Next Article in Journal
A Multi-Criteria Decision-Support Framework for Sustainable Asphalt Mixtures: Integrating Mechanical Performance and Environmental Impacts Through Structural Normalisation
Previous Article in Journal
The Impact of Green Credit on Agricultural Carbon Emissions: Spatial Spillover Effects and Channels in China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 18
Issue 10
10.3390/su18105065
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

Factors Influencing Sustainability in Powder Metallurgy: A Systematic Literature Review

by
Luan Radmann
1,
Ana Caroline Domingos Dias Moraes
2,
Luciano Volcanoglo Biehl
1,3,
Rui M. Lima
4,
Bibiana Porto da Silva
1,3,
Mariane Cásseres de Souza
1,3 and
Jorge Luis Braz Medeiros
1,3,*
1
Postgraduate Program in Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande, Rio Grande 96203-900, Brazil
2
School of Chemistry and Food, Federal University of Rio Grande, Rio Grande 96203-900, Brazil
3
School of Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande, Rio Grande 96203-900, Brazil
4
Algoritmi Research Centre, School of Engineering, University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimaraes, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2026, 18(10), 5065; https://doi.org/10.3390/su18105065
Submission received: 3 April 2026 / Revised: 1 May 2026 / Accepted: 14 May 2026 / Published: 18 May 2026
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

The increasing demand for sustainable industrial practices has intensified the search for manufacturing processes that minimize environmental impacts without compromising technical performance or economic viability. In this context, powder metallurgy has emerged as a promising alternative in mechanical manufacturing due to its potential for raw material reuse, waste reduction, lower energy consumption, and near-net-shape production. However, despite the growing body of research on this topic, there is still a lack of a comprehensive and integrated framework that systematically organizes and correlates the factors influencing sustainability across environmental, economic, and social dimensions, which limits a holistic understanding of the process. Therefore, this study aims to analyze and classify the main factors affecting sustainability in powder metallurgy. A Systematic Literature Review was conducted following the PRISMA method, using the Scopus, Web of Science and Wiley databases. The initial search identified 1753 articles, of which 56 were selected after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. The analysis considers the three pillars of sustainability and examines how variables related to raw materials, energy consumption, processing technologies, waste reuse, product performance, and operational conditions influence process sustainability. The results enable the identification of the most recurrent factors in the literature and support the development of a structured theoretical framework, contributing to a more integrated understanding of sustainability in powder metallurgy.

1. Introduction

Sustainability has become a global concept since the publication of the Our Common Future report, prepared by the Brundtland Commission [1], which defined sustainable development as the ability to meet present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The growing concern about the environmental and social impacts of industrialization has driven the integration of economic, environmental, and social dimensions, consolidated by the concept of the triple bottom line [2,3,4,5]. Sustainable production emerges as a strategy to transform the linear model of “extract, produce and discard” into circular systems based on the reduction, reuse, and recycling of materials throughout the product life cycle [6,7]. The adoption of these principles is particularly relevant in manufacturing, where energy efficiency, process optimization, and resource reuse contribute directly to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals [7,8]. In mechanical manufacturing processes, sustainability has become a central element for defining indicators that guide more responsible and assertive decisions [9,10]. The choice of materials and production methods should consider not only economic aspects, but also energy efficiency, recyclability and life cycle analysis [11]. Among manufacturing processes, powder metallurgy (PM) stands out for its sustainable potential. Powder metallurgy (PM) has evolved as a key manufacturing technology for producing materials with tailored microstructures and controlled properties, enabling applications in advanced engineering systems [12]. As a near-net-shape process, it allows for high utilization of raw materials, reducing waste, machining steps and waste generation [13,14]. In addition, pressing and sintering allow for the almost complete use of the metal powder, making PM a more efficient alternative when compared to conventional processes [15]. Controlling the size and morphology of particles improves density and mechanical performance, reducing rework and energy consumption. Especially in the production of high value-added materials, such as titanium and its alloys, PM presents itself as a promising route to reconcile technical performance and reduction in environmental impacts [15]. The process allows precise control of material properties and microstructure, which enhances performance and broadens its industrial applicability. These characteristics contribute to the growing relevance in modern manufacturing systems, particularly in applications requiring efficiency and material optimization [12]. Despite the recognized potential of powder metallurgy (PM) as a sustainable manufacturing route, particularly due to its near-net-shape capability, high material utilization, and reduced need for secondary processing. Most contributions emphasize specific dimensions, such as energy consumption, material efficiency, or recycling potential, often limited to particular applications without establishing connections between these elements. The authors Ehmsen et al. [16] and Ferreira et al. [17] consider the powder metallurgy in sustainable manufacturing, particularly in terms of material efficiency, energy consumption, and circularity. However, they also highlight critical challenges, such as the environmental impact of powder production and the need for improved recycling strategies. Furthermore, the current literature reviews addressing sustainability in manufacturing tend to adopt a broad perspective, focusing on general manufacturing systems or specific technologies, with limited attention to the unique characteristics of PM processes. As a result, there is a lack of structured approaches that integrate and systematically classify the factors influencing sustainability in PM across the environmental, economic, and social dimensions. This gap limits the ability to comprehensively understand how different process variables interact and jointly affect sustainability performance. In addition, previous studies consolidate sustainability factors into an integrated analytical framework that supports both academic understanding and practical application. The absence of such a framework hinders the identification of critical factors, the comparison between studies, and the development of more sustainable PM systems. Therefore, this study aims to fill this gap by systematically identifying, analyzing, and classifying the main factors influencing sustainability in powder metallurgy through a Systematic Literature Review based on the PRISMA protocol. The novelty of this research lies in the development of a structured and validated framework that organizes sustainability factors according to the triple bottom line dimensions and highlights their interrelationships within the PM process. By doing so, this study contributes to advancing a more integrated and process-oriented understanding of sustainability in powder metallurgy, supporting both future research and decision-making in industrial contexts.

2. Background

The concept of sustainable development was consolidated following the publication of the Our Common Future report, prepared by the World Commission on Environment and Development, which defined sustainability as the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs [1]. This document highlighted the need to integrate environmental, social and economic aspects in the formulation of policies and productive practices. Since industrialization, industrial activity has had significant impacts on ecosystems, natural resource consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. In response, international policies and agreements have begun to encourage energy efficiency and the reduction in environmental impacts [18,19]. In this context, the 2030 Agenda, proposed by the United Nations, established the Sustainable Development Goals as guidelines for balancing economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental preservation [7,20]. Sustainability has come to be understood systemically based on the triple bottom line model, proposed by Elkington [3], which integrates the economic, social and environmental dimensions. Wheeler and Elkington [5] highlight that the challenges of this model stem from structural and organizational conflicts, necessitating changes to production processes and management models. In this sense, Jayal et al. [4] and Ivanov [21] emphasize the importance of adopting innovative practices, energy efficiency and technological integration to ensure competitiveness and socio-environmental responsibility. The incorporation of sustainability into industrial processes requires the definition of factors capable of measuring, in an integrated way, its economic, environmental and social impacts [11]. Awan and Sroufe [7] and Gholami et al. [22], as well as Ferreira et al. [17], highlight the role of the circular economy, technological innovation and the reuse of materials in promoting more efficient production systems. In addition, Szilágyi et al. [9] and Bilad et al. [23] show that automation and Industry 4.0 contribute to resource optimization, although they demand attention to energy consumption [24]. In the context of mechanical manufacturing, powder metallurgy (PM) stands out as a process with high sustainable potential, as it allows for the almost complete use of raw materials, waste reduction and lower energy consumption [13,25]. It is a near-net-shape process in which parts are produced close to the final shape, reducing the number of finishing steps. According to Torralba et al. [14], PM allows high compositional control and dimensional precision, enabling its application in high-demand sectors, in addition, it is used for small parts, complex geometries and high production volumes [26]. Fang et al. [27] demonstrate that, especially for titanium components, the process reduces material losses and energy consumption. The traditional process involves powder production, mixing, compaction and sintering, resulting in parts with adequate mechanical properties [13]. Despite the advantages, PM has limitations related to the cost of metal powder, geometric restrictions and feasibility in small productions [28]. In addition, Abdoli and Kianian [29] warn of possible limitations in the durability of some components, reinforcing the importance of life cycle analysis. Studies indicate that sustainability in powder metallurgy is influenced by factors such as energy consumption and material utilization, as in the study by Motta et al. [30] where fly ash is used as a reinforcing material in metal matrix composites (MMC) based on Fe–Cu–C alloys produced by powder metallurgy, waste management, economic viability, component durability and technological integration [8,11]. Mohammed and Mahmood [31] and Bolzoni and Yang [32] highlight the potential of PM for waste recycling and for promoting the circular economy. Kianian [33] and Raoufi et al. [34] demonstrate that although the initial investment is high, high productivity can offset costs at scale. Life cycle analysis stands out as a fundamental tool for assessing environmental impacts and supporting decision-making [35]. In addition, Frech et al. [36], Strehl [37] and Skoglung et al. [38] show that the near-net-shape character contributes to the reduction in raw material consumption and carbon footprint. In this way, sustainability in powder metallurgy results from the interaction between energy efficiency, rational use of materials, economic performance, environmental management, occupational safety and technological innovation.

