Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0-Inception, conception and perception

Abstract

Industry 4.0, an initiative from Germany, has become a globally adopted term in the past decade. Many countries have introduced similar strategic initiatives, and a considerable research effort has been spent on developing and implementing some of the Industry 4.0 technologies. At the ten-year mark of the introduction of Industry 4.0, the European Commission announced Industry 5.0. Industry 4.0 is considered to be technology-driven, whereas Industry 5.0 is value-driven. The coexistence of two Industrial Revolutions invites questions and hence demands discussions and clarifications. We have elected to use five of these questions to structure our arguments and tried to be unbiased for the selection of the sources of information and for the discussions around the key issues. It is our intention that this article will spark and encourage continued debate and discussion around these topics.

Full text

Journal of Manufacturing Systems 61 (2021) 530–535
0278-6125/© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Society of Manufacturing Engineers.
Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0—Inception, conception and perception
Xun Xu
a
,
*, Yuqian Lu
a
, Birgit Vogel-Heuser
b
, Lihui Wang
c
a
Department of Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
b
Institute of Automation and Information Systems, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
c
Department of Production Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
ARTICLE INFO
Keywords:
Industrial Revolution
Industry 4.0
Industry 5.0
Technology-driven
Value-driven
ABSTRACT
Industry 4.0, an initiative from Germany, has become a globally adopted term in the past decade. Many countries
have introduced similar strategic initiatives, and a considerable research effort has been spent on developing and
implementing some of the Industry 4.0 technologies. At the ten-year mark of the introduction of Industry 4.0, the
European Commission announced Industry 5.0. Industry 4.0 is considered to be technology-driven, whereas
Industry 5.0 is value-driven. The co-existence of two Industrial Revolutions invites questions and hence demands
discussions and clarications. We have elected to use ve of these questions to structure our arguments and tried
to be unbiased for the selection of the sources of information and for the discussions around the key issues. It is
our intention that this article will spark and encourage continued debate and discussion around these topics.
1. Introduction
The Fourth Industrial Revolution (a.k.a. Industry 4.0, translated from
Industrie 4.0 as in German) originated in 2011 from a project in the
high-tech strategy of the German government. It advanced the concept
of Cyber Physical Systems (CPS) [1,2] into Cyber Physical Production
Systems (CPPS) [3]. SmartFactory is one of the key associated initiatives
of Industry 4.0 [4]. The term Industry 4.0 was publicly introduced in
2011 at the Hannover Fair [1,2], and it is on the back of the following
denitions of the rst three Industrial Revolutions. The First Industrial
Revolution was marked by a transition from manual production
methods to machines powered by steam or water. Thanks to electricity,
the Second Industrial Revolution transformed factories into modern
production lines resulting in high productivity and signicant economic
growth. The Third Industrial Revolution saw eld-level computers like
Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) and communication technologies
in the production process, leading to automated production. In the In-
dustry 4.0 era, production systems, in the form of CPPS, can make
intelligent decisions through real-time communication and cooperation
between “manufacturing things
1
” [5], enabling exible production of
high-quality personalized products at mass efciency [6,7]. To progress
the initiative and ensure a coordinated, cross-sectoral approach, the
professional associations BITKOM, VDMA and ZVEI have established the
joint Industrie 4.0 Platform [8]. Globally, many countries have intro-
duced similar strategic initiatives, for example, Industrial Internet
Consortium (USA), Industria 4.0 (Italy), Produktion 2030 (Sweden),
Made in China 2025, and Society 5.0 (Japan), to name a few.
