Industry 4.0 Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review on the Role of Blockchain Technology in Creating Smart and Sustainable Manufacturing Facilities
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Industry 4.0
2.2. BCT
- (i)
- BCT is intended to be “distributed and synchronised via networks”, allowing companies to connect and exchange data, and, therefore, is suitable for multi-actor enterprise networks that consist of SCs or financial partnerships.
- (ii)
- BCTs provide “smart contracts”, which are agreements that parties form beforehand and hold within the network. “A smart contract” is a code protocol designed to promote, validate, or execute the agreed clauses and conditions of the contract on a digital basis. This allows for the execution of legitimate contracts without the need for third-party interference because it is entirely performed digitally. This also affords various parties on the network the mutual trust that everyone will comply with the rules.
- (iii)
- BCT relies on using “P2P networks”, where an agreement on the validity of a transaction is reached among all relevant parties, and these networks serve to keep incorrect or possibly deceitful transactions away from the database.
- (iv)
- Lastly, BCT is considered “data immutable”, which means that the agreed-upon transactions are logged and not altered. It offers a history of assets; thus, it is easy to know where it is, where it has been, and what has occurred in every object in its lifetime.
- (i)
- Non-localization (decentralized database): Centralized databases are more vulnerable to hacking, manipulation, or crashing. By contrast, decentralized databases are more reliable and trusted due to the reliability of the intermediary or other network members [65];
- (ii)
- Security: This is an essential requirement for reliable and long-term information exchange. It is necessary for managing the demands among members of the network [66]. Transaction history is only available to authorized network users, while no one else can remove or change data without the consent of others;
- (iii)
- (iv)
- Smart execution: Another feature of BCT is the self-execution of digital transactions using decentralized cryptographic mechanisms that astutely bridge protocols and user interfaces to foster regulated and secure communications across computer networks [24].
2.3. Key Classification of BCT
3. Methodology
4. Analysis and Results
4.1. Descriptive Analysis
4.2. BC-Based SC
4.3. Key Features for Implementing BCT in SCs
- Traceability, accountability, and visibility: The most common use of BCT for SC purposes is the verification of the source of the goods (mainly the location, time, and producer) and details of the route of the flow of goods from the starting point “its origin” (the back-end SC) to the place of consumption (the front-end SC). “Traceability, accountability, and visibility” issues are critical in providing quality logistics services to customers. To increase the accuracy of tracking the goods from their source to their final destination, BCT is commonly employed in conjunction with RFID tags for items that have different product details and are scanned in a non-contact transfer manner through radio waves imitating different “scanners” [66]. Once the data are gathered and digitized, BCT enables its verification, insertion into a shared distributed ledger, enhancement, and real-time validation. Therefore, BCT serves as a tool for mapping the SC and as a protected platform for exchanging “information”. The benefits of using BCT to record and share information are that all participants in the SC have equal access to real-time updates on product movements and operations [66].
- Boosting demand forecast: The difficulty of forecasting demand is becoming more acute as product life cycles shorten and manufacturing lead times extend. In these scenarios, SCs are increasingly confronting the possibility of either an overabundance of production capacity (stemming from decreased consumer demand) or inadequate product availability [20]. Nevertheless, traditional methods of information sharing, such as the use of an electronic data exchange network to incorporate various coding standards (standards), or the introduction of an “integrated ERP system” to gain “visibility”, are costly and impractical. This is due to BCTs relying on an alternative technology, namely, “peer-to-peer networking”. In this peer-to-peer network, each node serves as a repository for the entire transaction history, encompassing both client and server activities. This distributed approach ensures that all nodes agree on the current state of the ledger, safeguarding data consistency [20]. Consequently, BCTs find an efficient and long-term exchange of information that is central to the management of demand in the supply network [66]. In practice, this means that on the basis of available orders, every entity within the SC develops its demand estimate based on the orders placed by the downstream link (from the distributed ledger). These demands are referred to as derived demands.
- Improved partnership, contract management, and governance of SC partners: The “creation and management” of SCs or network partnerships as per the traditional (“conventional”) method necessitates collaborative efforts, including information dissemination and resource sharing, decision-making coordination, alignment of interests, and a process of trusted exchange [13,79,87,98,100,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110]. As SCs consist of a series or “network” of interconnected partnerships, the competitive edge of SCs can only be sustained by a positive inter-organizational cooperation among SC participants. Information transparency is a feature of BCT resulting in fast and reliable information shared with the entire community of BCT users. If the BCT features apply to the entire SC of the final product, these BCT features forward information immediately and whenever necessary to all approved actors of the distributed network within the SC, including suppliers of product components [79]. Consequently, this improves SC partnerships and overall performance. In addition, a smart contract execution also improves contract management and the governance of SC partners. A “smart contract” is a self-executing computer program that mimics a traditional contract to oversee digital assets and clearly define the rights and responsibilities of the involved SC members [20]. Upon meeting a set of criteria, the “smart contract” will execute automatically without any human intervention. It can streamline the negotiation process, standardize the terms, automate the execution, and facilitate the real-time monitoring of the contract’s performance. Consequently, specific tasks (e.g., payments) can be carried out through an open disclosure (“transparency”) and effectively [20].
- Improved manufacturing cycle: A substantial volume of information is produced during the manufacturing cycle, ranging from tracking the origins of conflict-free raw materials to implementing process improvement methodologies as in the case of Lean and Six Sigma methodologies. BCT validates manufacturing parameters that are perceived as bulk operations. Smart contracts, equipped with executive powers, can enforce and validate terms and conditions to facilitate the large scale automation of units [111]. By leveraging BC, high-quality data can be centralized, standardized, and shared with all participants in a network to enable better decision-making. BCT can also assist in the additive manufacturing process through constructing a more documentable and design-related process [63].
4.4. Role of BCT in the Development of Smart and Sustainable Manufacturing Facilities
4.5. Potential Use of BCT to Facilitate SCM
4.6. How BCT Can Be Used to Make Manufacturing More Sustainable
5. Discussion
- Developing new business models: a dynamic network of interconnected businesses, facilitated by BCT, seamlessly collaborating to create and deliver value to customers in entirely new ways.