3. Methodology

This review study sought to analyze and classify studies using a structured and reproducible approach aligned with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol, which establishes guidelines for systematic reviews [39]. The steps of the method include selecting keywords, defining inclusion and exclusion criteria, conducting a search in scientific databases, and analyzing the selected articles (1st stage). After analyzing and classifying the studies, the factors identified in the literature were validated by field experts (2nd stage). The PRISMA 2020 checklist is provided in Supplementary Material.

3.1. Systematic Literature Review (1st Stage)

The search and selection of articles were conducted as shown in Figure 1, involving the following steps:
(i)
Article Identification: In this step, databases and keywords were selected. The databases are Scopus, Web of Science and Wiley. Access to the databases was carried out in August 2025. The defined search terms were: (Sustaina* AND “Powder Metallurgy” OR “Powder Metal”). The search terms were developed through an iterative process based on an initial exploratory literature review and the identification of keywords commonly used in studies addressing sustainability in powder metallurgy. Selection of articles published in scientific journals. Filtering by document type: only scientific articles and conference papers. Language restriction: English. The search resulted in 1753 articles. Of these, 730 were from the Scopus database, 579 from Web of Science and 444 from Wiley. In this step, 25 articles that did not provide full access were excluded, leaving 1728 articles. Among the articles with full access, 142 were excluded as duplicates. Thus, 1586 articles were selected at the end of this step. The selection of databases, Scopus, Web of Science and Wiley, was based on their wide coverage, scientific relevance, and recognition in indexing high-quality peer-reviewed journals in the fields of engineering, materials science, and manufacturing processes. These databases are commonly used in systematic literature reviews due to their robustness, multidisciplinary scope, and advanced search capabilities.
(ii)
Screening: In this stage, the exclusion criterion of English writing language was applied, resulting in no exclusions. The selection of databases, Scopus, Web of Science and Wiley, was based on their wide coverage, scientific relevance, and recognition in indexing high-quality peer-reviewed journals in the fields of engineering, materials science, and manufacturing processes. These databases are commonly used in systematic literature reviews due to their robustness, multidisciplinary scope, and advanced search capabilities.
(iii)
Eligibility: The selected articles should present sustainability concepts related to the powder metallurgy manufacturing process and address one or more of the pillars of sustainability (environmental, social, and economic), even if superficially. Based on these criteria, the titles and abstracts were read; this was conducted by independent reviewers. To ensure the reliability of the selection process, the screening and eligibility stages were conducted independently by two reviewers. In cases of disagreement regarding the inclusion of studies, the articles were re-evaluated through discussion between the reviewers. When consensus was not reached, additional reviewers were consulted to support the decision-making process. This procedure contributed to reducing selection bias and increasing the robustness and transparency of the review.
(iv)
Inclusion: the 56 articles were sorted alphabetically by title, with their identifying information recorded and the article content included in the data analysis.
The Bibliographic Portfolio was constructed to gather and classify scientific publications related to the results of the Systematic Literature Review. Table A1 (Appendix A) presents the list of identified articles; this set of publications constitutes the theoretical basis for the study’s discussions and analyses.
Despite the systematic and structured approach adopted in this study, some methodological limitations should be acknowledged. First, the review was restricted to three scientific databases, which, although comprehensive, may not cover all relevant publications on the topic. Second, the exclusion of gray literature, such as technical reports, theses, dissertations, and industry documents, may have limited the inclusion of practical insights and emerging knowledge not yet published in indexed journals.

3.2. Validation of Sustainability Factors (2nd Stage)

After analyzing and classifying the sustainability factors through a Systematic Literature Review, a qualitative validation stage was conducted with field experts to evaluate the conceptual consistency, practical relevance, and scope of the proposed factors. For this purpose, a structured instrument comprising four questions was developed and made available via Google Forms. The questionnaire was sent via email to four experts with experience in powder metallurgy and/or industrial sustainability, selected based on their proven academic and/or professional performance in the subject.
The first question was descriptive and sought to identify the participants’ length of experience in the field of powder metallurgy or sustainability, allowing for contextualization of the respondents’ profiles. The second question aimed to assess the degree of agreement among the experts regarding the factors identified in the literature review. For this, a five-point Likert scale was used, with the following options: “Strongly Disagree”, “Disagree”, “Neutral”, “Agree”, and “Strongly Agree”. This stage enabled analysis of experts’ perceptions of the influence and relevance of the proposed factors to the sustainability of powder metallurgy processes. The third question was open-ended and sought to identify possible gaps, redundancies, or the need to reformulate the factors presented. Participants were able to suggest conceptual adjustments, the exclusion of elements, or the inclusion of new factors deemed relevant, contributing to the refinement of the proposed theoretical model. Finally, the fourth question, also open-ended, aimed to assess conceptual clarity, practical relevance, the scope of the factors, and possible relationships among them. To this end, participants were asked to indicate whether they considered these aspects adequately covered and to use the space provided to present justifications, comments, or complementary suggestions. Expert validation was employed to strengthen the study’s theoretical robustness, ensuring that the factors identified in the literature exhibited conceptual coherence and applicability within the context of powder metallurgy.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Characterization of the Studies

The 56 selected articles were published in 39 different journals, highlighting the high dispersion of publications and indicating that the theme has a cross-cutting character and interest distributed across different areas of knowledge. The journals with the highest number of publications were: Funtai Oyobi Funmatsu Yakin/Journal of the Japan Society of Powder and Powder Metallurgy (four articles), Journal of Cleaner Production (three), Procedia CIRP (three), Materials Today: Proceedings (three), IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (two), Journal of Sustainable Metallurgy (two) and Materials Science and Engineering A (two). The other journals identified had only one publication each, reinforcing the fragmentation of scientific production in the area. Regarding geographical distribution, the articles analyzed had authors and co-authors from 26 countries. There is a greater concentration in India (16%), China (14%) and the United States (11%), followed by Germany (7%), Sweden (7%), the United Kingdom (7%), and Canada (5%). Together, these seven countries account for 68% of total publications. In contrast, the remaining countries individually account for less than 4%, highlighting the relative concentration of scientific production in economies with a strong industrial and technological tradition. Regarding the temporal distribution, there has been an increase in publications in recent years. The year 2025 stands out, with 12 articles (21.4% of the total), noting that there is already one study cataloged for 2026. From 2023 to 2025, 37.2% of the studies were published, indicating a recent growth trend. When expanding the analysis to the period from 2020 to 2025, the percentage reaches 57.1%. The predominance of publications after 2020 reflects the increasing global focus on sustainability, driven by international attention, notably after the publication of the document: “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” [35] and agendas and growing industrial demand for environmentally responsible manufacturing practices. In powder metallurgy, this trend is also associated with recent technological advances and the need to evaluate sustainability in more complex and integrated production systems.