As businesses started to embrace Industry 4.0, along came the Fifth
Industrial Revolution (Industry 5.0). Industry 5.0 is understood to
recognize the power of industry to achieve societal goals beyond jobs
and growth, to become a resilient provider of prosperity, by making
production respect the boundaries of our planet and placing the well-
being of the industry worker at the center of the production process [9,
10]. The introduction of Industry 5.0 is based on the observation or
assumption that Industry 4.0 focuses less on the original principles of
social fairness and sustainability but more on digitalization and
AI-driven technologies for increasing the efciency and exibility of
production. The concept of Industry 5.0, therefore, provides a different
focus and point of view and highlights the importance of research and
innovation to support the industry in its long-term service to humanity
within planetary boundaries [9]. Indeed, leading up to this formal
introduction of Industry 5.0, there have been some discussions about
“Age of Augmentation” where the human and machine reconcile and
work in symbiosis [11]. Similarly, Bednar and Welch [12] described
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: x.xu@auckland.ac.nz (X. Xu).
1
Though manufacturing and production are sometimes used interchangeably, we make the following differentiations. Manufacturing is the process in which raw
material is converted into the tangible products, whereas production creates utility made for the purpose of the consumption. Therefore, production is a broader term
involving, for example, manufacturing, logistics and nance.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Manufacturing Systems
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmansys
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.10.006
Received 28 September 2021; Received in revised form 6 October 2021; Accepted 8 October 2021

Journal of Manufacturing Systems 61 (2021) 530–535
531
“Smart Working” practices.
It is fair to say that co-existence of the two Industrial Revolutions has
promoted a few questions. The questions are rooted in the scientic
community as well as the industry. With no attempt to be exhaustive,
some of these questions are:
•To what extent is Industry 4.0 technology-centric and oblivious of
human-centricity, sustainability and resilience?
•Can Industry 4.0 enabling technologies also help realize the goals of
Industry 5.0, or do we need to develop new Industry 5.0
technologies?
•Is Industry 5.0 a chronological continuation of Industry 4.0, similar
to their predecessors (i.e., Industry 1.0 through to Industry 4.0)?
•Are we living amongst two Industrial Revolutions, or effectively one
– techno-social revolution?
•What would industry’s journeys of Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 look
like?
This article intends to stand on an unbiased ground to ascertain the
landscape co-occupied by both Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0, and to
shed some light on possible ways of responding to these questions and
possibly more. If the above questions echo some of your bafements, it is
the authors’ hope that you will be in a better position to respond to some
of the questions after reading this article. It is also the authors’ intention
to spark and encourage further discussions about these topics. The
following two sections intend to provide an accurate but succinct ac-
count of Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 more at their intersections than
otherwise. We nish off with discussions around the imposed questions
and set a stage for continued debates.
In order to remain focused, this article makes no attempt to dene
and discuss what an “Industrial Revolution”, or Industry 4.0 and In-
dustry 5.0 are. The main associated concepts are considered well un-
derstood, with the only exception of Industry 5.0, a more nascent term.
The debate over Revolution vs Evolution is still ongoing but also falls
outside the scope of this article.
2. Understanding Industry 4.0
Industry 4.0 refers to the intelligent networking of machines and
processes for the industry based on CPS – a technology that achieves
intelligent control using embedded networked systems [8,13]. There are
different understandings of Industry 4.0, albeit all agree upon the
Reference Architecture Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI4.0). RAMI4.0 was
developed by the German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers’
Fig. 1. Reference Architecture Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI4.0) [16].
X. Xu et al.

Journal of Manufacturing Systems 61 (2021) 530–535
532
Association (ZVEI) to support Industry 4.0 initiatives [14]. RAMI 4.0
model consists of a three-dimensional coordinate system (Fig. 1(a)) that
depicts the architecture of Industry 4.0 systems. The "Hierarchy Levels"
axis is derived from the information model of automation [15] and
represents the different functionalities within factories or facilities; the
"Layers" axis describes the decomposition of a machine into its proper-
ties and the "Life Cycle Value Stream" axis represents the life cycle of
facilities and products. The latter includes business models and the
benet of using Industry 4.0 as well. Fig. 1(b) summarizes some of the
characteristics of Industry 4.0 components based on RAMI4.0.
Vogel-Heuser and Hess [1] discussed the main design principles of
Industry 4.0, which are summarized as the following:
•Service-oriented reference architecture.