- Fostering innovative ecosystems: BCT can empower the creation of collaborative environments where startups, established companies, and research institutions can co-innovate and bring revolutionary ideas to life.
- Achieving value innovation: by leveraging BCT’s transparency and traceability features, businesses can optimize their operations, develop data-driven insights, and create new revenue streams through improved products and services.
- Reduce costs: streamlined, automated processes enabled by BCT can lead to significant cost savings in areas like production, logistics, and inventory management.
- Accelerate time to market: improved transparency and shorter production cycles facilitated by BCT can bring new technologies to market faster, giving businesses a competitive edge.
6. Conclusions, Implications, and Limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Khan, I.S.; Ahmad, M.O.; Majava, J. Industry 4.0 innovations and their implications: An evaluation from sustainable development perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 405, 137006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cirillo, V.; Fanti, L.; Mina, A.; Ricci, A. New digital technologies and firm performance in the Italian economy. Ind. Innov. 2023, 30, 159–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oduro, S.; De Nisco, A. From Industry 4.0 adoption to innovation ambidexterity to firm performance: A MASEM analysis. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mubarik, M.S.; Naghavi, N.; Mubarik, M.; Kusi-Sarpong, S.; Khan, S.A.; Zaman, S.I.; Kazmi, S.H.A. Resilience and cleaner production in industry 4.0: Role of supply chain mapping and visibility. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 292, 126058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, F. A supply chain traceability system for food safety based on HACCP, blockchain & Internet of things. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Service Systems and Service Management, Dalian, China, 16–18 June 2017; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Jeble, S.; Dubey, R.; Childe, S.J.; Papadopoulos, T.; Roubaud, D.; Prakash, A. Impact of big data and predictive analytics capability on supply chain sustainability. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2018, 29, 513–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kshetri, N. 1 Blockchain’s roles in meeting key supply chain management objectives. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 39, 80–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Queiroz, M.M.; Wamba, S.F. Blockchain adoption challenges in supply chain: An empirical investigation of the main drivers in India and the USA. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 46, 70–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Y.; Zhang, J.Z.; Cao, Y.; Kazancoglu, Y. Intelligent transformation of the manufacturing industry for Industry 4.0: Seizing financial benefits from supply chain relationship capital through enterprise green management. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2021, 172, 120999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bag, S.; Yadav, G.; Dhamija, P.; Kataria, K.K. Key resources for industry 4.0 adoption and its effect on sustainable production and circular economy: An empirical study. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 281, 125233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalenogare, L.S.; Benitez, G.B.; Ayala, N.F.; Frank, A.G. The expected contribution of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 204, 383–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chae, H.-C.; Koh, C.E.; Park, K.O. Information technology capability and firm performance: Role of industry. Inf. Manag. 2018, 55, 525–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alazab, M.; Alhyari, S.; Awajan, A.; Abdallah, A.B. Blockchain technology in supply chain management: An empirical study of the factors affecting user adoption/acceptance. Clust. Comput. 2021, 24, 83–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anand, A.; Fosso Wamba, S.; Sharma, R. The effects of firm IT capabilities on firm performance: The mediating effects of process improvement. In Proceedings of the ACIS 2013 Proceedings, Phuket, Thailand, 31 October–2 November 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Weill, P. The relationship between investment in information technology and firm performance: A study of the valve manufacturing sector. Inf. Syst. Res. 1992, 3, 307–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Díaz-Chao, Á.; Ficapal-Cusí, P.; Torrent-Sellens, J. Environmental assets, industry 4.0 technologies and firm performance in Spain: A dynamic capabilities path to reward sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 281, 125264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erkmen, T.; Günsel, A.; Altındağ, E. The role of innovative climate in the relationship between sustainable IT capability and firm performance. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, X.; Yang, Y. Big data analytics for improving financial performance and sustainability. J. Syst. Sci. Inf. 2021, 9, 175–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Del Gaudio, B.L.; Porzio, C.; Sampagnaro, G.; Verdoliva, V. How do mobile, internet and ICT diffusion affect the banking industry? An empirical analysis. Eur. Manag. J. 2021, 39, 327–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helo, P.; Hao, Y. Blockchains in operations and supply chains: A model and reference implementation. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2019, 136, 242–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cole, R.; Stevenson, M.; Aitken, J. Blockchain technology: Implications for operations and supply chain management. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2019, 24, 469–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eljazzar, M.M.; Amr, M.A.; Kassem, S.S.; Ezzat, M. Merging supply chain and blockchain technologies. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1804.04149. [Google Scholar]
- Büchi, G.; Cugno, M.; Castagnoli, R. Smart factory performance and Industry 4.0. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2020, 150, 119790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salmerón-Manzano, E.; Manzano-Agugliaro, F. The role of smart contracts in sustainability: Worldwide research trends. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rejikumar, G.; Raja Sreedharan, V.; Arunprasad, P.; Persis, J.; Sreeraj, K.M. Industry 4.0: Key findings and analysis from the literature arena. Benchmarking Int. J. 2019, 26, 2514–2542. [Google Scholar]