4.2. Sustainability in the Powder Metallurgy Process

Based on the Systematic Literature Review, an initial set of twelve sustainability factors influencing powder metallurgy processes was identified, as presented in Table 1. These factors were directly extracted from the literature and reflect the current state of research without external validation. Subsequently, these factors were subjected to a validation process with domain experts (Section 4.3), which resulted in refinements, including nomenclature adjustments, consolidation of overlapping factors, and conceptual reorganization.
The analysis of the selected studies revealed that some sustainability factors are more frequently addressed in the literature than others. Among the most prominent factors are energy demand and efficiency, use of raw materials, waste management, and minimization of material losses, which appear consistently across multiple studies. These factors are strongly associated with the environmental and economic dimensions of sustainability, reflecting the traditional focus of manufacturing research on process efficiency and cost reduction. In contrast, the analysis indicates relatively limited coverage of social sustainability aspects in the reviewed literature. For Aslan et al. [74], there is a tendency to prioritize environmental and economic aspects over social sustainability considerations in powder metallurgy. Factors related to Health, safety, and working conditions were identified in only a small number of studies, highlighting an imbalance in the sustainability discourse within the context of powder metallurgy. This finding suggests that, while environmental and economic aspects are well-established in the literature, the social dimension remains underexplored. Product and process life cycle assessment, also known as life cycle assessment, is a systematic methodology for evaluating the environmental impacts of a product or process throughout its life cycle, from raw material extraction through production and use to final disposal. Taking into account durability and product quality, its application enables the identification of critical phases with the greatest potential for environmental impact, supporting technical decisions aimed at reducing emissions, natural resource consumption, and waste generation throughout the production chain [34,40,41,75]. The energy demand and efficiency of the production process refer to the amount of energy required at different stages, such as atomization, compaction, and sintering. This is a factor that is associated with both operating costs and greenhouse gas emissions, seeking greater energy efficiency, contributions to cost reduction, mitigation of environmental impacts and increased competitiveness of the production process [34,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,76]. The efficiency in the use of natural resources involves optimizing production processes, improving operational control, and using more efficient raw materials to enhance the technical performance of these processes. In addition, it seeks to reduce the consumption of inputs to generate the same product, as well as the reduction in waste generated and associated environmental impacts [11,22,34,71,77]. Operational efficiency and process stability is a factor that points to the optimization of production operations and the improvement of decision-making based on environmental and economic criteria. This factor depends on monitoring performance indicators, which increase the process’s reliability and stability. In this way, it contributes to integrating productive efficiency with the principles of sustainability [78,79]. Another factor highlighted in the literature is the Management and treatment of industrial waste, encompassing practices for the collection, separation, storage, reuse, and proper final disposal of waste generated during production. It is a factor that also involves optimizing production processes to reduce by-product and waste generation, as well as promoting the more efficient use of raw materials and inputs, highlighting that the best waste is the waste that is not generated, thus reinforcing the use of prevention strategies to avoid its generation. In addition, efficient management contributes to the reduction in environmental impacts, avoids contamination and strengthens reuse and recycling strategies, aligning with the principles of the circular economy [32,33,42,43,46,48,51,56,57,58,71]. Direct environmental impacts and emissions associated with the process include atmospheric emissions, potential soil and water contamination, and the generation of solid waste and effluents during production. The analysis of these impacts allows the identification of pollution sources and the development of strategies for emission control, reducing environmental damage and negative effects on ecosystems, complying with current legislation and contributing to the sustainable performance of the organization [29,34,41,45,47,48,61,62,72]. The regulatory, institutional, and public policy influence factor refers to the role of environmental regulations, institutional guidelines, and government policy instruments in guiding production practices, promoting sustainability, encouraging cleaner technologies, ensuring compliance with environmental standards, and integrating socio-environmental criteria into organizational management. In addition, it aims to encourage investments in sustainable practices through government regulations and incentives, contributing to the transition to more sustainable production systems [80,81,82,83]. Integration of the process into circular economy models involves adopting strategies that transform linear production systems into more sustainable ones through process redesign, integrating resource flows, and developing more closed production chains. In this context, the circular economy model is used to prioritize the reuse of materials, extending the useful life of products, and reducing waste generation. Its adoption reduces dependence on virgin natural resources, minimizes waste, and generates both environmental and economic benefits [41,56]. The factor of Minimization of material losses and waste involves adopting strategies to optimize production processes and use raw materials efficiently, thereby reducing losses at each stage of production. These practices contribute to reducing environmental impacts and improving the economic performance of industrial processes, and can be achieved through improved operational control and the adoption of more efficient technologies [6,11,22]. Reintroduction of materials and by-products into the production cycle refers to the reuse of waste, by-products, or secondary materials generated during the production process as inputs, reinserting them into the production system rather than discarding them, thereby reducing natural resource consumption and waste generation. In addition, it reinforces the planning and integration of material flows within the production system, to increase the material and energy efficiency of the process and align with the principles of the circular economy [47,49,50,63,64,71,76,84]. Health, safety, and working conditions factors deal with measures to protect workers against occupational risks, such as exposure to metallic dust, noise, heat, and chemical agents, ensuring a safe working environment that promotes the well-being of employees, reduces accidents and occupational diseases, improves productivity, and strengthens the organization’s social responsibility [34]. The last factor is Economic viability and competitiveness of the production process, involves analyzing costs, investments, financial returns, productive efficiency, and market acceptance, ensuring the continuity of sustainable practices, promoting technological innovation, and improving resource-use efficiency. In addition, it contributes to the organization’s market permanence over time, as these analyses reduce financial risks and guide strategic decisions on implementing sustainable production processes [32,34,46,58,62,71].

4.3. Validation of Sustainability Factors

The expert validation stage not only confirmed the relevance of the factors identified in the literature but also provided important insights into their organization and practical applicability. While the initial set of factors reflects the diversity of approaches found in the literature, the validated framework represents a more coherent and structured model, reducing redundancies and improving conceptual clarity. Table 2 presents the experience time of each participant regarding the area of sustainability and/or powder metallurgy.
Table 2 shows that the participating experts have professional experience in the field ranging from 2 to 30 years. It can be observed that most participants have a consolidated career in the field, with 2, 13, 25, and 30 years of experience, indicating a high level of technical maturity and accumulated knowledge of production processes and the sustainability challenges associated with them. This aspect is particularly relevant to validating the factors identified in the systematic review, since professionals with extensive experience tend to have a more comprehensive and critical view of the practical applicability of these elements in both industrial and academic contexts. The validation results indicated 100% agreement with relevance/impact, across all factors presented, with no disagreements among the experts. Although no conceptual objections to the proposed factors were identified, the experts presented relevant suggestions for improvement. Evaluators 2 and 4 pointed out potential redundancy among factors associated with efficient resource use, loss minimization, and material reintroduction, suggesting a conceptual reorganization to avoid overlap. It was also suggested that the nomenclature for sustainability factors be reviewed and standardized to better align with terms used in the scientific literature. Based on this feedback, a decision was made to merge these factors into a single, more comprehensive category. This consolidation aimed to improve the conceptual clarity and usability of the framework, avoiding overlap and redundancy that could hinder its practical application. The merged factor reflects a broader sustainability dimension associated with material efficiency and circularity, encompassing the optimization of resource inputs, reduction in process losses, and reintegration of materials into the production cycle. Evaluator 2 suggested the need to hierarchize the factors and possibly assign relative weights, considering that some elements have a structuring role in the production process. This study was limited to the identification and classification of sustainability factors, without assigning relative weights. The development of a hierarchical structure and weighting of these factors is intended for future research, which may be considered a limitation of the present study. Figure 2 presents the sustainability factors validated from the evaluation stage with experts in the field, with the appropriate recommendations and adjustments.
After the validation stage with experts, it was observed that some factors retained their original nomenclature, as the initially proposed terms were already aligned with the literature and considered sufficiently clear to represent the aspects analyzed. In these cases, it was decided to preserve the initial name, maintaining the following factors: Management and treatment of industrial waste, Economic viability and competitiveness of the production process, and Health, safety, and working conditions. On the other hand, other factors underwent nomenclature adjustments to promote greater conceptual standardization and alignment with the terms most frequently used in the scientific literature. The factors for evaluating the product and process life cycle became known as the product life cycle, adopting a terminology widely used in studies that address sustainability and life cycle assessment in production processes [85,86,87,88]. Similarly, the efficiency in the use of material resources factor was adjusted to Use of raw materials and material resources, seeking to broaden the understanding of the factor and align it with approaches that discuss the management and optimization of resource use in production systems [89,90]. The direct environmental impacts and emissions associated with the process factor was reformulated to total environmental impacts and emissions, to make the term more comprehensive and representative of the different types of environmental impacts associated with industrial processes [90,91]. Likewise, demand and energy efficiency of the production process was simplified to energy consumption, adopting a more direct terminology that is widely used in studies that analyze energy sustainability in industrial environments [85,92,93,94]. The prominence of energy-related factors is consistent with recent studies that identify powder production and processing as major contributors to environmental impacts [16]. The operational efficiency and process stability factor was adjusted to process performance and control, seeking to more comprehensively represent the aspects related to monitoring, control and improvement of production operations [90,92,93]. In addition, process integration in circular economy models was renamed simply circular economy [7,64,82], aiming for greater objectivity and terminological standardization, in line with studies that address the incorporation of circular practices in production systems [7,85,88,93,95,96,97,98]. Some factors were regrouped, considering the conceptual proximity of the addressed themes and the redundancies identified by evaluators 2 and 4. In this context, the factors Minimization of material losses and waste and Reintroduction of materials and by-products into the production cycle were integrated into a single factor called 3Rs (reduce, reuse, recycle), which more comprehensively represents the strategies related to efficiency in the use of resources and materials management within a logic of sustainability and circularity [85,93]. Similarly, the factor Regulatory, institutional and public policy influence was incorporated into the factor organizational culture, recognizing that regulatory, institutional and normative aspects directly influence how organizations structure their practices, values and strategies aimed at sustainability. Studies indicate that organizational culture is strongly related to the institutional context and market characteristics of each country, involving factors such as the regulatory environment, industrial practices, governance, and even elements associated with the political and organizational culture that guide the adoption of sustainable practices in companies [93,97,99,100]. Powder metallurgy presents significant advantages in the context of sustainability, particularly regarding material utilization and process efficiency, as a substantial part of this technology enables the use of industrial residues, including metallic powders obtained through processes such as the carbonyl route, which can be reused as high value-added raw materials; in addition, modern powder production methods, such as atomization, involve minimal material losses, contributing to waste reduction throughout the production chain [43]. Another important aspect is that powder metallurgy techniques allow the production of near-net-shape components, substantially reducing the need for subsequent steps such as machining, extensive heat treatments, and non-destructive testing, which in turn lowers energy consumption and operational costs, aligning with cleaner and more sustainable production principles [101,102]. Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge that there are still limitations related to the assessment of the entire supply chain, particularly concerning raw material traceability and variability in industrial practices among different suppliers; despite these constraints, the data presented are robust and consistent, supporting the study’s conclusions with an adequate level of reliability. In the context of sustainable manufacturing, combining the Theory of Constraints with quality management practices can support the identification of process inefficiencies and enhance resource utilization, ultimately improving the performance and durability of engineered materials [103,104,105]. In addition, it is important to emphasize that the scope of this study was deliberately defined to provide a structured and critical synthesis of the existing literature, rather than a complete life-cycle or energy-integrated assessment of the entire powder metallurgy chain. Although we agree that a comprehensive evaluation encompassing raw material production, processing, and post-consumer stages could provide valuable insights, such an approach would require extensive primary data collection and the use of standardized metrics that are not yet consistently available in the field. Accordingly, this work seeks to contribute by consolidating current knowledge, identifying consistent sustainability advantages, and highlighting relevant gaps particularly those related to supply chain integration and energy analysis that should be addressed in future research. Additionally, it is emphasized that the results and discussions presented may serve as a theoretical foundation not only for conventional powder metallurgy, but also for related technologies such as metal injection molding (MIM) and catalytic filament-based metal additive manufacturing, thereby expanding the applicability of this study. We believe that this contribution, although focused, remains relevant and scientifically sound, serving as a basis for more comprehensive and data-driven investigations.

