Towards a Low-Carbon Future: Evaluating 3D Printing’s Alignment with Sustainable Development Goal 13

Abstract

Sustainable development goals were laid out by the United Nations in 2015 as a means to address the profound issues present in the world by 2030. Nations have been encouraged to make amendments to their policies and frameworks by adding the SDGs to promote sustainability. In this era, where nations look for sustainable solutions, 3D printing has emerged as a revolutionary technology that has the potential to aid in accomplishing the SDGs. Advancements and developments in technology have boosted manufacturing efficiency and provide the pathway to achieving the set targets of multiple SDGs. Thus, this article looked into the potential contribution of 3D printing towards Sustainable Development Goal 13—Climate Action. A comprehensive literature review was performed using the PRISMA framework to understand the latest advancements in 3D printing and how 3D printing has been used to achieve the SDG targets. Moreover, an exploration of the impact of 3D printing on SDG 13 was performed. The potential impact topics explored include the reduction in GHG emissions using sustainable AM, decentralized manufacturing, resilient infrastructure to climatic hazards, the circular economy and product lifecycle extension. Qualitative analysis was conducted by looking into the effects of the SDGs on both the environmental and socio-technical aspects. Challenges in the implementation of AM within different economic sectors and its potential solutions are discussed in this article. The literature review and qualitative analysis pointed to a strong correlation between SDG 13 and 3D printing, paving the way for a sustainable future.

1. Introduction

The concept of additive manufacturing or 3D printing has undergone significant developments in recent years. It has transformed from prototyping to manufacturing complex and intricate end products [1]. At the advent of 3D printing, raw materials were limited to polymers. However, technological advancements have led to the development of 3D printing technologies that can print a wide range of materials. This, in turn, has facilitated the incorporation of additive manufacturing (AM) within critical industries. According to the ISO/ASTM 52900:2021 standard [2], additive manufacturing is categorized into seven processes, namely, Binder jetting, directed energy deposition, material extrusion, material jetting, powder bed fusion, sheet lamination and vat photopolymerization [1,3,4,5]. PBF methods work under the principle of fusing powdered particles, layer by layer, through the use of an electron beam or a laser [5]. Zhang et al. [3] has highlighted the core principle of each process and their workings in detail. Binder jetting methods involve the deposition of a liquid bonding agent along with the powdered material onto the bed. DED processes have a nozzle mounted in a multi-axis arm, which melts the material by using an energy source on the substrate. The material extrusion method involves the extrusion of the material through an orifice or a nozzle onto the build plate. In the material jetting method, printheads are used to deposit the material through small nozzles onto the build plate, which is then hardened and cured using a UV light. The sheet lamination method uses the concept of thin sheets being fused together, followed by a cutting tool etching the shape onto each layer. Vat photopolymerization uses an energy source to harden and cure photocurable resin, layer by layer [3].

AM applications are now seen within the biomedical industry, aerospace sector, automotive industry and architectural and civil industry. The fourth industrial (4.0) revolution encouraged an exponential growth of technology which, in turn, has been a driving force for the growth of AM [6]. This extensive involvement of 3D printing within critical industries has paved the way for eco-friendly and sustainable production. As Hegab et al. [7] pointed out, AM technology has played a pivotal role in sustainability through its lower energy and mass usage when compared to traditional subtractive processes. Moreover, AM methods are known for their low buy-to-fly ratio, as these methods only use the necessary amount of material required for the final product [7,8].

1.1. Overview of Sustainable Development Goals

The rapid development of technology across multiple sectors has contributed to the economic growth of countries. However, this has often come at the cost of the excessive consumption of natural resources. Unsustainable policies and over-exploitation of natural resources have led to detrimental effects on the environment and society as a whole. The concept of sustainable practices and sustainable development has been under study since the late 1900s. Sustainable practices should be ones that promote and strike a balance between societal needs and the environment. In other words, as Sorooshian puts it, sustainable practices refer to a system where the basic needs of the current population are met without hindering the needs of future generations [9]. Though these concepts sound easy, countries have found it rather hard to implement on various fronts. The United Nations has been striving to address and overcome the sustainability challenges for years. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development in 1992 and Agenda 21 of the UN Conference on Environment and Development have underscored the pivotal role of sustainability within the world agenda [10]. However, in 2015, the United Nations launched the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a means to safeguard the environment, eradicate poverty and promote peace for all by 2030 [11,12]. Under the SDGs, there are 17 objectives that aim to address different issues within the global community. Figure 1 shows the 17 SDGs and

Table 1. Sustainable Development Goals and their main targets [14].

SDG Number	Sustainable Development Goal	Main Target
1	No Poverty	End poverty in all its forms everywhere
2	Zero Hunger	End hunger while achieving food security and promoting sustainable agriculture
3	Good Health and Well-being	Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
4	Quality Education	Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
5	Gender Equality	Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
6	Clean Water and Sanitation	Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
7	Affordable and Clean Energy	Ensure access to affordable, reliable and modern energy for all
8	Decent Work and Economic Growth	Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
9	Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure	Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
10	Reduced Inequalities	Reduce inequality within and among countries
11	Sustainable Cities and Communities	Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
12	Responsible Consumption and Production	Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
13	Climate Action	Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
14	Life Below Water	Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
15	Life on Land	Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
16	Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
17	Partnership for the Goals	Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development

shows the main target of each goal as laid out by the United Nations.

The interconnections between the real-life interaction of multiple SDGs facilitate an equitable allocation of research efforts and resources for a meaningful outcome. However, Sharyar [11] points out that very limited progress has been made over the past 10 years in terms of addressing the goals and it almost seems impossible to achieve the laid-out objectives by 2030. Moreover, his study showed that the focus given to each SDG by the global community is disproportional. This was also backed by the bibliometric analysis of SDGs performed by Mishra et al. [10]. The authors reported that developed countries, such as the USA, Canada, and Australia, as well as Europe, were more focused on SDG 4, SDG 11, SDG 12 and SDG 13. However, African countries laid their focus on SDGs 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 13 and 15 [10]. These trends lead to the fact that regional issues and social problems drive research on SDGs in that particular region. The majority of the research and development have been narrowed down to five SDGs according to Yamaguchi et al. [15], which are SDGs 3, 10, 13, 14 and 15.

