Neue Dimensionen von Mensch-Maschine-Interfaces: Entwicklung eines Scoring-Systems zur Beschreibung und Evaluation von Mensch-Maschine-Interfaces für digitalisierte industrielle Anwendungen

Hohe Produktivität und niedrige Kosten sind zentrale Kriterien von Produktionsmaschinen. Doch auch die Qualität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Mensch-Maschine-Schnittstelle (humanmachine interface – HMI) gewinnt an Relevanz bei der Gesamtbewertung einer Maschine. Das liegt auch daran, dass der Mensch als Maschinenbediener oder -überwacher in digitalisierten und Hochgeschwindigkeitsproduktionsprozessen schnell zum Flaschenhals der Informationsverarbeitung und damit ein limitierender Faktor für die Produktivität werden kann. Denn mit der Digitalisierung der Produktionssysteme erweitert sich die Menge an verfügbaren Informationen drastisch und neue Komplexfunktionalitäten wie Assistenzsysteme und dezentrale Überwachungsaufgaben führen zu neuen vielschichtigen Bedienfunktionen. Moderne HMIs müssen dabei nicht nur ergonomisch, sondern auch intuitiv und leistungsfähig sein und mit den richtigen Bedienfunktionen ein reibungsloses und sicheres Bedienen der Maschinen unterstützen

Levels of Autonomy in Production Logistics: Terminology and Framework

The increasing demand of flexibility in production systems influences the organisation of production logistics and enhances the role of autonomous resources for logistic tasks. In the current state of the art, there exists neither a common definition of the term “autonomy” in the production logistics context nor a generalised approach regarding the classification of autonomous resources depending on their characteristics as well as their skills. Due to this lack, difficulties appear when intending to integrate autonomous resources - that are implemented for logistic tasks - in the superior production control processes which aim to meet the key performance indicators of the production system. This paper analyses in a first step the current use of terminology regarding autonomy and related terms like automation and self-x approaches in production logistics. Based on these results, a definition of “autonomy” for production logistics and a universal framework for classifying autonomous resources regarding their level of autonomy can be proposed. This allows to specify afterwards the appropriate level of autonomy in production logistics for a specific production system

Industrie 4.0 – An empirical and literature-based study how product development is influenced by the digital transformation

The fourth industrial revolution, referred to as Industrie 4.0 in the German high-tech strategy, is in most cases associated with the industrialization of production, but the term is increasingly broadly understood. Industrie 4.0 means the networking of all areas involved in the value creation process. In areas such as production and politics, visions are already being driven forward, but in the development of products and product-related services it is often unclear how engineering needs to change to realize the potentials of Industrie 4.0. Several research projects are already dealing with the development of new processes, methods and tools to enable these potentials. However, studies show that companies do not have the resources or strategies to implement such solutions. In many ways, the influence of Industrie 4.0 and its impact on product development is still insufficiently known. Therefore, a literature-based study was conducted to systematically identify context factors that characterize Industrie 4.0. In order to analyze the impact on product development, a second step involved an impact analysis with the context factors of Industrie 4.0 onto the context factors of product development known from the literature. In a third step, strongly influenced fields of product development were identified and their relevance for the realization of the potentials of Industrie 4.0 for product development was evaluated in an online survey. In addition, the current status in these fields was analyzed in interviews with experts from industry. With methods of foresight a portfolio was created, which couples the influence of Industrie 4.0 on the context factors of product development with their future robustness. Comparing the current state of development with the findings from the portfolio, recommendations for future research were formulated

Mastering Omni-Channel Retailing Challenges with Industry 4.0 Concepts

Omni-Channel Management is an important trend, which allows retailers to improve customer experiences. Notwithstanding, entirely seamless integration of all channels, for example, in terms of customer or pricing data or consistent product offerings, is still a challenging endeavor. Technological developments, such as Industry 4.0 (I4.0), lead to innovation opportunities in the production industry. As there are intersections between I4.0 and Omni-Channel retailing, we propose that prominent Omni-Channel retailing challenges can be overcome by integrating knowledge from both research domains. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to investigate, which I4.0 concepts are utilized in scientific literature to overcome challenges and how these concepts can be transferred to Omni-Channel Management. To make this knowledge tangible for retailers, this article deduces opportunities on the application of I4.0 concepts in Omni-Channel retailing. The results show that especially IoT networks offer numerous deployment options and even Cyber-Physical Systems and Smart Factories provide related potentials

Sensor and data: key elements of human-machine interaction for human-centric smart manufacturing