- Reischauer, G. Industry 4.0 as policy-driven discourse to institutionalize innovation systems in manufacturing. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2018, 132, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghobakhloo, M. The future of manufacturing industry: A strategic roadmap toward Industry 4.0. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2018, 29, 910–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sony, M.; Naik, S. Critical factors for the successful implementation of Industry 4.0: A review and future research direction. Prod. Plan. Control 2020, 31, 799–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, D.; Lee, C.K.; Lau, H.; Yang, Y. Strategic response to Industry 4.0: An empirical investigation on the Chinese automotive industry. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2018, 118, 589–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agostini, L.; Filippini, R. Organizational and managerial challenges in the path toward Industry 4.0. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2019, 22, 406–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luthra, S.; Kumar, A.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Mangla, S.K.; Garza-Reyes, J.A. Industry 4.0 as an enabler of sustainability diffusion in supply chain: An analysis of influential strength of drivers in an emerging economy. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 1505–1521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stentoft, J.; Adsbøll Wickstrøm, K.; Philipsen, K.; Haug, A. Drivers and barriers for Industry 4.0 readiness and practice: Empirical evidence from small and medium-sized manufacturers. Prod. Plan. Control 2021, 32, 811–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wamba, S.F.; Queiroz, M.M. Industry 4.0 and the supply chain digitalisation: A blockchain diffusion perspective. Prod. Plan. Control 2022, 33, 193–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moeuf, A.; Lamouri, S.; Pellerin, R.; Tamayo-Giraldo, S.; Tobon-Valencia, E.; Eburdy, R. Identification of critical success factors, risks and opportunities of Industry 4.0 in SMEs. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 1384–1400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, Y.; Liu, C.; Kevin, I.; Wang, K.; Huang, H.; Xu, X. Digital Twin-driven smart manufacturing: Connotation, reference model, applications and research issues. Robot. Comput. -Integr. Manuf. 2020, 61, 101837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frank, A.G.; Dalenogare, L.S.; Ayala, N.F. Industry 4.0 technologies: Implementation patterns in manufacturing companies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 210, 15–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mariani, M.; Borghi, M. Industry 4.0: A bibliometric review of its managerial intellectual structure and potential evolution in the service industries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2019, 149, 119752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benitez, G.B.; Ayala, N.F.; Frank, A.G. Industry 4.0 innovation ecosystems: An evolutionary perspective on value cocreation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020, 228, 107735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matthyssens, P. Reconceptualizing value innovation for Industry 4.0 and the Industrial Internet of Things. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2019, 34, 1203–1209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stentoft, J.; Rajkumar, C. The relevance of Industry 4.0 and its relationship with moving manufacturing out, back and staying at home. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 2953–2973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Machado, C.G.; Winroth, M.P.; Ribeiro da Silva, E.H.D. Sustainable manufacturing in Industry 4.0: An emerging research agenda. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 1462–1484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Foropon, C.; Godinho Filho, M. When titans meet–Can industry 4.0 revolutionise the environmentally-sustainable manufacturing wave? The role of critical success factors. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2018, 132, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamble, S.S.; Gunasekaran, A.; Ghadge, A.; Raut, R. A performance measurement system for industry 4.0 enabled smart manufacturing system in SMMEs-A review and empirical investigation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020, 229, 107853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosin, F.; Forget, P.; Lamouri, S.; Pellerin, R. Impacts of Industry 4.0 technologies on Lean principles. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 1644–1661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tortorella, G.L.; Giglio, R.; Van Dun, D.H. Industry 4.0 adoption as a moderator of the impact of lean production practices on operational performance improvement. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2019, 39, 860–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiarini, A.; Kumar, M. Lean Six Sigma and Industry 4.0 integration for Operational Excellence: Evidence from Italian manufacturing companies. Prod. Plan. Control 2021, 32, 1084–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hahn, G.J. Industry 4.0: A supply chain innovation perspective. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 1425–1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ivanov, D.; Dolgui, A.; Sokolov, B. The impact of digital technology and Industry 4.0 on the ripple effect and supply chain risk analytics. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 829–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Núñez-Merino, M.; Maqueira-Marín, J.M.; Moyano-Fuentes, J.; Martínez-Jurado, P.J. Information and digital technologies of Industry 4.0 and Lean supply chain management: A systematic literature review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 5034–5061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leang, Y.K.; Rasiah, R. Diffusion of IR4. 0 Technologies in Electronics Manufacturing: The Role of the Embedding Ecosystem. In Digitalization and Development; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2023; pp. 49–67. [Google Scholar]
- Gibson, I.; Rosen, D.W.; Stucker, B.; Khorasani, M.; Rosen, D.; Stucker, B.; Khorasani, M. Additive Manufacturing Technologies; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; Volume 17. [Google Scholar]
- Chryssolouris, G.; Mavrikios, D.; Papakostas, N.; Mourtzis, D.; Michalos, G.; Georgoulias, K. Digital manufacturing: History, perspectives, and outlook. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 2009, 223, 451–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.; Bagheri, B.; Kao, H.-A. A cyber-physical systems architecture for industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems. Manuf. Lett. 2015, 3, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Armbrust, M.; Fox, A.; Griffith, R.; Joseph, A.; Katz, R.; Konwinski, A.; Lee, G.; Patterson, D.; Rabkin, A.; Stoica, I.; et al. A view of cloud computing. Commun. ACM 2010, 53, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderl, R. Industrie 4.0–Technological approaches, use cases, and implementation. at-Automatisierungstechnik 2015, 63, 753–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, M.; Wan, J.; Gonzalez, S.; Liao, X.; Leung, V.C. A survey of recent developments in home M2M networks. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2013, 16, 98–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yao, X.; Zhou, J.; Zhang, J.; Boër, C.R. From intelligent manufacturing to smart manufacturing for industry 4.0 driven by next generation artificial intelligence and further on. In Proceedings of the 2017 5th International Conference on Enterprise Systems (ES), Beijing, China, 22–24 September 2017; pp. 311–318. [Google Scholar]
- Rojko, A. Industry 4.0 concept: Background and overview. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 2017, 11, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roblek, V.; Meško, M.; Krapež, A. A complex view of industry 4.0. Sage Open 2016, 6, 2158244016653987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayat, A.; Shahare, V.; Sharma, A.K.; Arora, N. Introduction to Industry 4.0. In Blockchain and Its Applications in Industry 4.0; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 29–59. [Google Scholar]
