices. Moreover, Chabane et al. (2023)
highlight the need to integrate the impact of in-
2.3.2. Answer to RQ2 dustry changes, including the adoption of I4.0
Indicators and various quantification models are technologies, into the asset management process
employed to evaluate the impact of I4.0 technolo- to balance economic activity with environmental
gies on the sustainability of maintenance prac- responsibility and social progress. While Samad-
tices. hiya et al. (2023) examine the mediating role of
Jena et al. (2024) utilize KPIs such as pro- the circular economy in the relationship between
duction volume, downtime, Mean Time Between total productive maintenance and I4.0 within a
Failures (MTBF), and Overall Equipment Ef- sustainability context, their study focused on its
fectiveness (OEE) to assess the impact of inte- impacts in Indian industries, using questionnaires
grating I4.0 technologies with Reliability Cen- distributed to professionals in the field.
tered Maintenance (RCM). Furthermore, they in-
corporate environmental performance indicators, 2.3.3. Literature gaps and research
opportunities
including energy consumption, carbon footprint,
and water consumption, to measure the sustain- Despite the benefits of I4.0 technologies for main-
ability improvements. Similarly, Munsamy and tenance sustainability, significant gaps remain in
Telukdarie (2018) employ a Process Centric En- understanding the broader implications of I4.0
ergy Model (PCEM) to analyze the impacts of technologies. Key challenges include the sus-
I4.0 technologies on energy demand, greenhouse tainability of their manufacturing processes and
gas emissions (GHG) within a maintenance pro- the quantification of lifecycle impacts Patalas-
cess. Their model demonstrates how integrating Maliszewska and Losyk (2022). In particular, the
technologies like big data analytics, Internet of manufacturing phase is underexplored, with lim-
Things, and CPS can lead to significant reductions ited focus on both the positive and negative ef-
in energy consumption and emissions. In addition, fects, highlighting opportunities for further re-
Narkhede et al. (2024) emphasize the importance search and practical advancements. Also, social
of sustainability measurements to understand the metrics remain underrepresented in most frame-
impact of I4.0 technologies across various manu- works Franciosi et al. (2020).
facturing work functions, including maintenance, Then, the future research proposed in this ar-
from the perspective of small and medium-sized ticle is developing more holistic and integrated
enterprises. They highlight the role of these tech- assessment frameworks that evaluate the full life-
nologies in streamlining processes, optimizing re- cycle impacts of I4.0 on maintenance strategies.
source allocation, and improving product quality, Existing models often focus on specific aspects of
ultimately contributing to sustainable growth. sustainability, such as energy efficiency or waste
Beyond KPIs and energy models, other quanti- reduction, but a more comprehensive approach
tative methods are also used. Patalas-Maliszewska is needed to capture the interconnection of eco-
and Losyk (2022) propose a Fuzzy-TOPSIS ap- nomic, environmental, and social dimensions.
proach to assess maintenance sustainability levels Furthermore, further research should explore
integrated with I4.0 technologies. This method the social dimension of sustainable maintenance,
provides a structured framework for evaluating the including the impact of I4.0 technologies on
impact of these technologies on various sustain- worker safety, job satisfaction, and community
ability criteria. Sénéchal and Trentesaux (2019) well-being.
emphasize the importance of considering envi- Lastly, the distribution of the selected papers by
 Proc. of the 35th European Safety and Reliability & the 33rd Society for Risk Analysis Europe Conference 1615

their year of publication (table 2) clearly shows Step 3: Develop three maintenance scenarios:
that the topic is recent and currently relevant but systematic maintenance, condition-based mainte-
yet not fully addressed. nance and predictive maintenance powered by
real-time data analytics.
3. Proposed roadmap Step 4: Apply a lifecycle framework to evaluate
I4.0 significantly impacts sustainable maintenance the impacts of these I4.0 technologies in mainte-
practices across multiple dimensions Almeida nance across their entire lifecycle, including pro-
et al. (2023). However, the SLR reveals critical duction, deployment, operational use, and end-of-
gaps in understanding and evaluating the sustain- life management, to ensure a holistic sustainabil-
ability impacts of I4.0 technologies on mainte- ity assessment.
nance. To fill this gap, the proposed roadmap, Step 5: Collect data from the case study and
illustrated in figure 2, provides a structured ap- process it using a data analysis software to eval-
proach for evaluating the sustainable impact of uate the defined KPIs.
I4.0 technologies on maintenance policies. Step 6: Perform quantitative analysis by com-
paring the maintenance scenarios, identifying
trade-offs and synergies to determine their sus-
tainability performance.
Step 7: Interpret the results to provide action-
able recommendations. Use these insights to re-
fine the roadmap, ensuring it adapts to evolving
technologies and industrial needs.