•Intelligent, self-organizing CPPS.
•Interoperability between CPPS and humans.
•Adaptability and exibility to changing requirements.
•Optimization for Overall Equipment Effectiveness.
•Data integration across disciplines and entire life cycle.
•Reliable and secured communications between businesses.
•Data security.
2.1. Technology, exibility and productivity-focused
Industry 4.0 is considered a technology-driven revolution to achieve
higher efciency and productivity and, as a high-tech strategy of the
government, to enhance Germany’s competitiveness in a global market.
This may be further reinforced by the three dimensions of RAMI4.0
(Fig. 1(a)), i.e., Product Life Cycle, Business Layers and Factory Hier-
archy. Boston Consulting Group identied nine key enabling technolo-
gies of Industry 4.0 [17], i.e., Big data and analytics, Autonomous
robots, Simulation, Horizontal and vertical system integration, Indus-
trial Internet of Things, Cybersecurity, Cloud, Additive Manufacturing,
and Augmented Reality. These technologies underpin the ve Industry
4.0 central research themes [18]:
•Horizontal integration through value networks
•End-to-end engineering across the entire value chain
•Vertical integration and networked manufacturing systems
•Cyber-Physical Systems technology
•New social infrastructures in the workplace
2.2. Sustainability, resilience and human-centric
Industry 4.0 may have been considered as a technology-driven
transformation. Some considerations and projected impacts from soci-
etal needs, such as sustainability, human-centricity and resilience, are
also visible.
2.2.1. Resource-efcient, sustainable and resilient industries
Industry 4.0 intends to address challenges such as resource and en-
ergy efciency, urban production, societal needs, and demographic
change [18]. In order to reduce the consumption of energy and re-
sources, changes in manufacturing processes and the design of ma-
chinery and plant are required.
The Green Production Index is suggested as one of the main decision-
supporting KPIs, together with the basic data required to make trans-
parent, resource-oriented investment decisions [18]. Though Industry
4.0 is pre-Covid, an Example Application was discussed, i.e., “Sudden
change of supplier during production due to a crisis beyond the manu-
facturer’s control” [18]. Industry 4.0 makes the necessary changes
smoother by running simulations of the affected downstream services,
thus allowing different suppliers to be evaluated and the best alternative
to be selected.
2.2.2. Human-centric approach
Industry 4.0 may not be considered a human-centric initiative. That’s
as may be, the like of human-machine cooperation or operator assistant
technologies, socio-technical approach, and work-life balance is not to
be ignored.
2.2.2.1. Technologies. Industry 4.0 promotes new socio-technical in-
frastructures by transforming different aspects of a workplace such as
health management and work organization, lifelong learning and career
path models, team structures and knowledge management. This is
described as a socio-technical approach of the Industry 4.0 initiative
leading to a paradigm shift in human-technology and human-
environment interactions [18]. It is anticipated that a worker’s role is
set to change signicantly due to the increased use of technologies that
are more open, virtual and extensive [18]. This is reected by some of
the design principles of Industry 4.0 [1]. Reective of the second and
third design principles (i.e., Information transparency and Technical
assistance) is the increased use of the technologies such as robot-assisted
systems and augmented reality (AR) to provide workers with real-time
information in order to improve decision-making and work procedures
[19–21].
2.2.2.2. Worker up-skilling and re-skilling, and workers’ wellbeing. Smart
assistance systems release workers from routine tasks so that they can
focus on more creative and value-added activities. Flexible work orga-
nization is promoted to enable all workers to continue professional
development more effectively and have a better work-life balance. The
relevant technologies will also allow older workers to extend their
working lives and remain productive longer [18]. It has been recognized
that in a smart factory, the role of employees will change signicantly.
Implementation of a socio-technical approach to work organization will
offer workers the opportunity to enjoy greater responsibility and
enhance their personal development [18,22].