- Javaid, M.; Haleem, A.; Singh, R.P.; Khan, S.; Suman, R. Blockchain technology applications for Industry 4.0: A literature-based review. Blockchain Res. Appl. 2021, 2, 100027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, A.K.; Khandait, S. A novel software tool to generate customer needs for effective design of online shopping websites. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Comput. Sci. 2016, 83, 85–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamble, S.; Gunasekaran, A.; Arha, H. Understanding the Blockchain technology adoption in supply chains-Indian context. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 2009–2033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Francisco, K.; Swanson, D. The supply chain has no clothes: Technology adoption of blockchain for supply chain transparency. Logistics 2018, 2, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baker, J.; Steiner, J. Blockchain: The Solution for Transparency in Product Supply Chains; Provenance: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Dujak, D.; Sajter, D. Blockchain applications in supply chain. In SMART Supply Network; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 21–46. [Google Scholar]
- Chang, Y.; Iakovou, E.; Shi, W. Blockchain in global supply chains and cross border trade: A critical synthesis of the state-of-the-art, challenges and opportunities. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 58, 2082–2099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, M. Blockchain for Dummies (2nd IBM Li); John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Cook, D.J.; Mulrow, C.D.; Haynes, R.B. Systematic reviews: Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann. Intern. Med. 1997, 126, 376–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tranfield, D.; Denyer, D.; Smart, P. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. J. Manag. 2003, 14, 207–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hart, C. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination; Sage: London, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Kitchenham, B.; Brereton, P. A systematic review of systematic review process research in software engineering. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2013, 55, 2049–2075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, Y.; Deschamps, F.; Loures, E.d.F.R.; Ramos, L.F.P. Past, present and future of Industry 4.0-a systematic literature review and research agenda proposal. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2017, 55, 3609–3629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dybå, T.; Dingsøyr, T. Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2008, 50, 833–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- 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]
- Saberi, S.; Kouhizadeh, M.; Sarkis, J.; Shen, L. Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 2117–2135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roeck, D.; Sternberg, H.; Hofmann, E. Distributed ledger technology in supply chains: A transaction cost perspective. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 2124–2141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manupati, V.K.; Schoenherr, T.; Ramkumar, M.; Wagner, S.M.; Pabba, S.K.; Inder Raj Singh, R. A blockchain-based approach for a multi-echelon sustainable supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 2222–2241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.-S.; Shin, N. The impact of blockchain technology application on supply chain partnership and performance. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tijan, E.; Aksentijević, S.; Ivanić, K.; Jardas, M. Blockchain technology implementation in logistics. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanfar, A.A.; Iranmanesh, M.; Ghobakhloo, M.; Senali, M.G.; Fathi, M. Applications of blockchain technology in sustainable manufacturing and supply chain management: A systematic review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braccini, A.M.; Margherita, E.G. Exploring organizational sustainability of industry 4.0 under the triple bottom line: The case of a manufacturing company. Sustainability 2018, 11, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ko, T.; Lee, J.; Ryu, D. Blockchain technology and manufacturing industry: Real-time transparency and cost savings. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, A.; Li, H. The effect of blockchain technology on supply chain sustainability performances. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rathor, S.; Zhang, M.; Im, T. Web 3.0 and Sustainability: Challenges and Research Opportunities. Sustainability 2023, 15, 15126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Upadhyay, A.; Mukhuty, S.; Kumar, V.; Kazancoglu, Y. Blockchain technology and the circular economy: Implications for sustainability and social responsibility. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 293, 126130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alhyari, S.; Alazab, M.; Venkatraman, S.; Alazab, M.; Alazab, A. Performance evaluation of e-government services using balanced scorecard. Benchmarking Int. J. 2013, 20, 512–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Subramanian, H. Decentralized blockchain-based electronic marketplaces. Commun. ACM 2017, 61, 78–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agrawal, T.K.; Kumar, V.; Pal, R.; Wang, L.; Chen, Y. Blockchain-based framework for supply chain traceability: A case example of textile and clothing industry. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2021, 154, 107130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Preuveneers, D.; Joosen, W.; Ilie-Zudor, E. Trustworthy data-driven networked production for customer-centric plants. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2017, 117, 2305–2324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casado-Vara, R.; Prieto, J.; De la Prieta, F.; Corchado, J.M. How blockchain improves the supply chain: Case study alimentary supply chain. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2018, 134, 393–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kawaguchi, N. Application of blockchain to supply chain: Flexible blockchain technology. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2019, 164, 143–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Kang, K.; Wang, B.; Zhong, R.Y.; Zhang, A. System architecture for blockchain based transparency of supply chain social sustainability. Robot. Comput. -Integr. Manuf. 2020, 63, 101896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leng, K.; Bi, Y.; Jing, L.; Fu, H.-C.; Van Nieuwenhuyse, I. Research on agricultural supply chain system with double chain architecture based on blockchain technology. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 86, 641–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siba, K.; Prakash, A. Block-chain: An evolving technology. Glob. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2016, 8, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christidis, K.; Devetsikiotis, M. Blockchains and smart contracts for the internet of things. IEEE Access 2016, 4, 2292–2303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, K.; Tan, L.; Aloqaily, M.; Yang, H.; Jararweh, Y. Blockchain-enhanced data sharing with traceable and direct revocation in IIoT. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2021, 17, 7669–7678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alazab, M.; Awajan, A.; Mesleh, A.; Abraham, A.; Jatana, V.; Alhyari, S. COVID-19 Prediction and Detection Using Deep Learning. Int. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. Ind. Manag. Appl. 2020, 12, 168–181. [Google Scholar]