4. Roadmap illustration on a use case

To validate the practical applicability of the
roadmap, we implement it in a Machinery Fault
Simulator (MFS), serving as a first case study.
Specifically designed for fault simulation and di-
agnostics, the MFS enables the emulation and
analysis of various fault scenarios in rotating ma-
chinery, as applied in the use case (figure 3).

Fig. 2. Roadmap for evaluating the sustainable impact

of I4.0 technologies on maintenance policies

This roadmap is organized into seven distinct

stages.
Step 1: Clearly define the scope of the anal-
ysis by identifying the I4.0 technologies to be
assessed; specifying the dimensions of sustain-
ability, economic, environmental, and social; and Fig. 3. Spectra-Quest - Machinery Fault Simulator
experiment platform. SquestraQuest (SquestraQuest)
develop a case study relevant for focusing the
analysis.
Step 2: Choose KPIs, such as cost, GHG emis- It can simulate a wide range of mechanical
sion, and worker safety, to measure the impact faults, from bearing defects to gear damage, un-
across the defined sustainability dimensions. balanced rotors, and shaft misalignments. Its de-
1616 Proc. of the 35th European Safety and Reliability & the 33rd Society for Risk Analysis Europe Conference

sign provides for flexibility, allowing fine con-

trol over operational parameters: rotational speed,
load, and coupling configurations.
We equipped the MFS with advanced I4.0 tech-
nology to enhance its diagnostic capabilities and
data collection efficiency. Central to this setup is
the Kappa X wireless vibration sensor developed
by Sensoteq. the Kappa X sensor is an IoT solu-
tion that enables us to monitor the condition of our
machine in real time by capturing high-resolution
vibration data and transmitting it wirelessly to An-
alytix, a cloud-based analysis platform. Addition-
ally, the sensor records parameters like speed, ac-
celeration, 3-axis displacement, and temperature.
Fig. 5. Roadmap applied to the MFS
Its low-power design ensures long battery life and
minimal maintenance. Figure 4 shows how Kappa
X sensor works. tenance, from their manufacturing to their end-
of-life. Additionally, existing research often ne-
glects the negative impacts of these technologies.
These insights highlighted the need of developing
a holistic evaluation tool to bridge this gap.
With those findings, this study proposed a struc-
tured roadmap for integrating and assessing the
Fig. 4. Kappa X sensor principle. Sensoteq (2019) sustainable impacts of I4.0 technologies in main-
tenance policies. By adopting a lifecycle per-
spective, the roadmap balances both the positive
Thus, gear and bearing faults will be simu- and negative impacts of these technologies across
lated on the MFS, and fault data acquired through economic, environmental, and social dimensions.
Kappa X sensors will be used to test maintenance The roadmap was practically illustrated using
scenarios (systematic, condition-based mainte- the Machinery Fault Simulator (MFS) as a case
nance and predicitive maintenance). Additionally, study, providing a real-world illustration of the
a life cycle analysis of the Kappa X sensor will roadmap’s application.
be conducted to compare the benefits of these IoT The key contributions of this work encompass
sensors in maintenance with their impact on sus- addressing the lifecycle sustainability gaps, intro-
tainability and determine the best trade-off. Figure ducing a quantifiable methodology for assessing
5 succinctly shows the application of the roadmap the impacts of I4.0 technologies in maintenance,
to the MFS. and emphasizing the strategic importance of main-
tenance in achieving global sustainability objec-
5. Conclusion and future works
tives. By focusing on lifecycle considerations,
This work started by addressing the findings from the roadmap ensures that the adoption of these
the SLR, which showed gaps in quantifying the technologies aligns with long-term sustainability
lifecycle impacts of I4.0 technologies on main- goals.
tenance practices. In fact, according to the re- While this study provides valuable insights, it
view, there is a need for frameworks that will represents an initial step. Future research should
account for economic, environmental, and social focus on applying the proposed roadmap to the
sustainability dimensions while considering the MFS in a detailed, quantitative evaluation. This
whole lifecycle of these technologies on main- further analysis, in collaboration with Sensoteq,
 Proc. of the 35th European Safety and Reliability & the 33rd Society for Risk Analysis Europe Conference 1617