Industry 4.0’s socio-technical approach strives for the so-called
motto, “better, not cheaper”. It argues that adopting an extreme
version of the Taylorist approach to work organization based on
frequent repetition of highly standardized and monotonous tasks is
hardly the most promising way to implement Industry 4.0. The fact that
smart factories will be congured as highly complex, dynamic and
exible systems means they will need empowered employees to act as
decision-makers and controllers [18].
2.3. Demonstrations and use cases
The past decade has seen a large number of demonstrations, testbeds
and use cases for Industry 4.0 implementations, most of which are in the
form of smart factories or elements of smart factories. Some of the ex-
amples include SmartFactory
KL
, a network of industry and research or-
ganizations [6,23], the French initiative Industrie du future [24], and
the Japanese Robot Revolution and Industrial IoT Initiative [25].
3. Understanding Industry 5.0
Since 2017, scattered academic efforts have been pushing the
introduction of the Fifth Industrial Revolution [26–29]. In 2021, the
European Commission formally called for the Fifth Industrial Revolution
(Industry 5.0), after discussions amongst participants from research and
technology organizations as well as funding agencies across Europe in
two virtual workshops organized by Directorate “Prosperity” of
Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, on 2 and 9 July 2020,
by the formal release of the document titled “Industry 5.0: Towards a
Sustainable, Human-centric, and Resilient European Industry” on 4
January 2021 [9]. This is similar to Industry 4.0 in 2011 by the German
government, devising a top-down initiative in response to the changing
societal and geopolitical landscape. Our analysis on Industry 5.0 in this
X. Xu et al.

Journal of Manufacturing Systems 61 (2021) 530–535
533
article is principally based on the sentiment from European Commission.
3.1. Concept
Industry 5.0 recognizes the power of industry to achieve societal
goals beyond jobs and growth, to become a resilient provider of pros-
perity by making production respect the boundaries of our planet and
placing the wellbeing of the industry worker at the center of the pro-
duction process. Industry 5.0 complements the existing Industry 4.0
paradigm by having research and innovation drive the transition to a
sustainable, human-centric and resilient European industry [9]. It is
apparent that Industry 5.0 results from the European Commission’s
consensus on the need better to integrate social and environmental
European priorities into technological innovation and shift the focus
from individual technologies to a systematic approach.
With the acknowledgment that technology advances transform the
way value is created, exchanged and distributed, there is a pressing need
for these technologies to be designed towards supporting future societal
values. The advent of these changes and questions closely linked to
technological innovation requires the industry to re-think its position
and role in society [7]. In addition, the political priorities in Europe have
signicantly shaped their thinking. The Green Deal will require a tran-
sition to a more circular economy and increased reliance on sustainable
resources, including energy. The Covid-19 crisis has highlighted the
need to re-think existing working methods and approaches, including
the vulnerability of global supply chains, with an aim to make their
industries more future-proof, resilient, sustainable and human-centric.
3.2. Core values
Industry 5.0 centers around three interconnected core values:
human-centricity, sustainability and resilience (Fig. 2).
The human-centric approach puts core human needs and interests
at the heart of the production process, shifting from technology-driven
progress to a thoroughly human-centric and society-centric approach.
As a result, industry workers will develop new roles as a shift of value
from considering workers as “cost” to “investment”. Technology is to
serve people and societies, meaning that technology used in
manufacturing is adaptive to the needs and diversity of industry workers
[30]. A safe and inclusive work environment is to be created to prioritize
physical health, mental health and wellbeing, and ultimately safeguard
worker’s fundamental rights, i.e., autonomy, human dignity and pri-
vacy. Industrial workers need to keep upskilling and re-skilling them-
selves for better career opportunities and work-life balance [9].
For the industry to respect planetary boundaries, it needs to be
sustainable. It needs to develop circular processes that re-use, re-
purpose and recycle natural resources, reduce waste and environmental
impact, and ultimately lead to a circular economy with better resource
efciency and effectiveness [9].