- Qiao, R.; Zhu, S.; Wang, Q.; Qin, J. Optimization of dynamic data traceability mechanism in Internet of Things based on consortium blockchain. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2018, 14, 1550147718819072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suifan, T.S.; Diab, H.; Alhyari, S.; Sweis, R.J. Does ethical leadership reduce turnover intention? The mediating effects of psychological empowerment and organizational identification. J. Hum. Behav. Soc. Environ. 2020, 30, 410–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, X.; Zhang, G.; Zhang, Y. A Comprehensive Review of Blockchain Technology-Enabled Smart Manufacturing: A Framework, Challenges and Future Research Directions. Sensors 2022, 23, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thiruchelvam, V.; Mughisha, A.S.; Shahpasand, M.; Bamiah, M. Blockchain-based technology in the coffee supply chain trade: Case of burundi coffee. J. Telecommun. Electron. Comput. Eng. 2018, 10, 121–125. [Google Scholar]
- Alhyari, S. Supply Chain Management Paradigms and Their Impact on Competitive Priorities: An Applied Study on Jordanian Airlines Industry. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, The World Islamic Sciences and Education University, Amman, Jordan, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Alhyari, S.; Al-Ali, A.M.; Nuseir, M. Assessing Supply Chain Partnership Performance in Services Organization: Conceptual Model. Afr. Dev. Resour. Res. Inst. J. 2014, 7, 2. [Google Scholar]
- Alhyari, S.; Alazab, M.; Venkatraman, S.; Alazab, M.; Alazab, A. Six Sigma approach to improve quality in e-services: An empirical study in Jordan. Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res. 2012, 8, 57–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alhyari, S.; Alhyari, M. Toward quality measurement approaches for improving E-government services in Jordan. In It in the Public Sphere: Applications in Administration, Government, Politics, and Planning; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2014; pp. 82–98. [Google Scholar]
- Alqudah, S.; Shrouf, H.; Suifan, T.; Alhyari, S. A Moderated Mediation Model of Lean, Agile, Resilient, and Green Paradigms in the Supply Chain. Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt. Vol. 2020, 9, 158–172. [Google Scholar]
- Suifan, T.; Alazab, M.; Alhyari, S. Trade-off among lean, agile, resilient and green paradigms: An empirical study on pharmaceutical industry in Jordan using a TOPSIS-entropy method. Int. J. Adv. Oper. Manag. 2019, 11, 69–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suifan, T.; Saa’da, R.; Alazab, M.; Sweis, R.; Abdallah, A.; Alhyari, S. Quality of Information Sharing, Agility, and Sustainability of Humanitarian Aid Supply Chains: An Empirical Investigation. Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt. Vol. 2020, 9, 1. [Google Scholar]
- Suifan, T.S.; Alhyari, S.; Sweis, R.J. A moderated mediation model of intragroup conflict. Int. J. Confl. Manag. 2019, 31, 91–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shanley, A. Real-time logistics. Internet of things, advanced analytics, and blockchain solutions such as smart contracts promise to give manufacturers more control over products and supply chains. Biopharm Int. 2017, 9, 47–58. [Google Scholar]
- Appelbaum, D.; Smith, S.S. Blockchain basics and hands-on guidance: Taking the next step toward implementation and adoption. CPA J. 2018, 88, 28–37. [Google Scholar]
- Filipova, N. Blockchain–An opportunity for developing new business models. Bus. Adm. 2018, 28, 75–92. [Google Scholar]
- Biswas, K.; Muthukkumarasamy, V.; Tan, W.L. Blockchain based wine supply chain traceability system. In Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC) 2017, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 29–30 November 2017; pp. 56–62. [Google Scholar]
- Angrish, A.; Craver, B.; Hasan, M.; Starly, B. A case study for Blockchain in manufacturing:“FabRec”: A prototype for peer-to-peer network of manufacturing nodes. Procedia Manuf. 2018, 26, 1180–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koonce, L. The wild, distributed world: Get ready for radical infrastructure changes, from blockchains to the interplanetary file system to the internet of things. Intellect. Prop. Technol. Law J. 2016, 28, 3. [Google Scholar]
- Kewell, B.; Adams, R.; Parry, G. Blockchain for good? Strateg. Change 2017, 26, 429–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Treiblmaier, H.; Umlauff, U. Blockchain and the future of work: A self-determination theory approach. Blockchain Econ. Implic. Distrib. Ledger Technol. 2019, 105–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hald, K.S.; Kinra, A. How the blockchain enables and constrains supply chain performance. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2019, 49, 376–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Leary, D.E. Configuring blockchain architectures for transaction information in blockchain consortiums: The case of accounting and supply chain systems. Intell. Syst. Account. Financ. Manag. 2017, 24, 138–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Esmaeilian, B.; Sarkis, J.; Lewis, K.; Behdad, S. Blockchain for the future of sustainable supply chain management in Industry 4.0. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 163, 105064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schulz, K.A.; Gstrein, O.J.; Zwitter, A.J. Exploring the governance and implementation of sustainable development initiatives through blockchain technology. Futures 2020, 122, 102611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Type of BC | Description | Access | Examples |
---|---|---|---|
Permissionless or public BCT | Public BCTs are decentralized, institution-free, completely public, and peer networks which any member can join (perform transactions and join in the consensus process) without the need for permissions from other members. | Open to anyone | Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana |
Private BCT | Private BCTs are those that hold centralized write and/or read permissions for a single organization. There are some disputes about whether these can be classified as BCTs, i.e., multi-chain, where a number of banks approve the network. | Controlled by a specific group of people or organizations | Hyperledger Fabric, Corda, Quorum |
Permissioned or permitted BCT | Permissioned or Permitted BCTs are an integration of both “public and private BCTs”. These are similar to a federation model, like Ripple, where a group allows new members to join with the permission of existing members, similar to accessing an exclusive club. These BCTs may also grant selected authorizations to carry out certain activities in the network [68]. | Limited number of users, but users are not necessarily known to each other | Ripple, R3 Corda, Hedera Hashgraph |
Year of Publication | Web of Science | Scopus | Science Direct | IEEEXplore | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | 2 | 14 | 1 | 0 | 17 |
2019 | 9 | 23 | 14 | 3 | 49 |
2020 | 19 | 41 | 33 | 9 | 102 |
2021 | 32 | 139 | 67 | 19 | 257 |
2022 | 48 | 180 | 125 | 13 | 366 |
2023 (up to August 4) | 39 | 52 | 150 | 7 | 248 |
Grand Total | 149 | 449 | 390 | 51 | 1039 |
Inclusion/Exclusion | Criteria | Clarification |
---|---|---|
Exclusion | Language disparity | An article’s title and abstract may be in English, but the content may be in another language. |
Unrelated content | A research paper is not the same as an academic journal article; e.g., “editorial materials”, “letters, or forewords are not articles”. Unrelated papers that do not emphasize IR4.0-technologies, leading to “innovativeness”, or the associated sustainability outcomes. 1: IR4.0 innovation is only used as a case in point. 2: Smart Manufacturing is regarded as an immanent feature of IR4.0 rather than a consequence of BCT implementation. 3: The IR 4.0 innovations have no additional implications for sustainability/TBL. | |
Inclusion | Time frame | Papers published in “peer-reviewed journals” between 2018 and August 2023 are the only ones involved. |