will measure sustainability outcomes, validate the Munsamy, M. and A. Telukdarie (2018). Application of
roadmap’s effectiveness, and refine its methodol- industry 4.0 towards achieving business sustainabil-
ogy for broader industrial applicability. ity. In IEEE Int. Conf. Ind. Eng. Eng. Manage., Vol-
ume 2019-December, pp. 844–848. IEEE Computer
These advancements will ensure that the Society.
roadmap evolves into a robust, practical tool, ca- Narkhede, G., S. Mahajan, R. Narkhede, and T. Chaud-
pable of guiding industries in adopting sustainable hari (2024, 3). Significance of industry 4.0 technolo-
maintenance practices. gies in major work functions of manufacturing for
sustainable development of small and medium-sized
Acknowledgement enterprises. Business Strategy and Development 7.
This research is funded by the French government as Orosnjak, M., M. Jocanovic, M. Cavic, V. Karanovic,
part of a joint PhD between université de technologie de and M. Pencic (2021, 9). Industrial maintenance
Compiègne and Polytechnique Montréal. Their support 4(.0) horizon europe: Consequences of the iron cur-
has been essential for the completion of this work. tain and energy-based maintenance. Journal of
Cleaner Production 314.
References Patalas-Maliszewska, J. and H. Losyk (2022, 12). An
approach to maintenance sustainability level assess-
Almeida, J. C., B. Ribeiro, and A. Cardoso (2023). A ment integrated with industry 4.0 technologies using
human-centric approach to aid in assessing mainte- fuzzy-topsis: A real case study. Advances in Produc-
nance from the sustainable manufacturing perspec- tion Engineering & Management 17, 455–468.
tive. In Procedia Comput. Sci., Volume 220, pp. 600– Samadhiya, A., R. Agrawal, S. Luthra, A. Kumar, J. A.
607. Elsevier B.V. Garza-Reyes, and D. K. Srivastava (2023, 4). Total
Chabane, B., D. Komljenovic, and G. Abdul-Nour productive maintenance and industry 4.0 in a sustain-
(2023). Converging on human-centred industry, re- ability context: exploring the mediating effect of cir-
silient processes, and sustainable outcomes in asset cular economy. International Journal OF Logistics
management frameworks. Environment Systems and Management 34, 818–846.
Decisions 43, 663–679. Saraswat, P. and R. Agrawal (2023). Artificial intel-
Ertz, M. and F. Gasteau (2023, 6). Role of smart ligence as key enabler for sustainable maintenance
technologies for implementing industry 4.0 environ- in the manufacturing industry: Scope & challenges.
ment in product lifetime extension towards circular Evergreen 10, 2490–2497.
economy: A qualitative research. HELIYON 9. Sensoteq (2019). Hmi user guide.
Franciosi, C., B. Iung, S. Miranda, and S. Riemma SquestraQuest. User operating manual for machinery
(2018). Maintenance for Sustainability in the Indus- fault simulator.
try 4.0 context: a Scoping Literature Review. Vol- Sénéchal, O. and D. Trentesaux (2019, 7). A framework
ume 51, pp. 903–908. Elsevier B.V. to help decision makers to be environmentally aware
Franciosi, C., A. Voisin, S. Miranda, and B. Iung during the maintenance of cyber physical systems.
(2020). Integration of i4.0 technologies with mainte- Environmental Impact Assessment Review 77, 11–22.
nance processes: what are the effects on sustainable Tomasoni, G., F. Marciano, E. Stefana, and P. Cocca
manufacturing? In University of Salerno, Volume 53, (2024, 1). Assessing the sustainability impact of im-
pp. 1–6. proving secondary steel production: Lessons learned
Jena, M. C., S. K. Mishra, and H. S. Moharana (2024). from an italian plant. Environmental and Climate
Integration of industry 4.0 with reliability centered Technologies 28, 32–44.
maintenance to enhance sustainable manufacturing. Turner, C., O. Okorie, C. Emmanouilidis, and J. Oyekan
Environmental Progress and Sustainable Energy 43. (2020). A digital maintenance practice framework
Mabaso, M., R. Peach, and L. Pretorius (2024). De- for circular production of automotive parts. In Uni-
termining maintenance 4.0 readiness: A case study versity of Surrey, Volume 53, pp. 19–24.
of a south african food manufacturing company. In Vrignat, P., F. Kratz, and M. Avila (2022). Sustain-
PICMET - Portland Int. Conf. Manag. Eng. Technol.: able manufacturing, maintenance policies, prognos-
Technol. Manag. Artif. Intell. Era, Proc. Institute of tics and health management: A literature review. Re-
Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. liability Engineering and System Safety 218.
Madreiter, T., B. Trajanoski, A. Martinetti, and Waghanna, P., A. Reddy, S. Deshpande, S. Chavan,
F. Ansari (2024). Sustainable maintenance: What V. R. Jaiswal, and V. Naranje (2024). Effects of
are the key technology drivers for ensuring posi- adopting industry 4.0 on a manufacturing plant. In
tive impacts of manufacturing industries? In IFAC- Int. Conf. Reliab., Infocom Technol. Optim. (Trends
PapersOnLine, Volume 58, pp. 616–621. Elsevier Future Dir.), ICRITO. IEEE Inc.
B.V.