Resilience refers to the need to develop a higher degree of robust-
ness in industrial production, arming it better against disruptions and
ensuring it can provide and support critical infrastructure in times of
crisis. The future industry needs to be resilient enough to swiftly navi-
gate the (geo-)political shifts and natural emergencies [9].
3.3. Enabling technologies
Industry 5.0 identied the following six enabling technologies [31].
1 Individualized human-machine interaction technologies that inter-
connect and combine the strengths of humans and machines.
2 Bio-inspired technologies and smart materials that allow materials
with embedded sensors and enhanced features while being
recyclable.
3 Digital Twins and simulation to model entire systems.
4 Data transmission, storage, and analysis technologies that are able to
handle data and system interoperability.
5 Articial Intelligence to detect, for example, causalities in complex,
dynamic systems, leading to actionable intelligence.
6 Technologies for energy efciency, renewables, storage and
autonomy
As seen above, Industry 5.0 is not a technology-driven revolution but
a value-driven initiative that drives technological transformation with a
particular purpose (Fig. 3).
3.4. Challenges and responses
Industry 5.0 present some unique challenges that are not seen in the
past [9], such as
•Social heterogeneity in terms of values and acceptance
•Measurement of environmental and social value generation
•Integration from customers across entire value chains to SMEs
•Interdisciplinarity of research disciplines and system complexity
•Ecosystem-oriented innovation policy with agile, outcome-
orientation
•Productivity is required, while large investments are needed
As a new initiative, the European Commission also outlined a series
of implementation strategies from investment, marketing, and gover-
nance dimensions to promote Industry 5.0 [9]. Response from other
governments and industries is still limited for the time being. Academia
though has quickly embraced the discussions on Industry 5.0, as Journal
of Manufacturing Systems, International Journal of Production Research
and IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics all established relevant
Special Issues to encourage the research on Industry 5.0 in 2021. IEEE
Robotics and Automation Society (RAS) Technical Committee (TC) on
Digital Manufacturing and Human-centered Automation has also high-
lighted its relevance to Industry 5.0 [32].
Similar to Industry 4.0, Industry 5.0, aiming for success, will need
substantial investment from government agencies. Regardless of the
future of Industry 5.0, its core values – human-centricity, sustainability
and resilience, have become major driving forces for societal progress
instead of as a by-product of GDP-driven prosperity development. This is
evident from recent government progress towards embedding them in
national policies, such as Paris Agreement [33], Sustainable Develop-
ment Goals (SDGs) [34] from the United Nations, Well-being of Future
Generations Act [35], Genuine Progress Indicator 2.0 [36], The Econ-
omy of Well-being [37], National Performance Framework [38], and
OECD Better Life Index [39].
Fig. 2. Core values of Industry 5.0 [9].
X. Xu et al.

Journal of Manufacturing Systems 61 (2021) 530–535
534
4. Discussions and nal remarks
It has been the authors’ intention to stand on neutral ground to
provide the account for both Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 through
Sections 1–3. This section may include some opinionated comments
from the authors, but otherwise, the intention to remain impartial is still
upheld. The remaining section is structured by following the ve ques-
tions imposed at the beginning of this article. One should, however, not
expect the provision of denitive answers to each of the questions.
Instead, the questions are utilized for pertinent discussions to provide an
answer or a partial answer as it may be to the question.
4.1. Questions and discussions
•To what extent is Industry 4.0 technology-centric and oblivious of
human-centricity, sustainability and resilience?
The perception by many has been that Industry 4.0 has a strong focus
on technologies or technological solutions. Such a focus is evident from
some of the early policy and government manifestos. Research publi-
cations in the early years tend to be technology-focused, too. White-
papers and business reports published by some top consulting rms, e.g.,
McKinsey and Boston Consulting Group, also have a clear technology
slant. Industry 4.0, however, may not be considered oblivious of human-
centricity, sustainability and resilience. Resource efciency and societal
needs are found in some of the key publications [18]. The Factory2Fit
project, for example, aims at empowering and engaging workers in a
more connected industrial environment. The workers are given more
inuence and hence greater responsibility in shaping the production
process through virtual means.