Related content | The link between the research constructs should be examined from the perspective of IR4.0-led innovations and sustainability, rather than the reverse. | |
Review articles | The related content criteria do not apply to review articles. This means that regardless of the causal relationship flow stated above, review articles will be incorporated if they tackle all of the research constructs. |
Journal Name | Count of Articles | Citation |
---|---|---|
International Journal of Production Research | 14 | [31,34,40,41,44,47,48,49,63,67,73,76,77,78] |
Sustainability | 9 | [17,24,79,80,81,82,83,84,85] |
Journal of Cleaner Production | 5 | [1,4,10,16,86] |
Production Planning & Control | 4 | [28,32,33,46] |
Technological Forecasting and Social Change | 5 | [9,23,26,37,42] |
International Journal of Production Economics | 4 | [11,36,38,43] |
Benchmarking: An International Journal | 2 | [25,87] |
Communications of the ACM | 2 | [54,88] |
Computers & Industrial Engineering | 2 | [20,89] |
European Journal of Innovation Management | 2 | [3,30] |
Industrial Management & Data Systems | 2 | [29,90] |
Information and Software Technology | 2 | [72,74] |
International Journal of Information Management | 2 | [7,8] |
Procedia Computer Science | 2 | [91,92] |
Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing | 2 | [35,93] |
British Journal of Management | 1 | [70] |
Cluster Computing | 1 | [13] |
European Management Journal | 1 | [19] |
Future Generation Computer Systems | 1 | [94] |
Global Journal of Enterprise Information System | 1 | [95] |
IEEE Access | 1 | [96] |
IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials | 1 | [56] |
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics | 1 | [97] |
Industry and Innovation | 1 | [2] |
Information & Management | 1 | [12] |
Information Systems Research | 1 | [15] |
International Journal of Computer Information Systems and Industrial Management Applications | 1 | [98] |
International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks | 1 | [99] |
International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science | 1 | [62] |
International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies | 1 | [58] |
International Journal of Operations & Production Management | 1 | [45] |
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing | 1 | [39] |
Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment | 1 | [100] |
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management | 1 | [27] |
Journal of Systems Science and Information | 1 | [18] |
Logistics | 1 | [64] |
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal | 1 | [21] |
The International Journal of Logistics Management | 1 | [6] |
Key Research Areas | Year | Author(s) | Publication Channel | Citations Count * |
---|---|---|---|---|
IR4.0 adoption; Sustainable innovation and circular economy | 2021 | [10] | Journal of Cleaner Production | 13,767 |
BCT solutions; Sustainability implications | 2018 | [94] | Future Generation Computer Systems | 5347 |
BCT in supporting the key objectives of SCs; Manufacturing and SC sustainability | 2019 | [76] | International Journal of Production Research | 2640 |
IR4.0 acceptance; Sustainability implications | 2018 | [29] | Industrial Management & Data Systems | 2196 |
IR4.0 technologies; Firm performance; BCT solutions; Sustainability implications | 2021 | [16] | Journal of Cleaner Production | 1940 |
IR4.0 revolutionize the environmental sustainability; Smart manufacturing | 2018 | [42] | Technological Forecasting and Social Change | 1426 |
BCT roles in achieving SC objectives; Sustainability implications | 2018 | [7] | International Journal of Information Management | 1077 |
IR4.0 technologies; BCT solutions; SC sustainability and traceability | 2020 | [31] | International Journal of Production Research | 998 |
IR4.0 innovations; BCT benefits; Smart manufacturing | 2018 | [27] | Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management | 920 |
BCT adoption; SC performance; Sustainability and smart manufacturing | 2019 | [8] | International Journal of Information Management | 844 |
Application Area | Explanation | Practical Example |
---|---|---|
Ensuring data security | BCT uses its chain storage structure with timestamps to ensure data security in smart manufacturing systems [63,101]. Every block of data in the BCT is immutable because it possesses a timestamp and a link to the former block. Furthermore, the encryption algorithm safeguards data security. BCT’s traceability facilitates the optimization of manufacturing systems by tracking the journey of materials and products from source to destination within the SC [13,66]. This helps manufacturers to identify and address inefficiencies. | In an actual situation, BCT-enabled industrial IoT is able to mitigate the risks of information loss and malicious interference as a result of malicious activity on any single network node. |
Increasing data sharing | BCT enhances data sharing through its distributed ledger technology, which allows all participants to simultaneously record and share information [97]. This enables both up-and-down-stream actors to share data in real time. Moreover, BC’s privacy protection mechanisms encrypt sensitive data, addressing the inconsistencies between data privacy and sharing [35]. As a result, BCT can break down information silos and enable effective data sharing among various parties. | In a practical example, a BC-based logistics data-sharing platform can accelerate document transfer and reconciliation, improving overall logistics performance. |
Traceability and trust mechanism | BCT can serve as a “trust machine and/or mechanism” for all parties in smart manufacturing [99]. Critical data throughout the design, production, and sales processes are cooperatively managed through trusted mechanisms [99,101]. Producers, vendors/contractors, distributors, and other smart manufacturing actors communicate transparent and trustworthy data, establishing trust relations between them [99]. | In practice, BCT can eliminate the need for supplier background checks and product quality inspections, further reducing the cost of smart manufacturing. |
System development and performance improvement | BCT significantly improves system coordination. Paperless, digital transactions and reliable electronic memory based on BCT critically enhance a firm’s transaction efficiency [35,101]. Additionally, BC’s smart contracts support partnership between up-and-down stream actors in the smart manufacturing and the entire SC. Consequently, BCT becomes a capable driver for the synchronized development of the entire “smart manufacturing system” [20,79,111]. | In practice, a BCT-based smart procurement platform can advance procurement coordination and support the transparency of industry trade relationships. |
Key Performance Area | SC Objectives | BCT Enabling Features | BC’s Roles | Supporting References |
---|---|---|---|---|
SC transparency and real-time information sharing | data availability | Non-localization | One key empowering feature of BCT is its ability to democratize data access by distributing it across a network of peers, as BCT is based on a decentralized structure. This is because the system user must “record” the transaction with the BCT P2P network in order to preserve the backup of the ledger. The digital ledger is available to all users, regardless of their physical location, to track and manage data | [79,80,91,95,112,113,114] |
data immutability | Security | “Information immutability” forbids unauthorized changes or deletions of information or data without the permission of the network participants. More specifically, the moment the transaction is accepted by a consensus algorithm, the block embedded in the BCT will prevail. | [79,80,95,113] | |