5. Conclusions

Based on the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) and subsequent expert validation, a set of factors influencing sustainability in powder metallurgy manufacturing was identified and consolidated. The review results indicated a predominance of factors related to the environmental dimension, especially those associated with the product life cycle, energy consumption, raw material use, total emissions, waste management, the application of the 3Rs principles, and the circular economy. The validation stage with experts demonstrated partial or full agreement with the identified factors, reinforcing the relevance and consistency of the elements found in the literature with the experts’ practical experience in the field. In addition, the experts’ qualitative contributions improved the conceptual organization of the factors, highlighting the need for greater conceptual clarity, the reorganization of overlapping factors, and consideration of supply chain-related elements and factor measurement approaches. In the context of powder metallurgy, characteristics such as near-net-shape production, material reuse, and precise control of process steps reinforce this technology’s potential to promote industrial sustainability. However, maximizing these benefits depends on systematic planning of the factors that influence sustainability, since it is necessary to enhance circularity in the powder metallurgy production chain, implement waste management, control emissions, analyze process performance, ensure production efficiency, and uphold social responsibility to achieve a sustainable production process. From a practical and industrial standpoint, the findings offer relevant contributions for decision-makers, engineers, and practitioners involved in PM processes. The identified and validated factors can support more informed decision-making by enabling the evaluation and prioritization of sustainability aspects in process design, optimization, and management. In particular, the framework may assist industries in aligning operational practices with sustainability goals, improving resource efficiency, reducing environmental impacts, and addressing emerging regulatory and market demands. In terms of theoretical contributions, this research proposes a consolidated and validated set of sustainability factors tailored to powder metallurgy, contributing to the advancement of knowledge in sustainable manufacturing. The integration of literature-based evidence with expert insights enhances the robustness and applicability of the proposed framework, positioning it as a reference for future academic and applied research. In conclusion, this study contributes both conceptually and strategically by providing a validated framework that supports a more comprehensive and application-oriented understanding of sustainability in powder metallurgy, paving the way for more balanced and effective sustainability practices in the field. Ultimately, the proposed framework can serve as a foundation for the transition toward more sustainable and resilient manufacturing systems in powder metallurgy.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su18105065/s1, PRISMA 2020 Checklist.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.R. and A.C.D.D.M.; methodology, L.R. and A.C.D.D.M.; validation, J.L.B.M., M.C.d.S. and B.P.d.S.; formal analysis, L.R. and R.M.L.; investigation, L.V.B.; resources, J.L.B.M.; data curation, L.V.B.; writing—original draft preparation, L.R. and A.C.D.D.M.; writing—review and editing, J.L.B.M. and M.C.d.S.; visualization, M.C.d.S. and B.P.d.S.; supervision, J.L.B.M., M.C.d.S. and B.P.d.S.; project administration, R.M.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available upon request to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the support of CNPq, CAPES, FAPERGS, and the Federal University of Rio Grande (FURG) for their encouragement and support of this research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

This appendix presents the Bibliographic Portfolio (BP) resulting from the Systematic Literature Review conducted in this study. The portfolio comprises the set of scientific articles selected after the application of the defined search strategy, screening procedures, and eligibility criteria. These studies constitute the final body of literature used to support the analysis and discussion developed in the main text. The presentation of the BP in this appendix aims to provide transparency and traceability to the selection process, allowing readers to identify the publications that form the theoretical foundation of this research.
Table A1. Bibliographic Portfolio (BP).
Table A1. Bibliographic Portfolio (BP).
CodeTitleYear
[23]Analyzing the Environmental Consequences of Production Processes from a System of Systems Perspective: A Case of Gear Manufacturing in the Automotive Industry2021
[28]Powder metallurgy: A major partner of the sustainable development2004
[31]Using powder metal gears in industrial applications-A review2023
[32]Valorization of wood ash for sustainable in situ reinforced Ti composites with tailorable mechanical behavior manufactured via powder metallurgy2024
[33]Comparing acquisition and operation life cycle costs of powder metallurgy and conventional wrought steel gear manufacturing techniques2019
[34]Cost and environmental impact assessment of stainless-steel microscale chemical reactor components using conventional and additive manufacturing processes2022
[40]Environmental analysis of the powder metallurgy value chain: A methodology for comparison with conventional manufacturing2020
[41]A LCA Analysis of SMC Solution for Electrification2025
[42]Effect of boronizing and shot peening in ferrous based FeCu-Graphite powder metallurgy material on wear, microstructure and mechanical properties2010
[43]An Investigation into the Recyclability of 316L Stainless Steel Gas-Atomized Powder Used in Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing2025
[44]Frictional Behavior and Mechanical Performance of Al Reinforced with SiC via Novel Flake Powder Metallurgy2022
[45]Sintered Aluminum-Zeolite Composites for Structural Applications made by Powder Metallurgy2025
[46]A new facile solvo metallurgical leaching method for the selective Co dissolution and recovery from hard metals waste2021
[47]Dry sliding wear studies of copper-based powder metallurgy brake materials2014
[48]Effect of inert gas pressure on the properties and carbon footprint of UNS S32760 powders made from waste materials by gas atomization2024
[49]Development of Al-Nano Composites through Powder Metallurgy Process Using a Newly Designed Cold Isostatic Compaction Chamber2015
[50]Powder Metallurgy and Additive Manufacturing of High-Nitrogen Alloyed FeCr(Si)N Stainless Steel2025
[51]Development of a powder warming compacting machine with an electrical heating system2002
[52]Low-Temperature Sintering of Stereocomplex-Type Polylactide Nascent Powder: From Compression Molding to Injection Molding2018
[53]NdFeB magnets in wind energy system: A review of innovations for enhanced energy efficiency in Indonesia2025
[54]The Mechanisms of Nano-AlN Content in the Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Fe–25Mn–9Al–8Ni–1C–0.2Ti Alloy2025
[55]Effects of Niobium Addition on Face-Centered Cubic Crystal-Structured High-Entropy Alloys2026
[56]An innovative magnetic oxide dispersion-strengthened iron compound obtained from an industrial byproduct, with a view to circular economy2020
[57]Development of a recycling strategy for grinding sludge using supersolidus liquid phase sintering2020
[58]Suitability of turning and grinding steel chips to synthesize metal matrix composite via powder metallurgy route2022
[59]Sustainable Recycling of Ferrous Metallic Scrap Using Powder Metallurgy Process2017
[60]Synthesis of Newly Formulated Aluminium Composite through Powder Metallurgy using Waste Bone Material2023
[61]Foundations and Innovations in Sintering Automation Control: Multidimensional Capacity Optimization and Visual Positioning2025
[62]Ex-ante LCA of magnet recycling: Progressing towards sustainable industrial-scale technology2024
[63]Excellent thermal resistance and high electrical conductivity of Al wire sintered from powders2025
[64]Influence of Ti on the tensile properties of the high-strength powder metallurgy high entropy alloys2020
[65]An Investigation on Chemical Machining of NiTi SMA Prepared by Powder Metallurgy2019
[66]Characterization of sustainable binder with hydroxyapatite via powder metallurgy route2016
[67]Chromium Low Alloy Steel Powder for High Performance Applications2025
[68]Design for PM Challenges and Opportunities for Powder Metal Components in Transmission Technology2018
[69]Low cost powder metal turbine components2004
[70]Processing of steel mill scale for manufacturing novel engineering ceramics by powder metallurgy2017
[71]Joining processes for powder metallurgy parts: A review2010
[72]Low Alloy Titanium: A Sustainable Alternative for Laser Powder Bed Fusion2025
[73]Utilizing Low-Cost Eggshell Particles to Enhance the Mechanical Response of Mg–2.5Zn Magnesium Alloy Matrix 2017
[84]On modeling the CNC end milling characteristics of Al-7075/WC powder metallurgy composites2017
[106]An optical-based method to estimate the oxygen content in recycled metal powders for additive manufacturing2022
[107]Assessing the sustainability of laser powder bed fusion and traditional manufacturing processes using a parametric environmental impact model2023
[108]Crafting high-strength and ductile powder metallurgy Ti6Al4V alloy with a multi-scale microstructure2024
[109]Dependence of secondary operations in powder metallurgy and their impact on the electrical conductivity of MWCNTs/Cu nanocomposites2021
[110]Development of sustainable non-autoclaved aerated concrete: Influence of aluminium powder on mechanical properties and pore structure of geopolymers based on rockwool furnace bottom slag waste2025
[111]Effect of grain size and intergranular oxides at prior powder-particle boundaries on the mechanical properties of 316 stainless steels by powder metallurgy hot isostatic pressing: strengthening versus embrittlement2025
[112]Effect of spheroidizing heat treatment on the microstructure, hardness and toughness of high carbon powder metallurgy steel2017
[113]Electric voltage predictions and correlation with density measurements in green-state powder metallurgy compacts2002
[114]Exploring Possibilities for Fabricating Cu–TiB2 Composite Through Different Powder Metallurgy Routes2023
[115]Feasibility study of a new rapid tooling process2005
[116]HIP Powder Metal Near-Net Shapes for Demanding Environment and Applications2007
[117]Investigation of structural and mechanical properties of al-al2o3-sic-ws2 hybrid composites fabricated by powder metallurgy2023
[118]Smart components by additive technologies2019
[119]Assessment of powder metallurgy-hot isostatic pressed nozzleto-safe end transition joints2017
[120]Engineering the green state of powder products2009
Ref. [121] is cited in the supplementary materials.