1.2. Integration of SDGs and 3D Printing in Previous Literature

Three-dimensional printing has made it possible to accomplish the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. A study by Muth et al. [16] looked into the impact of 3D printing on each SDG by employing a qualitative analysis. Their analysis showed that there was great potential for SDG 1, 3, 4, 9, 12 and 14 targets to be accomplished by AM technology. Balubaid et al. [17] highlighted the importance of integrating AM within the manufacturing industry owing to its low material use, ease of manufacturing complex designs, flexibility, reduced costs and increased product lifecycle. These sustainability factors are directly linked with SDGs 8, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 15, showing the interconnections and possibility of attaining these goals through efficient AM processes. Countries have already laid out policies and frameworks to achieve the targets and, in line with that, there is an increase in the involvement of AM within industries. As Alami et al. [18] point out, AM is already being used within the aerospace and automotive industries, with certain applications directly linking with several SDG targets. Figure 2 shows the industries in which 3D printing has had a low influence and a major influence.

The use of AM has certainly increased in recent years, and adopting this revolutionary technology to promote SDG will be among the key strategies in the pathway towards a sustainable future.

2. Methodology

Scientific literature was analyzed systematically using the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis” (PRISMA) method. This system was designed in 2009 to systematically report the author’s aim of the literature review, the key strategies deployed and the final findings of the review [20]. This systematic review focuses on the existing relationships and interactions between SDG 13—Climate Action and 3D printing.

2.1. Search and Data Collection

The data reviewed in this study were primarily obtained from the collection database of the Rochester Institute of Technology, New York (RIT, New York, NY, USA). The metadata included abstracts, keywords, authors, affiliation, journals, etc. The primary source of reviews was from journal articles, book references and review papers. The databases explored include ScienceDirect, Springer, MDPI, SpringerLink, Taylor & Francis and BMJ. Moreover, to obtain similar papers that line up with this review, free software called the “Research Rabbit App” was utilized (available online: https://www.researchrabbitapp.com). For this review, over 100 papers were initially selected and downloaded using the following keywords: sustainable development goals, SDG, additive manufacturing, role of AM in achieving SDG, climate action, 3D printing to combat climate action and utilization of 3D printing to eradicate detrimental effects on the climate. Using the PRISMA method, the papers were narrowed down to those published after 2015, the year when the SDGs were published. In the screening phase, 42 records were excluded due to reasons such as the wrong study type, and 12 reports were excluded, as the content was not relevant to our research aims and objectives. Finally, a total of 42 studies were analyzed and included in this review. Figure 3 shows the PRISMA framework flowchart deployed in this review. The PRISMA checklist is available in the Supplementary Materials of the article.

2.2. Eligibility for Inclusion and Exclusion of Studies

The studies reviewed and included in this paper were based on the following criteria:

• Studies after the year 2015;
• Studies that looked at correlating SDGs with additive manufacturing;
• Studies pointing out the technological, economic, social and environmental advancements in AM;
• Studies that addressed 3D printing as a means to combat climate action;
• Case studies that demonstrated the viability of AM towards achieving SDGs;
• Publications available in full-text format.

The criterion for excluding studies were as follows:

• Papers that did not address any target or subtargets of SDG 13 through 3D printing;
• Papers without any quantifiable data;
• Papers that did not meet the aims and objectives of this study;
• Studies not available in full-text format.

Both authors of this review paper screened each entry independently before coming to a consensus on including or excluding them in this paper.

2.3. Descriptive Analysis of Included Studies

Each study was downloaded in pdf format through Mendeley Desktop Software (version 1.19.8). Critical data, such as title, journal, conference name, author name and key words, were extracted and consolidated in MS Excel Software (version 2508) for quick analysis and visualization of the data.

2.3.1. Publication by Year

The date of publication of each paper was used to plot the graph for publications by year, as seen in Figure 4. Studies included in this review are predominantly from 2023 (with 14 studies), followed by 2024 (11 studies), 2022 (6 studies) and 2025 (4 studies). Two studies were reviewed from the years 2019 and 2021, while only one study was reviewed from 2017, 2018 and 2020. The eligibility criteria used for the publication year was 2015. However, the earliest paper reviewed in this review was 2017.

2.3.2. Distribution of Research Journals

In this review paper, studies were analyzed from different journals, such as Sustainability (MDPI) and Journal of Cleaner Production. The papers were accessed through the RIT NY Database, which provides open access to all of the cited papers. Figure 5 shows the distribution of some key journals from which papers were accessed for this review. Four papers were reviewed from the Sustainability MDPI journal, while two papers each were reviewed from the Journal of Cleaner Production and Ain Shams Engineering Journal.

2.4. Data Analysis Techniques and Framework

For this study, the data obtained were analyzed and the impact of each interaction with SDG 13 was categorized into three qualitative grades: high impact, moderate impact and low impact. A similar framework was adopted by Hasaballah et al. and Muth et al. in their studies on the assessment of impacts on SDGs through 3D printing [16,21]. Figure 6 shows the basic framework used in this study.

a.

High Impact: There is a significant relationship between SDG 13 and 3D printing, which is backed up through multiple studies. The effects of 3D printing on SDG 13 demonstrate measurable effects and are seen to influence at least two subcategories of SDG 13.

○

Strong, well-documented relationship. The category corresponds where multiple studies provide robust evidence demonstrating that 3D printing directly contributes to achieving specific targets under SDG 13.

○

Measurable, multi-faceted effects. The positive impact is quantifiable (e.g., reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enhanced resilience) and influences at least two distinct aspects of SDG 13 targets.

Further Explanation: Evidence shows 3D printing significantly reduces GHG emissions in manufacturing (contributing to mitigation) and enables rapid production of disaster-resilient infrastructure components (contributing to adaptation). Figure 7 shows the same concept.

b.

Moderate Impact: In this category, the relationship between SDG 13 and 3D printing is not substantial and only has a relative effect when looked at from a narrower domain.

○

Identifiable but limited or indirect relationship. Evidence suggests a potential link or indirect contribution of 3D printing to SDG 13.

○

Context-dependent or partial effects. The positive impact is observed primarily in specific applications, sectors or under certain conditions. The evidence may be less comprehensive or more theoretical.

Further Explanation: Three-dimensional printing might support climate action through improved material efficiency in niche applications, but broader impacts across sectors or direct evidence linking it to specific SDG 13 targets are less established. Figure 8 shows the same concept.

c.

Low Impact: Here, there is no direct cause–effect relationship between the two. However, correlation is observed in certain domains.