data consistency | Auditability | Considering the above discussion and the availability and immutability characteristics of the SC transparency, the BCT with a decentralized ledger, similar to the “stock ledger”, serves as “a single unified data source”, providing a unified and verifiable record of all SC activity, ensuring that all participants are operating on the same term [21]. For example, manufacturing companies that use BCT may be able to improve the efficiency and transparency of their production, assembly, supply, and repair processes by ensuring that all participants follow the same rules [115]. | [21,76,102,112,115] | |
SC speed and reliability | SC visibility | Non-localization and Auditability | BCT may encourage companies to broaden the visibility of their SCs beyond level (tier) one and to react, such as those proposed in modern legislation on SC dependency. However, in cases of short, local SCs, the cost–benefit of using BCT might be questionable [21]. | [7,21,22,88,94,102,116] |
SC traceability | Non-localization and Security | The features of BCs (decentralized ledger and security) make them particularly suitable for applications involving traceability. Each time goods and their accompanying paperwork (such as shipping manifests or notifications) are transferred between different participants in the SC, there is a risk of fraud or theft. But with BCT, we can track the item’s journey from its source to its current location. This gives end-users more confidence in the information they receive because no single entity can change the data on the BCT without the consent of all participants [64]. | [7,64,76,88,91,102,114,116,117,118] | |
Cost and risk reduction | reduction of errors | Non-localization, Security, and Auditability | BCT can automatically update shared data whenever it is changed, speed up the process of getting new products to customers and other SC actors, and also decrease the number of mistakes made by humans and the amount of time it takes to process things. BCT can ensure that data are safe and accurate, which makes it less expensive to prevent malicious or arbitrary changes to data, growing risks to the SC, and making a business less trustworthy and reliable [48]. | [48,76,90,112,113] |
reduction of attacks | Non-localization and Auditability | BCT can uniquely help to improve the security of both cyber and physical systems, while also ensuring that the chain of custody for evidence is maintained. Digital ownership of an asset could be transferred instantly and without friction once a set of pre-defined criteria have been satisfied. “BCT” can “trace and control” the transactions throughout their journey as well as in a highly secure manner as follows [67]: (i) each authorized user on the network has a “unique identifier”, and only the intended recipient can process a transaction, which helps to prevent misuse; (ii) the cryptographic security, which is also known as a “Block encryption”, of BCT and its decentralized structure make it difficult for hackers and criminal organizations to attack the network. | [67,68,90,119] | |
reduction in structural complexity | Non-localization, Security, and Auditability | As mentioned above for the reduction of attacks and errors using BCT, one of the primary motivations behind the BCT framework is to improve productivity while simultaneously reducing the costs and complexity of the SC by eliminating duplication and human error through digitization, where all documented information is shared in a transparent public ledger rather than in the binders of individual companies participating in the SC. | [88,116,119] | |
SC flexibility | SC coordination | Non-localization and Auditability | BCT can be seen as a better solution for coordinating the SC network. By increasing “visibility”, any entity in the SC network will be able to keep tabs on the status of the products as they pass through the SC. This will allow all parties to follow the whereabouts of specific commodities or containers in transit. Entities can monitor the status of “customs records”, “report invoices”, and “track” other forms of data in an instantaneous fashion [120]. This claim is confirmed by [119] as the ability of each node in the BCT to see everything (i.e., product and document flow). Another advantage of full SC flexibility is preventing repeating similar or identical duties and facilitating communication between different locations in the SC. | [7,22,67,79,92,94,116,119,120] |
SC flexibility | SC restructuring and innovations | Non-localization, Security, and Auditability | Drawing upon the findings of the “Market Watch report (2019)”, the role of BCT in the SC market is expected to be seen as disruptive and sustaining innovation as well as advanced transformation, enabling participants (SC actors) to access everything they want on a single platform. In addition, the BCT can potentially be viewed as an incentive to reconsider critical decisions concerning, for example, “sustainability and product sourcing” [117]. This is likely to be seen as a BCT arrangement for gaining revolutionary new insights into the product’s sources. These insights, in turn, can motivate organizations and other SC members to adjust their procurement strategies away from unsuitable suppliers and toward new, much more sustainable, and innovative ones. This can give rise to opportunities for new product ideas and new markets, as data get resilient and adhere to the various components that pass through the SC. | [76,88,117] |
SC sustainability | SC sustainability (“environmental, social, and economic performance”) | Non-localization, Security, and Auditability | In terms of environmental sustainability, BCT can be used to monitor low-standard goods effectively to detect more product transactions that can help reduce preprocessing and reprocessing and help mitigate excessive resource consumption and pollution from “greenhouse gases”. This is due to the centralized nature of conventional power mechanisms, whereas a “peer-to-peer network” based on BCT “energy system technology” would minimize the demand for long-distance electricity transmission, saving a significant amount of energy lost during transmission over long distances [76]. In terms of economical sustainability, BCTs can result in a disintermediation of the SC, where fewer third parties participate in transaction costs and time reductions that minimize the duplication and redundancy of the SC. It may also immediately transfer any changes to the data, enabling likely faster product and procedure delivery while reducing errors caused by humans and processing times. Regarding social sustainability, the traceability of BCT facilitates social sustainability through enhanced “human rights”, “protections and fairness”, and “safe working conditions”, i.e., a detailed record of a product’s provenance instills in consumers a sense of assurance that the items they acquire originate from responsible sources. | [76,102,117] |
Strategic SC Partnership Management | SC partnerships | Non-localization, Security, and Auditability | BCT is viewed as a tool for strengthening trust in transactions as well as a potential enabler of cross-border mutual exchange of ownership. Increased transparency and visibility would also encourage SC participants to learn more about the BC’s embedded partner companies. This enables partners to interact instantaneously across a vast area encompassing various nations and worldwide [119]. In practice, integrating BCT and IoT technologies offers durable, authentically collaborative distributed networks and the ability to communicate with partners in a secure, accountable manner, which is completely unlike conventional IT or database solutions [96]. Since it has the potential to not only build credibility between system players (such as customers, manufacturers, and distributors), it may additionally provide a trustworthy platform that ensures the confidentiality needed by network actors. | [7,22,79,88,96,119] |