References

  1. WCED. Special Working Session. In World Commission on Environment and Development; Our Common Future; WCED: Geneva, Switzerland, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  2. Barbier, E.B. The Concept of Sustainable Economic Development. Environ. Conserv. 1987, 14, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Elkington, J. Partnerships from Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st-century Business. Environ. Qual. Manag. 1998, 8, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Jayal, A.D.; Badurdeen, F.; Dillon, O.W.; Jawahir, I.S. Sustainable Manufacturing: Modeling and Optimization Challenges at the Product, Process and System Levels. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2010, 2, 144–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wheeler, D.; Elkington, J. The End of the Corporate Environmental Report? Or the Advent of Cybernetic Sustainability Reporting and Communication. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2001, 10, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Khan, S.A.R.; Yu, Z.; Golpira, H.; Sharif, A.; Mardani, A. A State-of-the-Art Review and Meta-Analysis on Sustainable Supply Chain Management: Future Research Directions. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 278, 123357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Awan, U.; Sroufe, R. Sustainability in the Circular Economy: Insights and Dynamics of Designing Circular Business Models. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 1521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ayabaca, C.; Vila, C. An Approach to Sustainable Metrics Definition and Evaluation for Green Manufacturing in Material Removal Processes. Materials 2020, 13, 373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Szilágyi, Z.; Hajdu, C.; Csapó, Á.; Széll, K.; Galambos, P. Sustainability Indicators in Industrial Robotic Systems. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2023, 107, 79–84. [Google Scholar]
  10. Da Silva, B.P.; Cassel, R.A.; Wachs, P.; Martins, V.L.M.; Saurin, T.A. Sustainability and Its Influence on the Complexity of the Food Supply Chain: A Survey Study. Br. Food J. 2025, 127, 601–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Trucillo, P.; Erto, A. Sustainability Indicators for Materials and Processes. Sustainability 2023, 15, 6689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kováčik, J.; Manonukul, A. New Insights of Powder Metallurgy: Microstructure, Durability and Properties. Materials 2023, 16, 2307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chak, V.; Chattopadhyay, H.; Dora, T.L. A Review on Fabrication Methods, Reinforcements and Mechanical Properties of Aluminum Matrix Composites. J. Manuf. Process. 2020, 56, 1059–1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Torralba, J.M.; Alvaredo, P.; García-Junceda, A. High-Entropy Alloys Fabricated via Powder Metallurgy. A Critical Review. Powder Metall. 2019, 62, 84–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Miko, T.; Petho, D.; Gergely, G.; Markatos, D.; Gacsi, Z. A Novel Process to Produce Ti Parts from Powder Metallurgy with Advanced Properties for Aeronautical Applications. Aerospace 2023, 10, 332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ehmsen, S.; Conrads, J.; Klar, M.; Aurich, J.C. Environmental Impact of Powder Production for Additive Manufacturing: Carbon Footprint and Cumulative Energy Demand of Gas Atomization. J. Manuf. Syst. 2025, 82, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ferreira, B.T.; Monteiro, J.; Borille, A.; Leite, M.; Ribeiro, I. Reuse Powder Impacts in Additive Manufacturing for Aeronautical Parts. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2025, 141, 2027–2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Garraín, D.; Banacloche, S.; Ferreira-Aparicio, P.; Martínez-Chaparro, A.; Lechón, Y. Sustainability Indicators for the Manufacturing and Use of a Fuel Cell Prototype and Hydrogen Storage for Portable Uses. Energies 2021, 14, 6558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Alfonso, T.O.d.S.; Augusto Cassel, R.; Mairesse Siluk, J.C.; Porto da Silva, B.; Ferigolo Venturini, S. Analysis of Critical Factors for Energy Efficiency in Productive Systems: A Systematic Review. IEEE Lat. Am. Trans. 2021, 19, 1347–1356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Olabanji, O.M.; Mpofu, K. Assessing the Sustainability of Manufacturing Processes in the Manufacture of Transport Equipment, Based on Fuzzy Grey Relational Analysis. S. Afr. J. Ind. Eng. 2022, 33, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ivanov, D.; Dolgui, A. Viability of Intertwined Supply Networks: Extending the Supply Chain Resilience Angles towards Survivability. A Position Paper Motivated by COVID-19 Outbreak. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 2904–2915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gholami, H.; Saman, M.; Sharif, S.; Md Khudzari, J.; Zakuan, N.; Streimikiene, D.; Streimikis, J. A General Framework for Sustainability Assessment of Sheet Metalworking Processes. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bilad, A.; Zaim, M.; Zaim, F. Industry 4.0 Tools in the Industrial Sector: A Systematic Literature Review. In Proceedings of the 2022 14th International Colloquium of Logistics and Supply Chain Management (Logistiqua), El Jadida, Morocco, 25–27 May 2022; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  24. Rehman, S.; Hamdan, Y.H.; Sindhu, M. Impact of Industry 4.0 on Firms’ Sustainable Development in the GCC Economies. Braz. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2024, 21, 2166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lingam, D.; Ananthanarayanan, R.; Jeevanantham, A.K.; Seenivasagam, D.R. Optimization Methods in Powder Metallurgy for Enhancing the Mechanical Properties: A Systematic Literature Review. Eng. Res. Express 2024, 6, 022504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Cappellaro, O.R.; Medeiros, J.L.B.; Uva, G.P.; Carreno, N.L.V.; Maron, G.K.; Biehl, L.V.; Alano, J.H. Corrosion Behavior of 17—4PH Steel, Produced by the MIM Process, Sintered in Different Atmospheres. Rev. Mater. 2024, 29, e20240120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Fang, Z.Z.; Paramore, J.D.; Sun, P.; Chandran, K.S.R.; Zhang, Y.; Xia, Y.; Cao, F.; Koopman, M.; Free, M. Powder Metallurgy of Titanium—Past, Present, and Future. Int. Mater. Rev. 2018, 63, 407–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Seikh, Z.; Sekh, M.; Mandal, G.; Sengupta, B.; Sinha, A. Metal Matrix Composites Processed Through Powder Metallurgy: A Brief Overview. J. Inst. Eng. (India) Ser. D 2025, 106, 771–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Abdoli, S.; Kianian, B. Analyzing the Environmental Consequences of Production Processes from a System of Systems Perspective: A Case of Gear Manufacturing in the Automotive Industry. In Proceedings of the Procedia CIRP; Elsevier B.V.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; Volume 98, pp. 376–381. [Google Scholar]
  30. da Motta, C.A.O.; de Souza, J.; Martins, V.; Shaeffer, L.; Rossini, E.G.; Biehl, L.V.; de Jesus Pacheco, D.A.; Damas Martins, C.O.; Medeiros, J.L.B. Enhancing Composite Materials through Fly Ash Reinforcement through Powder Metallurgy. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2023, 307, 128124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mohammed, O.D.; Mahmood, Q. Using Powder Metal Gears in Industrial Applications-A Review. Mater. Res. Proc. 2023, 31, 299–305. [Google Scholar]
  32. Bolzoni, L.; Yang, F. Valorization of Wood Ash for Sustainable in Situ Reinforced Ti with Tailorable Mechanical Behavior Manufactured via Powder. Mater. Today Sustain. 2024, 26, 100787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kianian, B. Comparing Acquisition and Operation Life Cycle Costs of Powder and Conventional Wrought Steel Gear Manufacturing Techniques. In Proceedings of the 52nd Cirp Conference on Manufacturing Systems (CMS); Butala, P., Govekar, E., Vrabic, R., Eds.; Elsevier B.V.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; Volume 81, pp. 1101–1106. [Google Scholar]