○

Weak or theoretical relationship. A plausible connection exists based on general principles, but there is little to no empirical evidence directly linking 3D printing practices to progress on SDG 13 targets.

○

Correlation without demonstrated causation. Observations might align with SDG 13 goals, but no studies demonstrate 3D printing as a cause of climate action outcomes.

Further Explanation: While 3D printing uses digital models (which could theoretically support climate monitoring), no studies show its use directly improves climate data collection or policy implementation for SDG 13. Figure 9 shows the same concepts.

3. Analysis and Discussion

Sustainable Development Goal 13—Climate Action aims to address the growing concerns of climate change and provides a framework to prepare low-carbon development plans [22]. The world has seen unprecedented changes in the climate over the past few decades. Global warming has caused irreversible damage and losses to many nations. Nations are now scrambling to find ways to cope with the consequences of global warming. A few of the sub-goals of SDG 13 aim to address these issues by laying foundations for plans such as Net Zero by 2050 and carbon dioxide emissions reduction by 2030. In line with the SDGs, countries have now adopted strategies and policies that promote responsible production, the attainment of carbon neutrality by 2050 and the integration of new alternate sustainable technologies within industries. A section of Kufeoglu’s chapter on SDG 13—Climate Action focuses on companies and their use cases towards SDG 13 [23]. His analysis shows that most companies mainly look to reduce GHG emissions by promoting renewable energy, developing systems that give energy insights into systems and using AI for plant efficiency. While these approaches to meet the demands of SDG 13 are very practical, it is also crucial to use technological advancements to optimize how countries are producing, consuming and building. These are crucial elements within a country that have direct effects on the climate and environment. Every sector and industry will play a role in climate change, and it is essential to use the latest innovations to further strengthen the contribution of these areas towards sustainability. A very well-developed technology that supports this goal is additive manufacturing or 3D printing. Three-dimensional printing is already being used to address several SDG goals, such as SDGs 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 17 [24], and studies do point out applications where three-dimensional printing is slowly being integrated into industries to align with SDG 13. Kufeoglu’s study showed a use case related to General Electric, a company providing energy technology solutions, especially in the area of carbon capture and storage methods [23]. They have collaborated to develop a 3D-printed CCS facility. This 3D-printed manufacturing of the facility will reduce the carbon footprint, the costs associated with conventional manufacturing methods and will pave the way for green manufacturing through its raw material efficiency [23].

SDG 13.1 aims to strengthen the resilience to climate-related hazards and disasters, while SDG 13.2 looks towards combating climate change through integration of relevant policies. Target 13.3 strives for improving awareness and education prospects on climate change mitigation, impact reduction and early warning [25]. The use of sustainable materials for 3D printing components can lead to a reduction in carbon emissions, and also promote resource-efficient production through lower energy consumption and reduced waste products. Additionally, the use of 3D printing within the construction sector can have positive effects on the greenhouse savings when compared to conventional methods.

3.1. Impact of 3D Printing on SDG 13

Three-dimensional printing has the capability to address issues such as greenhouse gas emissions, distributed productions, high-carbon construction methods and inefficient renewable energy infrastructure. Figure 10 shows the direct impact that 3D printing can have towards SDG 13 by addressing the above-mentioned issues.

3.1.1. Reduction in GHGs Through Sustainable Additive Manufacturing

Critical and resource-intensive industries are known for their high greenhouse gas emissions. Studies show that the bioprocessing industry has 50% higher CO_2eq emissions per BIP when compared to the automotive industry [26,27]. Additionally, in this time and era, the usage of plastic has been on the rise even amidst government policies discouraging the practice. Achleitner et al. [27] showed that plastic usage within the biopharmaceutical industry is so high that this industry alone consumes 5 million tons of plastic annually [27].

However, the authors looked into the possibility of integrating 3D printing within such industries to not only reduce plastic wastage but also GHG emissions. Their study proposed the use of PLA, which is essentially a biopolymer, to be used to 3D print glassware and equipment that can replace single-use plastic equipment. Their analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in CO_2eq emissions when recycled PLA was used instead of standard single-use plastics. Through the optimization of printing parameters, the authors noted 83% CO_2eq emissions savings. Moreover, projections show that PLA production in the near future will be carbon negative, further boosting the reduction in GHG emissions over the lifecycle of such printed parts. In London et al.’s lifecycle assessment (LCA) on the GHG emissions of multi-jet fusion and injection molding [28], they observed that material jet fusion (MJF) AM has a lower environmental burden than conventional methods, until it reaches a certain breakeven point linked with environmental burden through machining, electricity systems and logistics. Additionally, the authors pointed out the need to have more research and development in these use cases, since high-volume production through AM can have a higher energy consumption and GHG emissions if the technology is not correctly applied. Experts must be able to identify areas within industries where the sustainability effects of AM are higher even with large scale production. In a more recent study, Oladunni et al. reviewed the possibility of mitigating GHG emissions through the advancements achieved in AM [29]. They explored 3D concrete printing within the construction industry, and observed that this technology has the potential for a 90% reduction in material waste while providing GHG emission reductions of 80%. This method was seen as a sustainable yet efficient method to construct concrete structures, promoting the development towards SDG 13 goals. The use of geopolymer binders and fibers will also aid in reducing GHG emissions when one explores the entire lifecycle of the process. Moreover, this category not only impacts SDG 13 but also has a strong correlation with SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 9 (Industry Innovation and Infrastructure). These applications are a means to address Target 13.2 of SDG 13, wherein certain policies and planning regarding the use of AM in industries can be mandated to reduce climate impacts. Another very strong example is found in the construction industry, where 3D printing technologies have provided innovative and environmentally friendly alternatives to conventional construction methods. The comparative analysis of impacts is reported below in Figure 11. Wang et al. [30] also conducted a well-documented study where different applications from the manufacturing and construction sectors were analyzed, and variations in their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were reported. Figure 12 shows the same information. The UAE has been promoting sustainable practices to combat climate action and, in line with government initiatives, a “green” house was 3D-printed in 2020 [31]. It was printed within two weeks using sustainable materials, showcasing additive manufacturing’s rapid pace and sustainability [1]. Researchers also noted that the 3D-printed building emitted 608.55 kg of CO_2eq of emissions when compared to 1154.2 kg of CO_2eq of emissions from a building built using traditional methods. Other than the GHG emissions, the 3D-printed building used around 78% of the water required for constructing a conventional building [31].