However, Industry 4.0 addresses the issues of human-centricity,
sustainability and resilience from a consequential perspective and
with a clear technological approach. Unlike Industry 4.0, Industry 5.0
makes a bold focus shift from individual technologies to a systematic
approach. This approach empowers the industry to achieve societal
goals beyond jobs and growth and places the wellbeing of the industry
worker at the center of the production process. This may help explain
why Industry 5.0 is considered a different type of Industrial Revolution
from the other Industrial Revolutions.
•Can Industry 4.0 enabling technologies also help realize the goals of
Industry 5.0, or do we need to develop new Industry 5.0
technologies?
Boston Consulting Group identied nine key enabling technologies
of Industry 4.0, whereas the EU identied six enabling technologies of
Industry 5.0. The terminologies used for these technologies may differ,
but there is a clear cross-over. It is believed that many enabling tech-
nologies of Industry 4.0 can help, and will undoubtedly be used to,
achieve the societal goals of Industry 5.0. There are, however, some
more targeted technologies of Industry 5.0 that require attention, such
as bio-inspired technologies and technologies for energy efciency,
storage, and renewable energy.
•Is Industry 5.0 a chronological continuation of Industry 4.0, similar
to their predecessors (i.e., Industry 1.0 through to Industry 4.0)?
Industry 5.0 is not a chronological continuation of, or an alternative
to, the existing Industry 4.0 paradigm. Industry 5.0 is the result of a
forward-looking exercise, a way of framing how industry and emerging
societal trends and needs will co-exist. As such, Industry 5.0 complements
and extends the hallmark features of Industry 4.0 [9]. This may help set
aside Industry 5.0 as a different type of Industrial Revolution from the
others, acknowledging the other Industrial Revolutions are the chro-
nological continuation of their predecessors.
It needs to be pointed out that some of the latest Industry 4.0
research has already extended the original thinking and intention of
Industry 4.0. This is particularly evident in Germany, where fresh ini-
tiatives on resource efciency, energy footprint and Arbeit 4.0 (Labour
or Work 4.0) [40,41] have been pushed out in recent years.
•Are we living amongst two Industrial Revolutions, or effectively one
– Techno-Social Revolution?
The notion of Industry 5.0 complementing and extending the hall-
mark features of Industry 4.0 suggests that they are to be considered
side-by-side, i.e., the co-existence of technology-driven Industry 4.0 and
value-driven Industry 5.0. In the interest of simplifying the terminology
but running the risk of further introducing new terms, we may be led to
believe that we are witnessing a Techno-Social Revolution (or perhaps
Social-Techno Revolution), with technology as the enabling tools and
societal needs as the ultimate goal, acknowledging that the term Techno-
Social System has existed for some time.
Fig. 3. Industry 5.0 goals and the technological enablers (reproduced based
on [21]).
X. Xu et al.

Journal of Manufacturing Systems 61 (2021) 530–535
535
•What would industry’s journeys of Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 look
like?
Many companies are on their journey of Industry 4.0, and this
journey is not to be derailed. This said, it may need to be re-purposed
and/or adjusted with a more prominent consideration of some of the
core values of Industry 5.0, i.e., sustainability, human-centricity and
resilience. Therefore, there is, and should be, just one journey for a
business.
4.2. Final words
Typically, an Industry Revolution is driven by transformative tech-
nological advances, which has led to fundamental changes in how the
industry functions. These changes have economic and societal conse-
quences. Some are intended and desirable; others unintended and un-
desirable. Like other predecessors, Industry 4.0 is technology-driven.
Industry 5.0 is, however, value-driven. The former needs the latter to
remind the essential societal needs, value and responsibility as ultimate
goals; the latter requires the former for the technological pushes and
solutions.