  34. Raoufi, K.; Haapala, K.R.; Etheridge, T.; Manoharan, S.; Paul, B.K. Cost and Environmental Impact Assessment of Stainless Steel Microscale Chemical Reactor Components Using Conventional and Additive Manufacturing Processes. J. Manuf. Syst. 2022, 62, 202–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Azevedo, B.B.; Saurin, T.A. Losses in Water Distribution Systems: A Complexity Theory Perspective. Water Resour. Manag. 2018, 32, 2919–2936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Frech, T.; Scholzen, P.; Löpenhaus, C.; Klocke, F. Powder Metal Gears for Highly Loaded Powertrains: How Powder Metallurgy Supports Current Trends in Transmission Technology. SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. 2018, 11, 431–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Strehl, R. Tragfähigkeitssteigerung von Zahnrädern Aus Hochfesten Sinterstählen; Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen: Aachen, Germany, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  38. Skoglund, P.; Litstrom, O.; Flodin, A. Improvement of Powder Metallurgy Gears for Engines and Transmissions; SAE Technical Paper: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  39. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, e1000097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Cor, E.; Baffie, T.; Desrousseaux, S.; Monnier, E. Environmental Analysis of the Powder Metallurgy Value Chain: A Methodology for Comparison with Conventional Manufacturing. In Proceedings of the Proceedings—Euro PM2020 Congress and Exhibition; European Powder Metallurgy Association (EPMA): Chantilly, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ye, Z.; Poulikidou, S.; Persson, A.R.; Kjellén, L. A LCA Analysis of SMC Solution for Electrification. J. Jpn. Soc. Powder Powder Metall. 2025, 72, S715–S719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Yilmaz, S.S.; Ünlü, B.S.; Varol, R. Effect of Boronizing and Shot Peening in Ferrous Based FeCu-Graphite Powder Metallurgy Material on Wear, Microstructure and Mechanical Properties. Mater. Des. 2010, 31, 4496–4501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mohammadhassan, T.; Gélinas, S.; Blais, C. An Investigation into the Recyclability of 316L Stainless Steel Gas-Atomized Powder Used in Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing. J. Sustain. Metall. 2025, 11, 1704–1721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Alharthi, N.H.; Almotairy, S.M.; Almutairi, A.M. Frictional Behavior and Mechanical Performance of Al Reinforced with SiC via Novel Flake Powder Metallurgy. Metals 2022, 12, 323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Colorado, H.A.; Meza, J.M.; Salazar, J.A. Sintered Aluminum-Zeolite Composites for Structural Applications Made by Powder Metallurgy. ES Mater. Manuf. 2025, 27, 1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Oumarou Amadou, A.; De Gaudenzi, G.P.; Marcheselli, G.; Cara, S.; Piredda, M.; Spiga, D.; Matharu, A.S.; De Gioannis, G.; Serpe, A. A New Facile Solvometallurgical Leaching Method for the Selective Co Dissolution & Recovery from Hard Metals Waste. Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard Mater. 2021, 98, 105534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gyimah, G.K.; Huang, P.; Chen, D. Dry Sliding Wear Studies of Copper-Based Powder Metallurgy Brake Materials. J. Tribol.-Trans. ASME 2014, 136, 041601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Gobber, F.S.; Priarone, P.C.; Pennacchio, A.; Actis Grande, M. Effect of Inert Gas Pressure on the Properties and Carbon Footprint of UNS S32760 Powders Made from Waste Materials by Gas Atomization. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2024, 33, 8814–8828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Bajpai, G.; Purohit, R.; Rana, R.S. Development of Al-Nano Composites through Powder Metallurgy Process Using a Newly Designed Cold Isostatic Compaction Chamber. In Proceedings of the Materials Today: Proceedings; Elsevier Ltd.: London, UK, 2015; Volume 2, pp. 2737–2746. [Google Scholar]
  50. Becker, L.; Radtke, F.; Lentz, J.; Santiago, B.; Broeckmann, C.; Weber, S. Powder Metallurgy and Additive Manufacturing of High-Nitrogen Alloyed(Si)N Stainless Steel. Adv. Eng. Mater. 2025, 27, 2402293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lung, C.Y.; Fan, K.C.; Mou, J.; Liao, W.B. Development of a powder warming compacting machine with an electrical heating system. Powder Technol. 2002, 127, 267–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Fu, M.; Liu, Z.; Bai, D.; Ling, F.; Bai, H.; Zhang, Q.; Fu, Q. Low-Temperature Sintering of Stereocomplex-Type Polylactide Nascent Powder: From Compression Molding to Injection Molding. Macromol. Mater. Eng. 2018, 303, 1800178. [Google Scholar]
  53. Agustiana, D.; Daraz, U.; Royani, I.; Lyu, P. NdFeB Magnets in Wind Energy System: A Review of Innovations for Enhanced Energy Efficiency in Indonesia. Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 2025, 44, e14636. [Google Scholar]
  54. Bai, Y.; Lei, N.; Guo, F.; He, Z.; Li, J.; Sun, C.; Wang, P. The Mechanisms of Nano-AlN Content in the Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Fe–25Mn–9Al–8Ni–1C–0.2 Ti Alloy. Steel Res. Int. 2025, 96, 201–213. [Google Scholar]
  55. Mogakane, T.; Madewu, F.; Malatji, N.; Kanyane, L.R.; Shongwe, M.B.; Tlotlenge, M. Effects of Niobium Addition on Face-Centered Cubic Crystal-Structured High-Entropy Alloys. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2026, 2026, 8553082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Tirado Gonzalez, J.G.; Reyes Segura, B.T.; Esguerra-Arce, J.; Bermudez Castaneda, A.; Aguilar, Y.; Esguerra-Arce, A. An Innovative Magnetic Oxide Dispersion-Strengthened Iron Compound from an Industrial Byproduct, with a View to Circular Economy. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 268, 122362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Hankel, J.; Jäger, S.; Weber, S. Development of a Recycling Strategy for Grinding Sludge Using Supersolidus Liquid Phase Sintering. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 263, 121501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Singh, A.; Anand, A.; Singh, J.; Singh, M.; Kumar, K.; Bhandari, P.; Srivastava, V.K.; Singh, A.; Sinha, M.K. Suitability of Turning and Grinding Steel Chips to Synthesize Metal Matrix Composite via Powder Metallurgy Route. In Proceedings of the Materials Today: Proceedings; Elsevier Ltd.: London, UK, 2022; Volume 69, pp. 215–219. [Google Scholar]
  59. Rane, K.K.; Date, P.P. Sustainable Recycling of Ferrous Metallic Scrap Using Powder Metallurgy. J. Sustain. Metall. 2017, 3, 251–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kamatchi, R.M.; Muraliraja, R.; Vijay, J.; Bharathi, C.S.; Eswar, M.K.; Padmanabhan, S. Synthesis of Newly Formulated Aluminium Composite through Powder Metallurgy Using Waste Bone Material. In Proceedings of the E3S Web of Conferences; EDP Sciences: Les Ulis, France, 2023; Volume 399. [Google Scholar]
  61. Wang, Y.; Hsiao, H.-H.; Dang, J.-F.; Wang, K.-J. Foundations and Innovations in Sintering Automation Control: Multidimensional Capacity Optimization and Visual Positioning. J. Jpn. Soc. Powder Powder Metall. 2025, 72, S1329–S1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. van Nielen, S.S.; Miranda Xicotencatl, B.; Tukker, A.; Kleijn, R. Ex-Ante LCA of Magnet Recycling: Progressing towards Sustainable Industrial-Scale Technology. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 458, 142453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Liu, M.; Li, G.; Li, D.; Gu, J.; Lu, Y.; Ma, C.; Zheng, R. Excellent Thermal Resistance and High Electrical Conductivity of Al Wire Sintered from Powders. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2025, 946, 149098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Moravcik, I.; Gamanov, S.; Moravcikova-Gouvea, L.; Kovacova, Z.; Kitzmantel, M.; Neubauer, E.; Dlouhy, I. Influence of Ti on the Tensile Properties of the High-Strength Powder High Entropy Alloys. Materials 2020, 13, 578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Al-Ethari, H.; Haleem, A.H.; Gased, N.M. An Investigation on Chemical Machining of NiTi SMA Prepared by Powder Metallurgy. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 518. [Google Scholar]
  66. Pahroraji, H.F.; Ibrahim, M.H.I. Characterization of Sustainable Binder with Hydroxyapatite via Powder Metallurgy Route. ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2016, 11, 7818–7822. [Google Scholar]