3.1.2. Localized Manufacturing and Reduced Logistics Emissions

Additive manufacturing has a major impact on the entire supply chain process. AM’s advantage of limited tools and conventional molds allows for on-premises and on-demand manufacturing, promoting sustainability practices within the supply chain. Environmental footprints can be significantly reduced, as AM facilitates the elimination of physical inventories, storage and the transportation of individual components. Moreover, the carbon emissions associated with logistics are eliminated due to the compactness of 3D printing set ups. Dzogbewu et al.’s study showed that conventional supply chains have high carbon footprints through logistics bridges, such as distribution, flights and regional shipping [33]. Approximately 12.5 CO_2eq of emissions are present just from the above-mentioned logistics [33]. Additive manufacturing set ups can be decentralized, thus minimizing the need for long-distance transportation of the end product to the customer. Moreover, Nefeli et al. tapped into a critical industry, where the decentralization of 3D printing leads to reduced environmental impacts [34]. The spare parts industry is one that has great potential because of its complex geometries, low-volume production and fluctuating demand [34]. With the advancements of AM, these parts can be manufactured rapidly based on customer demand. This, in turn, also makes the use of transportation less intensive and reduces the flow of goods [35]. Moreover, as Woldesilassiea et al. [35] point out, AM’s capability to consolidate and manufacture several components into one assembled structure would reduce the GHG emissions through reduced global logistical activities. The long global logistics network can be decoupled through this technology, and the decentralized network will support shorter lead times.

Moreover, the concept of digital spare parts has been gaining traction in recent years. It is known for reducing the GHG emissions and increasing sustainability within manufacturing industries through decentralized manufacturing. Rupp et al. [36] conducted an analysis on emission reductions through additive-manufactured steel for digital spare parts. The authors saw that conventional supply chains have additional steps when compared to the additive manufacturing process, which contributes to high amounts of carbon emissions, as highlighted in Figure 13.

They also highlighted that manufacturing high-complexity parts through additive manufacturing can reduce around 70% of CO₂ emissions when compared to conventional manufacturing processes. As the buy-to-fly ratio increases, additive manufacturing becomes a more sustainable option. The same is highlighted in Figure 14. In a more practical case study, the authors explored the emissions when a damaged pump impeller had to be replaced through the conventional approach and the digital spare parts approach. They noted that using AM for the same part through the digital spare part method reduced the GHG emissions by around 50%. Much of the savings are accomplished by reducing the transportation requirements, attained through the decentralized manufacturing capabilities of AM. Figure 15 shows carbon emission comparisons for both approaches.

Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) have started deploying 3D printing to manufacture critical components on-demand within their sites [37]. The company noted that the production lead times have been cut by 50%, allowing for a rapid responsiveness to demands. Moreover, ADNOC’s past hurdle of overseas shipping and on-site inventories have been eliminated through AM, which, in turn, has also optimized the company’s supply chain. Another company that uses 3D printing for environmental benefits is 3DXB Group. 3DXB Group is looking to incorporate 3D printing in 25% of all new buildings in Dubai by 2030; they utilize eco-friendly materials that are locally sourced to reduce transportation emissions that are usually seen in traditional construction methods [38].

Localized manufacturing also benefits the socio-technical aspect, as it strengthens the local community by facilitating job creation and stronger supply chain resilience. Prashar et al. highlighted that new avenues for design and manufacturing are fostered through AM [6]. The authors also emphasized the need for skilled and well-trained personnel in this area for the widespread and rapid adoption of AM across industries. Alami et al. also noted that advancements in additive manufacturing support economic growth and promote a resilient supply chain. Decentralized manufacturing leads to lower transportation time and costs, whereby the resulting economic advantages can be distributed across the entire value chain [18].

3.1.3. Resilient Infrastructure to Combat Climate-Related Hazards

SDG 13.1 looks toward strengthening the resilience of countries concerning climate-related hazards and disasters. The concepts of disaster management and smart cities have been gaining traction in recent years [39]. A city’s or country’s strength lies in its capacity to mitigate the effects of natural disasters on the society, infrastructure and environment. Additive manufacturing is a developed tool that has the potential to be a cornerstone for various disaster management strategies. The mass customization possible through additive manufacturing facilitates designs adaptable to different conditions. As Kantaros et al. point out, 3D printing is known for its rapid construction of resilient shelters and housing in disaster-stricken areas [39]. Contour crafting is an upcoming technology that is widely used to construct buildings using robotic arms. During climate-related hazards, contour crafting can be used to build resilient shelters with high speed. Countries are also adopting 3D printing technologies within their natural disaster frameworks and policies. New York, for instance, has developed a comprehensive plan to integrate 3D printing for building new infrastructure and repairing damaged ones at a rapid pace [39,40]. Subramanya et al. also looked into 3DP for printing houses for people displaced from their houses during a natural disaster, and saw its potential especially with regard to its reduced build time, high safety and low transportation logistics [41]. Additionally, the advancements of 3D printing can be used not only to create relief shelters but also emergency infrastructure such as bridges to facilitate rapid mobilization. Alim Khan et al. explored how 3D printing can be used for a rapid response towards climate change-induced emergencies [42]. The authors reported that bridges such as the Striatus bridge in Venice and Dutch bridge in Amsterdam were 3D-printed, and they demonstrated their robustness during day-to-day operations [42]. Moreover, 3DP can be used to build coastline protection structures (CPSs) that can combat sea level rise due to climatic change, while also preserving the aquatic ecosystem and ecology [43]. Architects and marine biologists at Florida International University have developed 3D-printed modular tiles to reduce the impact of storm surges while supporting marine life. The complex designs within the tiles, facilitated through 3D printing, allow for a greater absorption of the wave energy. Moreover, these walls can mimic natural shorelines, paving way for ecological balance restoration. Three-dimensional printing facilitates the manufacturing of different wall designs for each type of wave seen in any particular region [44]. These applications have highlighted the significance of 3DP technology in emergency situations. In recent years, an increased number of studies on the response of 3D-printed elements and their designs have enabled the advancement of 3D-printed concrete wall designs. The application of bed joint reinforcement has strengthened the overall structure, and has the potential to withstand and resist seismic forces. Aghajani Delavar et al. [45] designed 3D-printed concrete walls to study their response against shear demands and seismic forces. Mechanical tests and finite element analysis were used in the study to validate the results. The structural walls were 3D-printed and reinforced with an RC frame to enhance the strength. Figure 16 and Figure 17 show the schematic view and wall design used in this study. Using a lower spacing within the bed joint reinforcement and the presence of an infill pattern resulted in an increase in the shear strength and lateral strength of the walls, providing adequate resistance against seismic forces.