However, a word of caution is that a proliferation of buzz words,
such as Industry 4.0+, Industry 4.5 and even Industry 6.0 and Industry
7.0 in a not-too-distant future, may dawn upon us. These buzz words
may be inviting for paper-writing or grant applications; they are not
conducive to making any business decision and facing technological
challenges. To this end, cool heads and wise minds are required. It is our
intention that this article will spark and encourage further, extensive
and in-depth discussion around these topics as we owe the industry a
clear vision into the future.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors report no declarations of interest.
References
[1] Vogel-Heuser B, Hess D. Guest editorial: Industry 4.0–prerequisites and visions.
IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 2016;13(April 2).
[2] Bauernhans T, Vogel-Heuser B, ten Hompel M. In: Allgemeine Grundlagen, editor.
Handbuch Industrie 4.0 Bd.4. Springer; 2017. ISBN: 978-3-662-53254-53256.
[3] Vogel-Heuser B, Bayrak G, Frank U. Forschungsfragen in
“Produktionsautomatisierung der Zukunft”. Diskussionspapier für die acatech
Projektgruppe “ProCPS – Production CPS”. acatech Materialien. 2012.
[4] Zuehlke D. SmartFactory—towards a factory-of-things. Annu Rev Control 2010;34
(April 1):129–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcontrol.2010.02.008.
[5] Lu Y, Xu X, Wang L. Smart manufacturing process and system automation – a
critical review of the standards and envisioned scenarios. J Manuf Syst 2020;56:
312–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2020.06.010.
[6] Wang S, Wan J, Zhang D, Li D, Zhang C. Towards smart factory for Industry 4.0: a
self-organized multi-agent system with big data based feedback and coordination.
Comput Netw 2016;101:158–68.
[7] Zhong RY, Xu X, Klotz E, Newman ST. Intelligent manufacturing in the context of
Industry 4.0: a review. Engineering 2017;3(5):616–30.
[8] Plattform Industrie 4.0. https://www.plattform-i40.de. (Accessed 28 September
2021).
[9] Breque M, De Nul L, Petridis A. Industry 5.0: towards a sustainable, human-centric
and resilient European industry. Luxembourg, LU: European Commission,
Directorate-General for Research and Innovation; 2021.
[10] European Economic and Social Committee. Industry 5.0. 2021. Available online:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/research-area/industr
ial-research-and-innovation/industry-50_en (Accessed 28 September 2021).
[11] Longo F, Padovano A, Umbrello S. Value-oriented and ethical technology
engineering in Industry 5.0: a human-centric perspective for the design of the
factory of the future. Appl Sci 2020;10:4182. https://doi.org/10.3390/
app10124182.
[12] Bednar PM, Welch C. Socio-technical perspectives on smart working: creating
meaningful and sustainable systems. Inf Syst Front 2020;22:281–98. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10796-019-09921-1.
[13] Fay A, Gehlhoff F, Seitz M, Vogel-Heuser B. Agents for the realisation of Industrie
4.0 - VDI Status Report. August. 2019. https://doi.org/10.13140/
RG.2.2.23998.84805.
[14] DIN SPEC 91345:2016-04 - Referenzarchitekturmodell Industrie 4.0 (RAMI4.0).
Ver¨
offentlichung 20.04.2016.
[15] Process Automation Device Information Model (PA-DIM). OPC Foundation. 2021.
https://opcfoundation.org/markets-collaboration/pa-dim/.
[16] VDI/VDE-Gesellschaft Mess- und Automatisierungstechnik: Statusbericht; Industrie
4.0; Wertsch¨
opfungsketten. Düsseldorf: VDI e.V.. 2014. April.
[17] Rüßmann M, Lorenz M, Gerbert P, Waldner M, Engel P, Harnisch M, et al. Industry
4.0: the future of productivity and growth in manufacturing industries. 09 April.
Boston Consulting Group; 2015.
[18] Forschungsunion acatech. Recommendations for implementing the strategic
initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0. Final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. 8 April.
2013.
[19] Liu C, Cao S, Tse W, Xu X. Augmented reality-assisted intelligent window for cyber-
physical machine tools. J Manuf Syst 2017;44:280–6.