  67. Tremblay, J.C.; Nie, M.; Labrecque, C. Chromium Low Alloy Steel Powder for High Performance Applications. J. Jpn. Soc. Powder Powder Metall. 2025, 72, S1375–S1381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Frech, T.; Scholzen, P.; Schäflein, P.; Löpenhaus, C.; Kauffmann, P.; Klocke, F. Design for PM Challenges and Opportunities for Powder Metal Components in Transmission Technology. In Proceedings of the Procedia CIRP; Elsevier B.V.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; Volume 70, pp. 186–191. [Google Scholar]
  69. Banik, A.; Green, K.A.; Hardy, M.C.; Mourer, D.P.; Reay, T. Low Cost Powder Metal Turbine Components. Miner. Met. Mater. Soc. 2004, 571–576. [Google Scholar]
  70. Karayannis, V.; Lamprakopoulos, S.; Domopoulou, A.; Kyratsis, P.; Papapolymerou, G.; Spiliotis, X. Processing Of Steel Mill Scale For Manufacturing Novel Engineering Ceramics By Powder Metallurgy. Acad. J. Manuf. Eng. 2017, 15, 65. [Google Scholar]
  71. Selcuk, C.; Bond, S.; Woollin, P. Joining Processes for Powder Metallurgy Parts: A Review. Power Metall. 2010, 53, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Huang, J.; Issariyapat, A.; Kariya, S.; Umeda, J.; Kondoh, K. Low Alloy Titanium: A Sustainable Alternative for Laser Powder Bed Fusion. J. Jpn. Soc. Powder Powder Metall. 2025, 72, S187–S193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Parande, G.; Manakari, V.; Kopparthy, S.D.S.; Gupta, M. Utilizing Low-cost Eggshell Particles to Enhance the Mechanical Response of Mg–2.5 Zn Magnesium Alloy Matrix. Adv. Eng. Mater. 2018, 20, 1700919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Aslan, M. Powder Metallurgy in Additive Manufacturing: Trends, Challenges, Methods, Materials, and Emerging Applications. Powder Technol. 2026, 476, 122420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Yilmaz, S.S.; Unlu, B.S.; Kurgan, N.; Varol, R. Effect of Boronizing and Shot Peening on the Fatigue Properties of an Iron Based FeCu-Graphite P/M Material. Mater. Test. 2014, 56, 136–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Mascarenhas, J. Powder Metallurgy: A Major Partner of the Sustainable Development. In Proceedings of the Advanced Materials Forum II; Martins, R., Fortunato, E., Ferreira, I., Dias, C., Eds.; Trans Tech Publications Ltd.: Bäch, Switzerland, 2004; Volume 455–456, pp. 857–860. [Google Scholar]
  77. Khan, A.U.; Ali, Y. Sustainable Supplier Selection for the Cold Supply Chain (CSC) in the Context of a Developing Country. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 13135–13164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Kim, C. Performance Measurement and Optimization for Sustainable Production Process Improvement—Volume II. Processes 2023, 11, 2066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Khan, D.; Gupta, R.K. Production Optimization with the Maintenance of Environmental Sustainability Based on Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023, 26, 19425–19442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Zhang, J.; Wu, R.; Wang, H. Environmental Governance Innovation and Corporate Sustainable Performance in Emerging Markets: A Study of the Green Technology Innovation Driving Effect of China’s New Environmental Protection Laws. Sustainability 2025, 17, 6556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Wu, F.; Fu, X.; Zhang, T.; Wu, D.; Sindakis, S. Examining Whether Government Environmental Regulation Promotes Green Innovation Efficiency—Evidence from China’s Yangtze River Economic Belt. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Lehmann, P.; de Brito, M.M.; Gawel, E.; Groß, M.; Haase, A.; Lepenies, R.; Otto, D.; Schiller, J.; Strunz, S.; Thrän, D. Making the COVID-19 Crisis a Real Opportunity for Environmental Sustainability. Sustain. Sci. 2021, 16, 2137–2145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Xing, G.; Zhang, Y.; Guo, J. Environmental Regulation in Evolution and Governance Strategies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Hanuman, N.S.V.N.; Rao, P.G.; Kumar, B.S.; Karthik, N. On Modeling the CNC End Milling Characteristics of AL-7075/WC Powder Composites. In Proceedings of the International Conference On Functional Materials, Characterization, Solid State Physics, Power, Thermal And Combustion Energy (FCSPTC-2017); Malla, S.G., Sanjay, S.D., Khan, M.P., Eds.; AIP Publishing: Melville, NY, USA, 2017; Volume 1859. [Google Scholar]
  85. De Pascale, A.; Arbolino, R.; Szopik-Depczyńska, K.; Limosani, M.; Ioppolo, G. A Systematic Review for Measuring Circular Economy: The 61 Indicators. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 281, 124942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Colombini, G.; Rosa, R.; Ferrari, A.M.; Defanti, S.; Bassoli, E. Life Cycle Assessment of Lattice Structures: Balancing Mass Saving and Productivity. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 445, 141390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Yang, L.; Hu, H.; Yang, S.; Wang, S.; Chen, F.; Guo, Y. Life Cycle Carbon Footprint of Electric Arc Furnace Steelmaking Processes under Different Smelting Modes in China. Sustain. Mater. Technol. 2023, 35, e00564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Reijonen, J.; Silva, J.; Pulli, O.; Hahtonen, K.; Ulkuniemi, J.; Niskanen, J.; Puukko, P.; Metsä-Kortelainen, S. Comparative Life Cycle Inventory Of PBF Additive Manufacturing And CNC Machining. In Proceedings of the Euro PM2023 Proceedings; EPMA: Shrewsbury, UK, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  89. Parmentola, A.; Petrillo, A.; Tutore, I.; De Felice, F. Is Blockchain Able to Enhance Environmental Sustainability? A Systematic Review and Research Agenda from the Perspective of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Bus. Strategy Environ. 2022, 31, 194–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Saygin, D.; Gielen, D. Zero-Emission Pathway for the Global Chemical and Petrochemical Sector. Energies 2021, 14, 3772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Ercan, T.; Onat, N.C.; Keya, N.; Tatari, O.; Eluru, N.; Kucukvar, M. Autonomous Electric Vehicles Can Reduce Carbon Emissions and Air Pollution in Cities. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2022, 112, 103472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Grabowska, S.; Saniuk, S.; Gajdzik, B. Industry 5.0: Improving Humanization and Sustainability of Industry 4.0. Scientometrics 2022, 127, 3117–3144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Patwa, N.; Sivarajah, U.; Seetharaman, A.; Sarkar, S.; Maiti, K.; Hingorani, K. Towards a Circular Economy: An Emerging Economies Context. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 122, 725–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Stock, T.; Seliger, G. Opportunities of Sustainable Manufacturing in Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP 2016, 40, 536–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Ayati, S.M.; Shekarian, E.; Majava, J.; Wæhrens, B.V. Toward a Circular Supply Chain: Understanding Barriers from the Perspective of Recovery Approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 359, 131775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Rodríguez-Espíndola, O.; Cuevas-Romo, A.; Chowdhury, S.; Díaz-Acevedo, N.; Albores, P.; Despoudi, S.; Malesios, C.; Dey, P. The Role of Circular Economy Principles and Sustainable-Oriented Innovation to Enhance Social, Economic and Environmental Performance: Evidence from Mexican SMEs. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2022, 248, 108495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Sharma, N.K.; Govindan, K.; Lai, K.K.; Chen, W.K.; Kumar, V. The Transition from Linear Economy to Circular Economy for Sustainability among SMEs: A Study on Prospects, Impediments, and Prerequisites. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021, 30, 1803–1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Hysa, E.; Kruja, A.; Rehman, N.U.; Laurenti, R. Circular Economy Innovation and Environmental Sustainability Impact on Economic Growth: An Integrated Model for Sustainable Development. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Assoratgoon, W.; Kantabutra, S. Toward a Sustainability Organizational Culture Model. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 400, 136666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Isensee, C.; Teuteberg, F.; Griese, K.