In their review of SDG 13 and additive manufacturing, Muth et al. concluded that additive manufacturing does not play a major role in combatting climate action or its impacts towards society. However, as the authors [39,40,41,42,43] pointed out, AM’s potential towards combatting climate change is immense. The flexibility of AM to mass-customize and build resilient shelters, while having the capability to repair damaged infrastructure at a rapid pace after a natural disaster, is a direct involvement of the technology towards combatting the negative impacts of climate change. Additionally, the use of contour crafting opens up avenues for building post-disaster relief structures with quick turnaround times. The use of AM for coastline protection structures and printing concrete walls capable of withstanding seismic forces are means to build climate change-resilient infrastructure, possibly limiting the challenges associated with the aftermath.

3.1.4. Circular Economy

Circular economy refers to an alternative, sustainable approach, wherein economic growth is promoted through the principles of ‘reduce, reuse and recycle’, and the characteristics of low emissions and high efficiency [46]. Plastic waste is highly mismanaged in many countries and, in turn, it affects all forms of marine and land life. Though countries have laid out policies to limit the use of plastics, there is a need to facilitate sustainable recycling methods. Upcycling is a key concept within the circular economy, wherein the need to produce new material is reduced while reducing waste products at the same time. A lifecycle assessment implementing fused granular fabrication (FGF), traditional fused filament fabrication (FFF) and injection molding (IM) was conducted by Bilal et al. [47]. In the FGF method, waste plastic is cleaned and granulated into flakes, after which it is 3D-printed into the final product. The whole process is outlined in Figure 18 and Figure 19, which show comparisons among the three methods studied.

In order to create a plastic stool, the lifecycle emissions through the FFF method were 207.2 kg of CO₂-eq when compared to just 37.4 kg of CO₂-eq for the FGF on-site method. The injection molding, on the other hand, had 125.5 kg of CO₂-eq emissions. The highest contributions towards emissions were transportation, while electricity consumption varied among the processes. The analysis showed that the FGF method was the most sustainable option among the three outlined manufacturing methods. FGF had an 82% and 70.6% reduction in CO₂-eq emissions when compared against FFF and IM, respectively. This process is in line with the circular economy and has the potential to reduce overall GHG emissions.

To facilitate the concept of the circular economy, advancements were made in 3DP to develop biodegradable materials and also to enable the direct use of 3DP waste plastics into applications. However, as easy as it sounds, the use of 3D printing to achieve a circular economy is not of major importance in many countries. High-end applications cannot use biodegradable materials owing to their low mechanical properties. Moreover, the reuse of most plastics for other applications is fairly limited in most cases due to the high level of contamination. Other challenges in integrating 3DP into the circular economy include the difficulty in recycling polymers due to the many energy-intensive processing steps, which, in turn, leads to the repercussion of greenhouse gas emissions [48]. As Zhu et al. point out, there must be an active involvement of government to make 3DP more viable and to encourage the concept of the circular economy within industries [46].

3.1.5. Extension of Product Lifecycles

Damage to existing products and infrastructure is often dealt with by replacing the entire part. Though this approach is costly, it is widely used in industry owing to the urgent requirement to get the commissioned products back into service as soon as possible. Additive manufacturing techniques provide a rapid solution for such cases. With increasing concerns related to global warming, there is a need to reduce the overreliance on fossil fuels and reduce overall global emissions. One way to combat this problem is by extending the lifecycle of existing systems, as this reduces the burden on natural resources to produce a new part altogether. An LCA study was conducted to explore DED as a means to repair small-scale damage that occurred in damaged iron molds for glass [49].

Figure 20 shows the cast iron mold for a bottle that had been damaged during operation. The area to be repaired is highlighted as shown in the figure. In their study, they observed that using AM to repair the part rather than a full replacement reduced the global warming and particle matter formation by 76% and 71%, respectively. Moreover, conventional production of the same mold was seen to generate 10.95 kg of CO_2eq emissions, while the AM repair generated only 2.62 kg of CO_2eq emissions. Furthermore, these were the figures observed for a small and simple repair of the parts. The authors reported that, with a higher surface area and more complex repair, the associated energy and environmental savings will be much more profound with AM technologies. In addition to this research, Gouveia et al. paired up this DED system with a robotic arm to create automated systems for repair processes [50]. They conducted an environmental analysis of automated DED systems by looking into the subsystems of this technology and its potential towards the reduction in environmental impact. Each subsystem was analyzed to observe their contributions towards carcinogenic toxicity, particulate matter formation and global warming, among other critical factors. Figure 21 shows the environmental impacts that arise from the DED system.

The authors noted that there was a 98% reduction in the environmental damage when DED technology was used to repair the mold rather than manufacturing a new one using conventional production techniques. Using conventional methods results in high emissions, arising from the steel production, and copper and electronic components. However, when it comes to repair through DED, the contributors towards environmental emissions are mainly through argon usage, electricity consumption and end-of-life treatment. Figure 22 shows a comparison of the environmental impact between the conventional production of a new mold and a repair using the DED process.

Three-dimensional printing for repairing partially damaged parts was also explored by Kim et al., who laid out a maintenance framework that can be followed by industry [51]. The established framework includes 3D scanning of the damaged part; this is followed by a maintenance support system which comprises damage detection, followed by printing and repairing the model. The final step is post-machining and scanning it again for error measurements. Their study on repairing a damaged ball part based on this framework showed that 3D printing is an efficient technology that can be used for repair without the need for a skilled operator [51].

3.2. Synthesis of Findings

The advancements in the field of 3D printing have played a major role in impacting SDG 13 of the United Nations. With regard to the targets of SDG 13, the assessment markers selected for this study were the environmental impact and socio-technical impact.

• Environmental Impact: Three-dimensional printing technology is seen to have a positive impact towards the environment through many applications. In regard to SDG 13, this technology has the potential to address issues such as GHG emissions and to support climate-resilient policies. The studies in the above sections used LCA to study the impact of 3D-printed products from “cradle-to-grave” and observed positive impacts on the environment when compared to conventional manufacturing methods.
• Socio-technical Impact: The impact that 3D printing has on the socio-technical front is seen with regard to decentralized production, aligning with SDG 13.1 and SDG 13.2. Increasing the resilience towards climate-related hazards and the implementation of such measures within policies are crucial for 3D printing to have a lasting socio-technical impact for upcoming generations. Based on these assessment markers, qualitative analysis was performed on the five above-mentioned impacts of 3D printing on SDG 13. These impacts will be categorized as low, moderate or high based on the information obtained from the existing literature. Qualitative analysis of the same was performed and is visualized in Figure 23. It can be concluded that the environmental impact is greatly affected by the reduction in GHGs through sustainable manufacturing, localized manufacturing and the circular economy. Localized manufacturing, resilient structures and the extension of product lifecycles are the factors that have a great impact on the socio-technical front. The effects of causation for each SDG 13 targets through 3D printing impacts are analyzed briefly below based on the literature analyzed.
• Reduction in GHGs through Sustainable Additive Manufacturing: Sustainable additive manufacturing was seen to have a very high environmental impact due to its direct involvement in the reduction in GHGs. The studies analyzed showed great reductions in GHG emissions when AM was used to manufacture and repair parts as opposed to using conventional methods. In fact, the CO_2eq emissions that come just from material wastage in subtractive manufacturing are 1.5 tons, while the total CO_2eq footprint of 3D printing is a mere 0.8 tons [33]. However, on the socio-technical front, there is only a moderate impact on the reduction in GHGs, arising from the fact that this is fairly limited to advanced sectors. Seeing the potential of AM, there is a need to translate this potential towards low-tech manufacturing sectors in the near future.
• Localized Manufacturing: Localized manufacturing or the decentralization of 3D printing technology has a high environmental and socio-technical impact on SDG 13 targets. Studies have shown that decentralizing the technology reduces GHGs that arise from logistics and transport. Moreover, this factor has a direct impact towards SDG 13.1, as it allows for quick and rapid response in strengthening the resilience to climate-related hazards, thus reducing the overreliance on global supply chains.
• Climate-Resilient Infrastructure: Use of AM to facilitate climate-resilient infrastructure has a high impact on the socio-technical impact, as it enables the rapid deployment of temporary or permanent structures in times of climate-related hazards. This positive impact is also directly related to the added advantage of localized manufacturing. However, with regard to environmental impacts, it is seen that using AM for climate-resilient infrastructure only has a moderate influence. Though AM is seen as an advanced technology to build rapid structures, the GHG savings are highly dependent on the type of core material used, structural complexity and energy use. Thus, a moderate impact is asserted, as this method still shows a reduction in GHG emissions when tested out on small-scale applications.
• Circular Economy: The environmental benefits arising from the concept of the circular economy are high, as it would facilitate lower emissions, thus directly supporting SDG 13 targets. However, as mentioned above, the literature shows that this is not easily feasible due to multiple complexities that arise within the process chains. The potential to reuse and recycle certain plastic materials is highly affected through high contamination levels, and using more iterative processes to achieve this will effectively lead to higher GHG emissions. Thus, the circular economy only demonstrates a low influence with regard to the socio-technical impact on SDG 13.
• Extension of Product Lifecycles: Three-dimensional printing’s potential to repair objects at a rapid pace with minimal material has delivered a high influence on the environmental impacts. The need to manufacture whole replacement parts for moderate damage is being eliminated through AM. Though the literature shows certain frameworks being established for repair with AM, there still needs to be more regulations and policies that facilitate a foolproof repair system through AM. Thus, the socio-technical impact is seen to be moderate in this case.

Three-dimensional printing is a breakthrough in comparison with traditional manufacturing methods, as it not only addresses the issues of sustainability but is also capable of providing rapid solutions with comparable qualities. In regard to SDG 13—Climate Action, 3D printing has the potential to decentralize manufacturing, cut down on logistics requirements and enable mass customization.

Table 2. Prominent 3D printing technologies addressing SDG 13.

3D Printing Technology	Key Finding	SDG 13 Impact
Material Jet Fusion (MJF) [28]	LCD controller made through the injection molding process resulted in 244–460 kg of CO2eq emissions, as it also considers the emissions resulting from required tooling production. On the other hand, the same product made through the MJF process resulted in 27.4 kg of CO2eq emissions.	Lower GHG emissions. Energy efficient at medium production volumes.
Directed Energy Deposition (DED) [49,50]	This technology can be used for repairing small-scale damages rather than replacing the part.	Extends the lifecycle of the part. GHG emissions associated with replacement part manufacturing are eliminated.
3D Concrete Printing [29]	Used for constructing buildings at a rapid pace.	Rapidly build resilient infrastructure in times of climate-related hazards and natural disasters. Lower material wastage.

lists the prominent 3D printing technologies that, when used, have a direct impact in addressing SDG 13 targets. A summary of the key takeaways of the technology explored through this review is tabulated in

Table 3. Key breakthroughs of 3D printing in comparison to traditional manufacturing in view of SDG 13.

Study/Source	Practical Implication	Breakthrough in Comparison with Traditional Manufacturing Methods
Ref. [29] Advances in sustainable additive manufacturing: a systematic review for construction industry to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions	3D Concrete Printing	90% reduction in material waste. GHG emission reduction of 80%.
Ref. [39] Leveraging 3D Printing for Resilient Disaster Management in Smart Cities	Contour Crafting	Construct buildings with robotic arms at a rapid pace. Build resilient shelters at high speeds during natural disasters.
Ref. [35] Impacts of Adopting Additive Manufacturing Process on Supply Chain: Systematic Literature Review	Part Assembly	Consolidating and manufacturing several components into one assembled structure will reduce GHG emissions through reduced global logistical activities. The long global logistics network can be decoupled through this technology, and the decentralized network will support shorter lead times.
Ref. [50] Life Cycle Assessment of a Circularity Case Study Using Additive Manufacturing	Repair of Damaged Part	There is a 98% reduction in environmental damage when DED technology is used to repair a small mold rather than manufacturing a new one using conventional production techniques.
Ref. [41] Exploring Utilization of the 3D Printed Housing as Post-Disaster Temporary Shelter for Displaced People	3D Printing of Houses in Climate Induced Emergency Situations	Subramanya et al. also looked into 3DP for printing houses for people displaced from their houses during a natural disaster, and saw the potential especially with regard to its reduced build time, high safety and low transportation logistics.
Ref. [42] 3D Printing Technology for Rapid Response to Climate Change: Challenges and Emergency Needs	3D Printing of Infrastructure in Climate Induced Emergency Situations	3D printing can be used to build emergency infrastructure such as bridges to facilitate rapid mobilization. Bridges such as the Striatus bridge in Venice and Dutch bridge in Amsterdam were 3D-printed, and they demonstrated robustness during day-to-day operations.
[43] Combined Additive Manufacturing Techniques for Adaptive Coastline Protection Structures	Coastline Protection Structures to Combat Sea Level Rising	3DP can be used to build coastline protection structures (CPSs) that can combat sea level rise due to climate change while preserving the aquatic ecosystem and ecology.
Ref. [33] The role of PGMs in decarbonizing the atmosphere: additive manufacturing in perspective	Aerospace Industry	AM for manufacturing turbine blades for Boeing 787 resulted in 80% lower carbon emissions, 50% lower noise reduction while attaining an improvement in propelling efficiency by 50%.

.

Table 4. GHG emissions in AM and conventional manufacturing.

Real Life Application/Use Case Study	Additive Manufacturing Emissions	Conventional Manufacturing Emissions
UAE Green House [31]	608.55 kg CO2eq	1154.2 kg CO2eq
Manufacturing a Complex Pump Impeller [36]	45.6 kg CO2eq	91 kg CO2eq
Manufacturing Molds [49]	2.62 kg CO2eq	10.95 kg CO2eq
Manufacturing a Small-Scale Stool [47]	37.4 kg CO2eq	125.5 kg CO2eq

also shows the reduction in kg CO_2eq emissions for certain applications when AM is used over conventional manufacturing.

3.3. Practical Relevance and Economic Impacts for Industry

The environmental advantages of additive manufacturing are further complemented through concrete economic benefits. Gouveia et al.’s LCA and cost analysis of the AM repair process pointed out that the total lifecycle costs are reduced when hybrid AM repairing processes are used in contrast to mold replacement [49]. They highlighted that using a hybrid DED system had a cost of just EUR 4.651 per mold repair, while a conventionally manufactured mold requires EUR 1000 [49]. Balubaid et al. emphasized that costs associated with large inventories and storage are reduced drastically through AM’s capability of on-demand production and increased design flexibility [17]. A reduction in transportation costs by 25 times is made possible through localized production, while AM’s lack of tooling requirements further enhances the economic savings [17,52]. Peron et al.’s analysis aligned with that of Balubaid et al., where they noted that energy and spare part industries saved between USD 500 million and USD 3 billion in inventory costs by adopting AM [53].

Abdalla et al.’s exploration of the environmental and economic aspects of a 3D-printed house showed that 3D-printed houses are more economically viable than conventional methods [54]. The capital costs were reduced by 78% when 3D printing was used to construct the buildings. Additionally, lifecycle costing analysis conducted by the authors showed that the conventional techniques for building construction resulted in a present value of USD 81,064, while deploying 3D printing technology for the same was 49% cheaper [54]. Using AM methods such as wire arc additive manufacturing (WAAM) over subtractive manufacturing presents both economic and environmental benefits. Dias et al. developed a process-based cost model (PBCM) and reported that WAAM can reduce production costs by 34% when compared to subtractive manufacturing [55]. Apart from AM’s economic savings arising from the direct manufacturing process, additional savings are attained through low labor costs associated with this technology. The high level of automation and efficiency results in a lower manufacturing time, higher flexibility and labor efficiency. Singh et al. observed that utilizing 3D printing to manufacture certain building elements resulted in an accelerated turnaround of construction projects [56]. Furthermore, they observed that the labor costs associated with a 3D-printed building in Dubai were 60% lower than a conventionally built building [56]. Another study conducted by Mohammad et al. pointed out to the low costs associated with 3D concrete printing, while the productivity and quality of the structures were enhanced [57]. Weng et al. investigated the economic and environmental implications of using 3D concrete printing for manufacturing a prefabricated bathroom unit and observed that the overall costs, carbon emissions and energy consumption were reduced by 25.4%, 85.9% and 87.1%, respectively, when compared to the same unit being manufactured through a precast approach [58]. The economic savings paired with the environmental benefits promote the practicality of additive manufacturing within industries. Furthermore, rapid implementation, quick turnaround times and the flexibility of additive manufacturing processes strengthens its position for practical applications.

3.4. Use of Emerging Technologies in Additive Manufacturing to Support Climate Action (SDG 13)

In this technologically advanced era, rapid developments have been made in the fields of artificial intelligence, machine learning (ML) models and large language models (LLMs). Multiple industries and sectors have widely adopted these technological advancements in a bid to enhance their operation models. The additive manufacturing sector has also seen the implementation of artificial intelligence and machine learning to optimize input and output parameters while promoting sustainable processes. In their study, Shehbaz et al. explored the use of ML to predict and optimize sustainability aspects in additive manufacturing processes [59]. Random Forest and Decision Tree were the two prominent models that were able to demonstrate superior performance in predicting energy consumption, material usage and printing time. These models were also able to predict optimal print parameters, such as build orientation and infill percentage, which also plays a role towards sustainability through optimal material usage. With robust experimental data, these ML models have the capability to predict these sustainability outcomes. Khan et al. reviewed the integration of ML and digital twins within AM to address the issue of anisotropy in polymer additive manufacturing [60]. They saw that ML facilitates optimized manufacturing processes, wherein the highest quality products can be created at a rapid pace and with lower material usage. The variability in properties in additively manufactured parts can be lowered through ML to optimize the process parameters and parameter selection. Moreover, the use of digital twins optimizes the process chain, promoting sustainability within the different domains of the production line. The authors also pointed out that there is a need to benchmark these models across multiple applications to validate their outcomes. Moreover, the use of physics within the models for composite material printing is required, as the test data alone are deemed insufficient for optimal prediction. The environmental impacts of the additive manufacturing process can be further reduced when artificial intelligence is used to optimize energy consumption in these processes [61]. The capabilities of AI to monitor, inspect and control the process parameters enable defect tracking, anomaly detection and material usage. Additionally, the reinforcement learning potential of AI can be used to control the printing process for efficient components with less scrap. When these models are paired with real-life use cases, the sustainability-related benefits can be maximized.