contract management and SC governance | Non-localization and Smart execution | It can be noted that the decentralized structure of BCTs and the smart contract minimize the transaction costs of entering into and enforcing SC agreements [112]. This facilitates the formalization and compliance of agreements throughout the SC. In other words, it regulates the partnership arrangements between companies as well as all other types of actors in the SC and the properties they own. [91]. | [7,79,88,91,94,96,112,117]; | |
SC capability | SC competencies | Non-localization, Security, Auditability, Smart execution | In the light of the above-mentioned discussion on non-location, security, auditability, and smart execution features of BC-based SC technology, BCT can be considered a technique that leads to enhanced management capabilities by leveraging existing SC assets and competencies [119]. These capabilities include logistical, relational, and informational capabilities. | [118,119]; |
Sustainability Factor | Main Measures | Main Challenges | BCT Solutions | Supporting References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Economic Factor |
|
| Reliability: BCT enables distributed and synchronized dissemination of data among SC participants, which can improve the accuracy and efficiency of information sharing. BCT’s “immutability” ensures that data cannot be altered, which, in turn, leads to more reliable customer service, supplier service, forecasts, and stock levels. Responsiveness: Direct Connections and Distributed Operations—BCT provides direct connections among SC stakeholders as well as distributed ledgers that streamline transaction processes to decrease associated costs, time, and waste, making the SC more responsive to changes in demand or disruption. Smart contract solutions can automate the execution of SC agreements, streamlining processes and reducing manual interventions. Flexibility: Consensus Agreements and Resource Sharing—BCT provides its SC partners with the means to develop consensus agreements and share resources, which enables agile decision-making and partnership optimization. Smart contracts provide an effective and flexible means to draft flexible SC agreements that can adapt to changing conditions. Financial Performance: BCT’s P2P network can assist in lowering costs associated with product development, resource use, and waste while increasing transparency among SC participants resulting in lower transaction expenses and improved financial performance. BC’s immutability helps prevent fraud or errors which further contributes to reduced expenses and enhanced financial results. Quality: BCT can help to enhance data availability and sharing among SC stakeholders, which can improve quality management and assurance practices. BC’s immutability can help to ensure that product quality records are accurate and cannot be tampered with. | [63,76,77,81,82,83,86,89,94] |
Environmental Factor |
|
| Environmental management: BCT, through the distributed and synchronized feature, as well as its data immutability feature, can be used to track the sourcing, production, and transportation of raw materials and finished products. This can help manufacturers to identify and reduce environmental impacts. Exploitation of resources: BCT can be used to create a decentralized marketplace for recycled materials throughout its smart contracts and P2P network features. This may help manufacturers to reduce their reliance on virgin materials and minimize waste; e.g., manufacturers can create a platform where buyers and sellers of recycled materials can connect directly. It can help reduce transaction expenses and enhance the effectiveness of recycling processes. Pollution: BCT can help manufacturers track emissions from transportation vehicles, which, in turn, helps them reduce their carbon footprint. Manufacturers could create a system that tracks the fuel consumption and emissions of their fleet vehicles; using this information, they could identify strategies to lower emissions further. Ecosystem: BCT, through a smart contracts feature, can automate the execution of environmental management practices, such as product recalls and recycling programs. This can help to save resource cost and reduce emissions. In practice, manufacturers can create a smart contract that automatically triggers a product recall if a product is found to be defective. This can help to minimize the environmental impact of product recalls. | [1,10,16,42,76,77,78,81] |
Social Factor |
|
| Worker Well-being and Work Conditions: BCT with its smart contracts can automate safety audits and training sessions based on predefined criteria. These data are accessible through a distributed network, ensuring transparency and trust in safety protocols. Human Rights: in a complex global SC, a manufacturer employs BCT to trace the origin of raw materials. The BCT feature of peer-to-peer networks involving suppliers and relevant stakeholders ensures that no materials are sourced from regions with a history of child labor or human rights violations. This guarantees adherence to ethical standards and prevents any engagement with unethical practices. Corporate Social Responsibility: A manufacturing firm is committed to supporting local communities. Utilizing BCT, the company maintains a transparent record of investments in local healthcare, education, and job creation initiatives. The immutability of these data ensures that the community can easily verify the company’s contributions, fostering trust and accountability. Customer Satisfaction: utilizing the synchronized and distributed network offered by BCT, customers engage directly with the manufacturing process, selecting features and configurations. This real-time collaboration guarantees that the final product aligns precisely with the customer’s specifications, resulting in high levels of satisfaction. Fair Trading, Accountability, and Transparency: smart contracts integrated into the BCT automatically verify that suppliers adhere to fair trade principles. The immutability of data ensures that historical records of fair trading practices remain unaltered, enhancing the company’s reputation for transparency and accountability. | [78,81,84,86,89,93,122] |
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. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Alazab, M.; Alhyari, S. Industry 4.0 Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review on the Role of Blockchain Technology in Creating Smart and Sustainable Manufacturing Facilities. Information 2024, 15, 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15020078
Alazab M, Alhyari S. Industry 4.0 Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review on the Role of Blockchain Technology in Creating Smart and Sustainable Manufacturing Facilities. Information. 2024; 15(2):78. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15020078
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlazab, Moutaz, and Salah Alhyari. 2024. "Industry 4.0 Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review on the Role of Blockchain Technology in Creating Smart and Sustainable Manufacturing Facilities" Information 15, no. 2: 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15020078
APA StyleAlazab, M., & Alhyari, S. (2024). Industry 4.0 Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review on the Role of Blockchain Technology in Creating Smart and Sustainable Manufacturing Facilities. Information, 15(2), 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15020078