[20] Zhu Z, Liu C, Xu X. Visualisation of the digital twin data in manufacturing by using
augmented reality. Procedia CIRP 2019;81:898–903.
[21] Villani V, Sabattini L, Bara´
nska P, Callegati E, Czerniak JN, Debbache A, et al. The
INCLUSIVE system: a general framework for adaptive industrial automation. IEEE
Trans Autom Sci Eng 2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2020.3027876.
[22] Flores E, Xu X, Lu Y. Human Capital 4.0: a workforce competence typology for
Industry 4.0. J Manuf Technol Manag 2020;31(4):687–703. https://doi.org/
10.1108/JMTM-08-2019-0309.
[23] SmartFactoryKL, https://smartfactory.de/en/ (Accessed 28 September 2021).
[24] https://www.lafrenchfab.fr/2021/05/12/industrie-du-futur-gouvernement-
accelere/. (Accessed 28 September 2021).
[25] Robot Revolution and Industrial IoT Initiative. https://www.jmfrri.gr.jp/english/.
(Accessed 28 September 2021).
[26] Demir KA, D¨
oven G, Sezen B. Industry 5.0 and human-robot co-working. Procedia
Comput Sci 2019;158:688–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROCS.2019.09.104.
[27] Longo F, Padovano A, Umbrello S. Value-oriented and ethical technology
engineering in Industry 5.0: a human-centric perspective for the design of the
factory of the future. Appl Sci 2020;10:4182. https://doi.org/10.3390/
APP10124182.
[28] Nahavandi S. Industry 5.0—a human-centric solution. Sustainability 2019;11:
4371. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU11164371.
[29] Paschek D, Mocan A, Draghici A. Industry 5.0-the expected impact of next
industrial revolution. Thriving on future education, industry, business, and society.
In: Proceedings of the MakeLearn and TIIM International Conference; 2019.
p. 15–7.
[30] Lu Y, Adrados JS, Chand SS, Wang L. Humans are not machines—anthropocentric
human–machine symbiosis for ultra-exible smart manufacturing. Engineering
2021;7:734–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENG.2020.09.018.
[31] European Commission. Directorate General for Research and Innovation. Enabling
Technologies for Industry 5.0 Results of a workshop with Europe’s technology
leaders. 2020.
[32] Huang GQ, Vogel-Heuser B, Zhou M, Dario P. Digital technologies and automation:
the human and eco-centered foundations for the factory of the future [TC
Spotlight]. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 2021;28:174–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/
MRA.2021.3095732.
[33] Agreement P. Paris agreement. Report of the Conference of the parties to the
United Nations framework convention on climate change (21st session, 2015:
Paris), vol. 4. HeinOnline; 2015. Retrieved December, p. 2017.
[34] Assembly G. Sustainable development goals. SDGs transform our world. 2015.
p. 2030.
[35] Government Wales. Well-being of future generations (Wales) act 2015. 2015.
[36] Talberth J, Weisdorf M. Genuine progress indicator 2.0: pilot accounts for the US,
Maryland, and City of Baltimore 2012–2014. Ecol Econ 2017;142:1–11.
[37] Llena-Nozal A, Martin N, Murtin F. The economy of well-being: creating
opportunities for people’s well-being and economic growth. OECD; 2019.
[38] National Performance Framework | National Performance Framework, n.d.,
https://nationalperformance.gov.scot/ (Accessed 28 September 2021).
[39] OECD Better Life Index, n.d., https://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/ (Accessed 28
September 2021).
[40] German’s Platform for Articial Intelligence. https://www.plattform-lernende-syst
eme.de/home-en.html. (Accessed 28 September 2021).
[41] Salimi M. Work 4.0: an enormous potential for economic growth in Germany.
ADAPT bulletin. 2015. 16 December 2015 (Accessed 28 September 2021, htt
p://www.adaptinternational.it.
X. Xu et al.