Sustainability and Industry 4.0 in the packaging and printing industry: a diagnostic survey in Poland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Industry 4.0 (I4.0) became an important paradigm to bridge the gap between technologies and humans. The paper aims to diagnose sustainability performance and I4.0 maturity in Poland’s printing and packaging sector and identify research areas where further actions for improvements are necessary. This article adopts a mixed-method study combining in-depth interviews of eleven heterogeneous enterprises, supported with a quantitative survey on a representative sample of 301 companies. The findings revealed an insignificant correlation from a statistical point of view (0.44) between the adopted I4.0 technologies currently used and sustainable best practices. Internet of Things technologies are more often adopted in the printing industry (27.2 %) than in the packaging industry (14 %). The study concludes that using I4.0 technologies boosts the execution of sustainable practices and/or realising sustainable development practices requires I4.0 technology adoption. The paper clarifies that more in-depth analyses are needed to help achieve sustainable objectives for printing and packaging companies through digital technologies. The methodology is replicable and might be applied in other economies across separate multinational enterprises to influence sustainable digitalised business strategy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".