-M.; Topi, C. The Relationship between Organizational Culture, Sustainability, and Digitalization in SMEs: A Systematic Review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 275, 122944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Neves, E.C.; Nascimento, E.G.; Sacilotto, D.G.; Ferreira, J.Z.; Medeiros, J.L.B.; Biehl, L.V.; Lemos, G.V.B.; Martins, C.O.D.; Pacheco, D.A.J. Nondestructive Analysis of Corrosion in Ageing Hardened AA6351 Aluminium Alloys. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2022, 291, 126664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Vieira, E.R.; Biehl, L.V.; Medeiros, J.L.B.; da Silva, A.B.; da Silva, M.S. Effects of the Variation of the Concentration of Aqueous Polymer Solution Based on PVP in the Quenching of AISI 4140 Steel. Matéria 2019, 24, e12425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Zvekov, Y.A.; Gugina, E.M.; Shemetova, V.V.; Puzankova, E.A.; Tochilkin, V.V. Theory of Constraints in Machine Dynamics and Steelmaking Processes. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Industrial Engineering (ICIE 2022); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 309–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Souza, M.C.D.; Souza, T.A.; Vaccaro, G.L.R. Hospital bed management: An analysis from the perspective of the theory of constraints. Espacios 2016, 37, 3. [Google Scholar]
  105. Souza, M.C.D.; Korzenowski, A.L.; de Medeiros, F.A.; ten Caten, C.S.; Herzer, R. Standards for quality management in clinical laboratories. Espacios 2016, 37, 9. [Google Scholar]
  106. Le, T.P.; Wang, X.; Seita, M. An Optical-Based Method to Estimate the Oxygen Content in Recycled Metal Powders for Additive Manufacturing. Addit. Manuf. 2022, 59, 103127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Liao, J.; De Kleine, R.; Kim, H.C.; Luckey, G.; Forsmark, J.; Lee, E.C.; Cooper, D.R. Assessing the Sustainability of Laser Powder Bed Fusion and Traditional Manufacturing Processes Using a Parametric Environmental Impact Model. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2023, 198, 107138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Kuang, F.; Pan, Y.; Sun, J.; Liu, Y.; Lei, C.; Lu, X. Crafting High-Strength and Ductile Powder Metallurgy Ti6Al4V Alloy with a Multi-Scale Microstructure. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2024, 892, 146054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Mahesh; Singh, K.K.; Koti, V.; Rawat, P. Dependence of Secondary Operations in Powder Metallurgy and Their impact on the Electrical Conductivity of MWCNTs/Cu Nanocomposites. Mater. Today-Proc. 2022, 49, 2143–2148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Chen, C.; Liu, X.; Wang, X.; Jiu, S.; Chen, Y.; Liu, Y. Development of Sustainable Non-Autoclaved Aerated Concrete: Influence of Aluminium Powder on Mechanical Properties and Pore Structure of Geopolymers Based on Rockwool Furnace Bottom Slag Waste. Constr. Build. Mater. 2025, 472, 140957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Wang, Z.; Zhu, L.; Eslamirad, N.; Gilbert, E.P.; Zhu, Q.; Nicholls, T.; Han, J.; Jiang, Z. Effect of Grain Size and Intergranular Oxides at Prior Powder-Particle Boundaries on the Mechanical Properties of 316 Stainless Steels by Powder Metallurgy Hot Isostatic Pressing: Strengthening versus Embrittlement. J. Mater. Sci. 2025, 60, 15846–15861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Altuntas, O.; Güral, A. Effect of Spheroidizing Heat Treatment on the Microstructure, Hardness and Toughness of High Carbon Powder Metallurgy Steel. Kov. Mater. Met. Mater. 2017, 55, 303–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Ludwig, R.; Leuenberger, G.; Makarov, S.; Apelian, D. Electric Voltage Predictions and Correlation with Density Measurements in Green-State Powder Metallurgy Compacts. J. Nondestr. Eval. 2002, 21, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Murmu, U.K.; Sahu, S.; Ghosh, A.; Ghosh, M. Exploring Possibilities for Fabricating Cu–TiB2 Composite Through Different Powder Metallurgy Routes. J. Inst. Eng. (India) Ser. D 2023, 104, 247–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Jiang, X.; Liu, X.; Zhang, C. Feasibility Study of a New Rapid Tooling Process. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2005, 27, 296–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Hjorth, C.G. HIP Powder Metal Near-Net Shapes for Demanding Environment and Applications. J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 2007, 14, 121–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Biswal, S.R.; Sahoo, S. Investigation Of Structural And Mechanical Properties Of-Al2o3-Sic-Ws2 Hybrid Composites By Powder Metallurgy. Compos. Theory Pract. 2023, 23, 50–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Dani, I. Smart Components by Additive Technologies. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 480. [Google Scholar]
  119. Sutton, B.; Gandy, D. Assessment Of Powder Metallurgy-Hot Isostatic Pressed Nozzle-To-Safe End Transition Joints. In Proceedings of the ASME 2017 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 16–20 July 2017. [Google Scholar]
  120. Whittaker, D. Engineering The Green State Of Powder Products. Int. J. Powder Metall. 2009, 45, 298–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sustainability 18 05065 g001
Figure 1. PRISMA method.
Figure 1. PRISMA method.
Sustainability 18 05065 g001
Sustainability 18 05065 g002
Figure 2. Sustainability factors validated by experts.
Figure 2. Sustainability factors validated by experts.
Sustainability 18 05065 g002
Table 1. Factors influencing sustainability.
Table 1. Factors influencing sustainability.
Sustainability FactorsArticlesPillars of Sustainability
Product and process life cycle assessment[34,40,41,42]Environmental
Energy demand and efficiency of the production process[28,34,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55] Economic
Efficiency in the use of natural resources[32,52,53,55,56,57,58,59,60]Environmental
Operational efficiency and process stability[23,41,44,47,48,50,51,53,54,55,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70]Economic
Management and treatment of industrial waste[33,42,43,46,48,51,53,56,57,58,71]Environmental
Direct environmental impacts and emissions associated with the process[23,34,41,45,47,48,53,55,61,62,72]Environmental
Regulatory, institutional and public policy influence[23]Economic
Integration of the process into circular economy models[41,56,73]Economic
Minimization of material losses and waste[31,33,53,54,55,59,66,71,73]Environmental
Reintroduction of materials and by-products into the production cycle[32,56,57,58,59,60,73]Economic
Health, safety and working conditions[34]Social
Economic viability and competitiveness in the production process[32,34,46,53,54,55,58,62,71]Economic
Table 2. Participants’ years of experience.
Table 2. Participants’ years of experience.
Evaluator (s)Experience (Years)
12 years
230 years
325 years
413 years
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Radmann, L.; Domingos Dias Moraes, A.C.; Biehl, L.V.; Lima, R.M.; Silva, B.P.d.; Souza, M.C.d.; Medeiros, J.L.B. Factors Influencing Sustainability in Powder Metallurgy: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2026, 18, 5065. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18105065

AMA Style

Radmann L, Domingos Dias Moraes AC, Biehl LV, Lima RM, Silva BPd, Souza MCd, Medeiros JLB. Factors Influencing Sustainability in Powder Metallurgy: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability. 2026; 18(10):5065. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18105065

Chicago/Turabian Style

Radmann, Luan, Ana Caroline Domingos Dias Moraes, Luciano Volcanoglo Biehl, Rui M. Lima, Bibiana Porto da Silva, Mariane Cásseres de Souza, and Jorge Luis Braz Medeiros. 2026. "Factors Influencing Sustainability in Powder Metallurgy: A Systematic Literature Review" Sustainability 18, no. 10: 5065. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18105065

APA Style

Radmann, L., Domingos Dias Moraes, A. C., Biehl, L. V., Lima, R. M., Silva, B. P. d., Souza, M. C. d., & Medeiros, J. L. B. (2026). Factors Influencing Sustainability in Powder Metallurgy: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability, 18(10), 5065. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18105065

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop