Search results

The emerging industrial revolution referred to as Industry 5.0 is focusing on leveraging human creativity with intelligent and autonomous systems to derive user-friendly work environment for the businesses. Industry 5.0 stresses on people centric work ecosystem, zero accident policy and the well-being of labour within the production processes. This approach of Industry 5.0 to obtain human-centric safety solutions through the deployment of digital technologies deduces workplace accidents and costs leading to the development of Safety 4.0. This chapter aims to investigate the opportunities and challenges of Safety 4.0 and its enabling technologies aspiring towards the greater impact on safety management. Further, we have proposed a framework for the role of human centric digital transformations concerning safety in the manufacturing industry propelling Safety 4.0. Concluding, we discuss the implications for managers and practitioners. We found that Safety 4.0 will strengthen industrial safety, and instead of reacting to accidents, the concept evolved towards a preventive and proactive approach for a healthy industrial ecosystem.

The set of 2,509 documents related to the human-centric aspect of manufacturing were retrieved from Scopus database and systmatically analyzed. Using an unsupervised machine learning approach based on Latent Dirichlet Allocation we were able to identify latent topics related to human-centric aspect of Industry 5.0.

This study aims to create a scientific map of the human-centric aspect of manufacturing and thus provide a systematic framework for further research development of Industry 5.0.

In this study a 140 unique research topics were identified, 19 of which had sufficient research impact and research interest so that we could mark them as the most significant. In addition to the most significant topics, this study contains a detailed analysis of their development and points out their connections.

Industry 5.0 has three pillars – human-centric, sustainable, and resilient. The sustainable and resilient aspect of manufacturing has been the subject of many studies in the past. The human-centric aspect of such a systematic description and deep analysis of latent topics is currently just passing through.

Both technological and human-centric perspectives need to be acknowledged when combining lean production practices and Industry 4.0 (I4.0) technologies. This study aims to explore and explain how lean production practices and I4.0 technologies may coexist to enhance the human-centric perspective of manufacturing operations in the era of Industry 5.0 (I5.0).

The research approach is an explorative and longitudinal case study. The qualitative data collection encompasses respondents from different job functions and organizational levels to cover the entire organization. In total, 18 interviews with 19 interviewees and five focus groups with a total of 25 participants are included.

Identified challenges bring forth that manufacturing organizations must have the ability to see beyond lean production philosophy and I4.0 to meet the demand for a human-centric perspective in socially sustainable manufacturing in the era of Industry 5.0.

The study suggests that while lean production practices and I4.0 practices may be considered separately, they need to be integrated as complementary approaches. This underscores the complexity of managing simultaneous organizational changes and new digital initiatives.

The research presented illuminates the elusive phenomena comprising the combined aspects of a human-centric perspective, specifically bringing forth implications for the co-existence of lean production practices and I4.0 technologies, in the transformation towards I5.0.

The study contributes to new avenues of research within the field of socially sustainable manufacturing. The study provides an in-depth analysis of the human-centric perspective when transforming organizations towards Industry 5.0.

The Airbus A320 family engine fan cowl doors (FCDs) safety issue is known to the industry for almost 18 years; however, it has not been addressed adequately by the aircraft manufacturer and the various operators and regulating authorities. The purpose of this paper is to examine in a systematic way the possible operational and safety implications of a new modification on the engine FCDs.

An array of error-prone scenarios is presented and analysed under the prism of human factors in a non-exhaustive qualitative scenario analysis.

All examined scenarios are considered more or less probable. A number of accident prevention solutions are proposed for each of the scenario examined, in view of the acceptance and implementation of this modification by operators.

As these scenarios are neither exhaustive nor have been tested/validated in actual aircraft maintenance practice, the further analysis is necessary. A substantial follow-up survey should take place, which should include a wider array of scenarios. This would allow obtaining the necessary data for a quantitative (statistical) analysis.

This case study identifies issues in relation to this modification, introduced by Airbus and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which may prove problematic from the point of view of safety effectiveness and disruption of operations.

This case study examines a long-standing aviation safety issue and the implications of a solution proposed by the aircraft manufacturer and adopted by EASA. This can be useful in increasing the awareness around these issues and highlight the importance of a human-centric and scenario-based design of engineering modifications towards minimising error in aircraft technical operations.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate food supply chain stakeholders’ intention to use Industry 5.0 (I5.0) drones for cleaner production in food supply chains.

The authors used a quantitative research design and collected data using an online survey administered to a sample of 264 food supply chain stakeholders in Nigeria. The partial least square structural equation model was conducted to assess the research’s hypothesised relationships.

The authors provide empirical evidence to support the contributions of I5.0 drones for cleaner production. The findings showed that food supply chain stakeholders are more concerned with the use of I5.0 drones in specific operations, such as reducing plant diseases, which invariably enhances cleaner production. However, there is less inclination to drone adoption if the aim was pollution reduction, predicting seasonal output and addressing workers’ health and safety challenges. The findings outline the need for awareness to promote the use of drones for addressing workers’ hazard challenges and knowledge transfer on the potentials of I5.0 in emerging economies.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to address I5.0 drones’ adoption using a sustainability model. The authors contribute to existing literature by extending the sustainability model to identify the contributions of drone use in promoting cleaner production through addressing specific system operations. This study addresses the gap by augmenting a sustainability model, suggesting that technology adoption for sustainability is motivated by curbing challenges categorised as drivers and mediators.

Following the imperative for human-centric digital innovation brought by the paradigm of Industry 5.0, the article aims to integrate the dispersed and multi-disciplinary literature on individual risks for workers to define, explain and predict individual risks related to Industry 4.0 technologies.

The paper follows the question, “What is the current knowledge and evidence base concerning risks related to Industry 4.0 technologies, and how can this inform digital innovation management in the manufacturing sector through the lens of the Industry 5.0 paradigm?” and uses the method of systematic literature review to identify and discuss potential risks for individuals associated with digital innovation. N = 51 contributions met the inclusion criteria.

The literature review indicates dominant trends and significant gaps in understanding risks from a human-centric perspective. The paper identifies individual risks, their interplay with different technologies and their antecedents at the social, organizational and individual levels. Despite this, the paper shows how the literature concentrates in studying risks on only a limited number of categories and/or concepts. Moreover, there is a lack of consensus in the theoretical and conceptual frameworks. The paper concludes by illustrating an initial understanding of digital innovation via a human-centered perspective on psychological risks.

Findings yield practical implications. In investing in the adoption, generation or recombination of new digital technologies in organizations, the paper recommends managers ensure to prevent risks at the individual level. Accordingly, the study’s findings can be used as a common starting point for extending the repertoire of managerial practices and interventions and realizing human-centric innovation.

Following the paradigm of Industry 5.0, the paper offers a holistic view of risks that incorporates the central role of the worker as crucial to the success of digital innovation. This human-centric perspective serves to inform the managerial field about important factors in risk management that can result in more effective targeted interventions in risk mitigation approaches. Lastly, it can serve to reinterpret digital innovation management and propose future avenues of research on risk.

The fifth industrial revolution, known as Industry 5.0, envisions an industry that is innovative, resilient, socio-centric, and competitive while minimizing negative environmental and social impacts, respecting people, the planet, and prosperity. Industry 5.0 is replacing earlier advancements and it is successful because it reaches the pinnacle of perfection. Additionally, machine work saves human workers time and effort. It is built on the concept of fusing digitalization elements from the fourth industrial revolution with Sustainable Development Goals through human-centric solutions, bio-inspired technologies, and secure data transfer. Industry 5.0 mentions about the various opportunities, constraints, and potential directions for future research. Industry 5.0 places less emphasis on technology and focus on human collaboration for progress, it supposed to have a shift in existing paradigm. Industry 5.0 is necessary in contemporary business with the paid technology advancements in order to get competitive advantages as well as economic growth for the manufacturing and it has three drivers: “green transition”, “digital transition”, and “competitive transition”. The goal of green transition is to prevent climate change and environmental degradation. This necessitates changes to current economic growth strategies. The goal of digital transition is to support the circular economy by modernizing digital strategies in terms of digital skills, data, technologies, and infrastructure. Competitive transition aims to convert marketing policies, regulations, standards to increase people's prosperity and business value. It focuses on business and marketing rules that are fair, competitive, innovative, and adaptable.

Open data are characterized by a number of economic, environmental, technological, innovative, and social benefits. They are seen as a significant contributor to the city’s transformation into smart city. This is all the more so when the society is on the border of Society 5.0, that is, shift from the information society to a super smart society or society of imagination takes place. However, the question constantly asked by open data experts is, what are the key factors to be met and satisfied in order to achieve promised benefits? The current trend of openness suggests that the principle of openness should be followed not only by data but also research, education, software, standard, hardware, etc., it should become a philosophy to be followed at different levels, in different domains. This should ensure greater transparency, eliminating inequalities, promoting, and achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs). Therefore, many agendas (sustainable development strategies, action plans) now have openness as a prerequisite. This chapter deals with concepts of open (government) data and Society 5.0 pointing to their common objectives, providing some success stories of open data use in smart cities or transformation of cities toward smart cities, mapping them to the features of the Society 5.0. We believe that this trend develops a new form of society, which we refer to as “open data-driven society.” It forms a bridge from Society 4.0 to Society 5.0. This chapter attempts to identify the role of openness in promoting human-centric smart society, smart city, and smart living.

Against the background of the I50 paradigm, this paper queries in what ways blockchain and blockchain-based applications deployed in the smart city context facilitate the integration of the I50 paradigm in smart urban contexts.

A mixed methods approach is applied. First, by means of desk research and thematic literature review, a conceptual model integrating the I50 paradigm, smart city and blockchain-based solutions is built. Second, science mapping bibliometric analysis (SciMat) based on keywords’ co-occurrence is applied to a sample of 491 research articles to identify key domains of blockchain-based applications’ use in smart city. Third, a semi-systematic literature review complements insights gained through SciMat. Fourth, the findings are interpreted through the precepts of the conceptual model devised earlier.

The key blockchain-based applications in smart cities pertain to two domains, i.e. the foundational, service facilitation-oriented domain, including security (and safety), networks, computing, resource management and the service delivery-oriented domain, including mobility, energy and healthcare. Blockchain serves as the key building block for applications developed to deliver functions specific to each of the thus identified domains. A substantial layering of blockchain-based tools and applications is necessary to advance from the less to the more complex functional domains of the smart city.

At the conceptual level, the intricacies of the (making of the) I50 paradigm are discussed and a case for I50 – smart city – blockchain nexus is made. Easton’s input–output model as well as constructivism is referenced. At the empirical level, the key major domains of blockchain-based applications are discussed; those that bear the prospect of integrating the I50 paradigm in the smart city are highlighted. At the methodological level, a strategic move is made aimed at restoring the literature review’s role as subservient to the key line of exploration, to justify and ultimately support it, rather than to showcase the literature review as the ultimate purpose for itself.

This study addresses the implications of smart city development paths (techno-centric and human-centric) by investigating the evolution of a city strategy, focusing on how different actors in a dialogue centred on strategic planning documents for Saint Petersburg, Russia, visualised the smart city and then made it calculable.

The authors conducted a case study based on a documentary analysis supported by ethnographic elements relying on the smart city conceptual proposals, the approved city strategy and the artifacts of expert discussions leading to the strategy implementation plan.

Through the lens of dialogue theory, the authors show how government and non-government actors in different organisational settings devised techno-centric smart city calculations, which arose despite an initial human-centric vision.

While the case study allowed the study to illustrate the depth and richness of the context of the authoritarian Russian state where the role of citizens in public decision-making is rather limited, different and even contrasting results could be produced in other contexts.

There is a gap between a smart city vision and its grounding in calculations. Thus, the human-centric elements require special attention, and the organisation of the dialogue on smart city strategy must enable plurality of voices besides those of government actors.

The case suggests viewing the human-centric and techno-centric perspectives not as dichotomous, but rather emerging consecutively throughout the journey from an initial strategic vision to its implementation in the city's calculations.