3.5. Challenges in Implementing AM for Supporting Climate Action (SDG 13)

As with any technology, there are certain challenges that need to be addressed for positive reinforcement in society and the environment. Though countries aim to achieve the SDG targets of the UN, the progress towards them is very slow. Addressing climate action with AM has its own unique challenges. The literature points out that the reuse and recycling of most materials in the 3D printing industry is resource- and energy-intensive. Moreover, the recycled materials show lower mechanical properties. While this technology has seen unprecedented advancements in recent years, there is still a great untapped potential that needs to be studied to further increase the possibility of reusing and recycling materials efficiently. With regard to energy consumption, certain AM processes, such as selective laser melting, electron beam melting and powder bed fusion, are known for their high energy requirements [3]. Industrial components have different material and property requirements, and there is a need for optimum process combinations to meet these property requirements while staying within the standards and regulations [6]. Furthermore, metal printed parts are known for their limitations due to high-temperature metal processing. Issues such as residual stresses and undesirable mechanical properties are common due to these phenomena [6]. It is critical to select the optimal processing and printing parameters to ensure that the printed parts are of high quality. As Kanishka et al. and John et al. have pointed out, non-optimum printing parameters can lead to high porosity and unfavorable microstructural features, which, in turn, reduce the overall mechanical properties [4,62]. While intricate parts are easier to manufacture though AM, ensuring consistent quality becomes a challenge [4]. Kanishka et al. highlighted the importance of having highly competent operators towards consistent post-processed parts [4].

Liu et al. also pointed out that companies are mainly focused on the economic aspect rather than the environmental one [63]. Thus, there is an urgent need to further increase the awareness of climate-related hazards and how AM can contribute positively by reducing the detrimental effects on the environment. Furthermore, environmental benefits arising from AM are highly dependent on multiple factors and vary on a case-to-case basis. The integration of the circular economy within the realm of 3D printing requires more research and development towards alternative materials that reduce the burden on virgin feedstock material during recycling [52]. The establishment of efficient polymer recycling methods requires additional research and study. On the global level, the integration of AM to address SDG 13 goals are hindered through challenges such as the non-standardization of AM, which can lead to legal conflicts, and the adjustment of current supply chains and metrology [64].

These challenges should be addressed promptly to accelerate the movement towards the goals of SDG 13. Kawalkar et al. have pointed out that, in recent years, AM standardization policies are being laid out by organizations such as the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) [65]. Moreover, there is an increased collaboration between the ASTM and ISO to jointly develop AM standards that can be accepted on a global level. Additionally, the minimization of material contamination in recycling should be a focus area in upcoming studies so to enhance the usability of 3D printing in practical applications. The development of biodegradable plastic blends are potential areas that can be tapped to address this issue. Ďurfina et al.’s study on 3D printing using bio-based polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) blends showed that the crystallinity of the PHA blends can be altered to attain higher processability and lower viscosity, leading to superior mechanical properties [66]. The recycled use of biodegradable polymers such as PLA minimizes challenges from contamination, as they can be used to set up a single polymer closed loop. Tănase et al. investigated methods to optimize the mechanical properties of recycled PLA [67]. They found that annealing the parts made through recycled PLA increased the mechanical strength and Young’s modulus. Moreover, they observed that the layer heights and infill percentages can be adjusted to attain mechanical properties that are on par with the wrought materials, opening up avenues for the integration of recycled materials into multiple industries. Prashar et al. reported that challenges in regard to the high-temperature metal processing can be combatted by utilizing the supersonic deposition method [6].

4. Conclusions and Future Research

This study explored the contribution of 3D printing towards Sustainability Development Goal 13—Climate Action. The PRISMA framework was used to narrow down and explore journal articles, conference papers and textbook chapters related to climate action and the involvement of 3D printing in that arena. Correlation between 3D printing and its impact on five factors that relate to SDG 13 were reviewed in this paper. The literature pointed out the immense capabilities of AM as a whole for addressing SDG 13 goals and subtargets. AM was seen to contribute positively towards the concepts of sustainability, sustainable manufacturing and sustainable development. The use of AM for strengthening climate-related resilience and combatting climate change by implementing relevant policies was seen in the literature, highlighting how AM can accelerate a country’s movement towards attaining these SDG goals.

The GHG emissions through sustainable AM and its decentralization have been seen to be much lower than conventional methods. Moreover, the use of 3D printing for repair has been advancing in industries, paving the way for lower wastage, lower energy usage and a lower burden on logistics and the supply chain. The ease of customization with AM also allows for repairing products of different profiles and complexities. Furthermore, the use of AM for creating climate-resilient infrastructure has great potential, and the literature has shown that this has already been implemented for multiple use cases around the world. The rapid nature and efficiency of this technology have encouraged the integration of AM within the policy frameworks related to disaster management, which is perfectly aligned with SDG 13.2.

Though the advantages of AM towards sustainability and combatting climate change are high, further studies and explorations are required across multiple arenas to further strengthen the relationship between 3D printing and SDG 13. The literature shows a very limited focus on using AM to address Target 13.5 of SDG 13, which aims to develop mechanisms for efficient climate change management in the least developed countries and small islands [68]. Future research and work can be focused on this area by identifying a correlation between 3D printing and SDG 13.5. This would require economic analysis and viability studies of integrating AM technologies in these countries. Doing so will accelerate the world’s progress towards achieving the SDG targets. The socio-technical benefits and impacts towards SDG 13 can be further analyzed and correlated with SDG 8 and SDG 9. Moreover, the development of technologies that can address the issues of reusing contaminated plastics will strengthen the resilience of plastic-related industries towards climate change. Additionally, awareness and education of AM to address these goals and finding ways to correlate these towards climate change mitigation has to increase in the upcoming generation. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for collaboration between economists, policy makers and manufacturers to promote 3D printing as a means to combat climate action. The economic gains of AM and the contribution towards climate action can be quantified by developed models, while policy makers can incentivize organizations that deploy AM as an alternative to traditional manufacturing methods. The joint standards between the ASTM and ISO provide a foundation for quantifying the climate benefits. Manufacturers, on the other hand, can capitalize on the incentivization policies to promote the decentralization of the manufacturing process through AM while also reducing the GHG emissions that emerge from conventional manufacturing techniques. Further research into the use of AI within global supply chains to facilitate the involvement of AM has to be performed so to deliver promising results towards sustainability. With the current rise of AI, machine learning models and advancements in 3D printing, the possibilities of this technology to combat climate change are limitless.