The proposal of Industry 5.0 has made sustainability, human-centric and resilience the core of digital manufacturing, which also puts forward new requirements for the human-machine interaction (HMI) paradigm in human-centric smart manufacturing (HCSM). In the manufacturing scenario, the process of HMI can be divided into four parts: 1) Sensors and hardware, where the environment information and input signals are collected, 2) Data processing, where the signals are converted into data, 3) Transmission mechanism, where the data is transmitted to the processing centre, and 4) Interaction and collaboration. Among them, sensors and data are expected to become breakthrough points in optimising HMI. This is not only due to the emergence of new research, innovation and technologies but also because they are closely influenced by the new design concepts brought about by Industry 5.0. This paper analyses the latest studies and technologies in the sensor field and their possible applications in HCSM scenarios. Then, opportunities and challenges of data analysis in the HMI in Industry 5.0 are discussed. Finally, based on the design concepts and requirements of Industry 5.0, this paper demonstrates how they will become the key points for future HMI development

Agri-food 4.0: A survey of the supply chains and technologies for the future agriculture

[EN] The term "Agri-Food 4.0" is an analogy to the term Industry 4.0; coming from the concept "agriculture 4.0". Since the origins of the industrial revolution, where the steam engines started the concept of Industry 1.0 and later the use of electricity upgraded the concept to Industry 2.0, the use of technologies generated a milestone in the industry revolution by addressing the Industry 3.0 concept. Hence, Industry 4.0, it is about including and integrating the latest developments based on digital technologies as well as the interoperability process across them. This allows enterprises to transmit real-time information in terms behaviour and performance. Therefore, the challenge is to maintain these complex networked structures efficiently linked and organised within the use of such technologies, especially to identify and satisfy supply chain stakeholders dynamic requirements. In this context, the agriculture domain is not an exception although it possesses some specialities depending from the domain. In fact, all agricultural machinery incorporates electronic controls and has entered to the digital age, enhancing their current performance. In addition, electronics, using sensors and drones, support the data collection of several agriculture key aspects, such as weather, geographical spatialization, animals and crops behaviours, as well as the entire farm life cycle. However, the use of the right methods and methodologies for enhancing agriculture supply chains performance is still a challenge, thus the concept of Industry 4.0 has evolved and adapted to agriculture 4.0 in order analyse the behaviours and performance in this specific domain. Thus, the question mark on how agriculture 4.0 support a better supply chain decision-making process, or how can help to save time to farmer to make effective decision based on objective data, remains open. Therefore, in this survey, a review of more than hundred papers on new technologies and the new available supply chains methods are analysed and contrasted to understand the future paths of the Agri-Food domain.Authors of this publication acknowledge the contribution of the Project 691249, RUC-APS "Enhancing and implementing Knowledge based ICT solutions within high Risk and Uncertain Conditions for Agriculture Production Systems" (www.ruc-aps.eu), funded by the European Union under their funding scheme H2020-MSCARISE-2015.Lezoche, M.; Hernández, JE.; Alemany Díaz, MDM.; Panetto, H.; Kacprzyk, J. (2020). Agri-food 4.0: A survey of the supply chains and technologies for the future agriculture. Computers in Industry. 117:1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2020.103187S115117Ahumada, O., & Villalobos, J. R. (2009). Application of planning models in the agri-food supply chain: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 196(1), 1-20. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2008.02.014Ait-Mouheb, N., Bahri, A., Thayer, B. B., Benyahia, B., Bourrié, G., Cherki, B., … Harmand, J. (2018). The reuse of reclaimed water for irrigation around the Mediterranean Rim: a step towards a more virtuous cycle? Regional Environmental Change, 18(3), 693-705. doi:10.1007/s10113-018-1292-zAli, J., & Kumar, S. (2011). Information and communication technologies (ICTs) and farmers’ decision-making across the agricultural supply chain. International Journal of Information Management, 31(2), 149-159. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.07.008Alzahrani, S. M. (2018). Development of IoT mining machine for Twitter sentiment analysis: Mining in the cloud and results on the mirror. 2018 15th Learning and Technology Conference (L&T). doi:10.1109/lt.2018.8368490Amandeep, Bhattacharjee, A., Das, P., Basu, D., Roy, S., Ghosh, S., … Rana, T. K. (2017). Smart farming using IOT. 2017 8th IEEE Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON). doi:10.1109/iemcon.2017.8117219Annosi, M. C., Brunetta, F., Monti, A., & Nati, F. (2019). Is the trend your friend? An analysis of technology 4.0 investment decisions in agricultural SMEs. Computers in Industry, 109, 59-71. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2019.04.003Baio, F. H. R. (2011). Evaluation of an auto-guidance system operating on a sugar cane harvester. Precision Agriculture, 13(1), 141-147. doi:10.1007/s11119-011-9241-6Belaud, J.-P., Prioux, N., Vialle, C., & Sablayrolles, C. (2019). Big data for agri-food 4.0: Application to sustainability management for by-products supply chain. Computers in Industry, 111, 41-50. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2019.06.006Nicolaas Bezuidenhout, C., Bodhanya, S., & Brenchley, L. (2012). An analysis of collaboration in a sugarcane production and processing supply chain. British Food Journal, 114(6), 880-895. doi:10.1108/00070701211234390Bhatt, M. R., & Buch, S. (2015). Prediction of formability for sheet metal component using artificial intelligent technique. 2015 2nd International Conference on Signal Processing and Integrated Networks (SPIN). doi:10.1109/spin.2015.7095356Birkel, H. S., & Hartmann, E. (2019). Impact of IoT challenges and risks for SCM. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 24(1), 39-61. doi:10.1108/scm-03-2018-0142Boehlje, M. (1999). Structural Changes in the Agricultural Industries: How Do We Measure, Analyze and Understand Them? American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 81(5), 1028-1041. doi:10.2307/1244080Bonney, L., Clark, R., Collins, R., & Fearne, A. (2007). From serendipity to sustainable competitive advantage: insights from Houston’s Farm and their journey of co‐innovation. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 12(6), 395-399. doi:10.1108/13598540710826326Boshkoska, B. M., Liu, S., Zhao, G., Fernandez, A., Gamboa, S., del Pino, M., … Chen, H. (2019). A decision support system for evaluation of the knowledge sharing crossing boundaries in agri-food value chains. Computers in Industry, 110, 64-80. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2019.04.012Brewster, C., Roussaki, I., Kalatzis, N., Doolin, K., & Ellis, K. (2017). IoT in Agriculture: Designing a Europe-Wide Large-Scale Pilot. IEEE Communications Magazine, 55(9), 26-33. doi:10.1109/mcom.2017.1600528Bronson, K., & Knezevic, I. (2016). Big Data in food and agriculture. Big Data & Society, 3(1), 205395171664817. doi:10.1177/2053951716648174Brown, K. (2013). Global environmental change I. Progress in Human Geography, 38(1), 107-117. doi:10.1177/0309132513498837Chilcanan, D., Navas, P., & Escobar, S. M. (2017). Expert system for remote process automation in multiplatform servers, through human machine conversation. 2017 12th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI). doi:10.23919/cisti.2017.7975913Choi, J., In, Y., Park, C., Seok, S., Seo, H., & Kim, H. (2016). Secure IoT framework and 2D architecture for End-To-End security. The Journal of Supercomputing, 74(8), 3521-3535. doi:10.1007/s11227-016-1684-0Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128. doi:10.2307/2393553Dabbene, F., Gay, P., & Tortia, C. (2014). Traceability issues in food supply chain management: A review. Biosystems Engineering, 120, 65-80. doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2013.09.006Del Borghi, A., Gallo, M., Strazza, C., & Del Borghi, M. (2014). An evaluation of environmental sustainability in the food industry through Life Cycle Assessment: the case study of tomato products supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 78, 121-130. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.083Devarakonda, R., Shrestha, B., Palanisamy, G., Hook, L., Killeffer, T., Krassovski, M., … Lazer, K. (2014). OME: Tool for generating and managing metadata to handle BigData. 2014 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). doi:10.1109/bigdata.2014.7004476Nascimento, A. F. do, Mendonça, E. de S., Leite, L. F. C., Scholberg, J., & Neves, J. C. L. (2012). Calibration and validation of models for short-term decomposition and N mineralization of plant residues in the tropics. Scientia Agricola, 69(6), 393-401. doi:10.1590/s0103-90162012000600008Dolan, C., & Humphrey, J. (2000). Governance and Trade in Fresh Vegetables: The Impact of UK Supermarkets on the African Horticulture Industry. Journal of Development Studies, 37(2), 147-176. doi:10.1080/713600072Dragincic, J., Korac, N., & Blagojevic, B. (2015). Group multi-criteria decision making (GMCDM) approach for selecting the most suitable table grape variety intended for organic viticulture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 111, 194-202. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2014.12.023Dworak, V., Selbeck, J., Dammer, K.-H., Hoffmann, M., Zarezadeh, A., & Bobda, C. (2013). Strategy for the Development of a Smart NDVI Camera System for Outdoor Plant Detection and Agricultural Embedded Systems. Sensors, 13(2), 1523-1538. doi:10.3390/s130201523Eisele, M., Kiese, R., Krämer, A., & Leibundgut, C. (2001). Application of a catchment water quality model for assessment and prediction of nitrogen budgets. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Part B: Hydrology, Oceans and Atmosphere, 26(7-8), 547-551. doi:10.1016/s1464-1909(01)00048-xElsayed, K. M. F., Ismail, T., & S. Ouf, N. (2018). A Review on the Relevant Applications of Machine Learning in Agriculture. IJIREEICE, 6(8), 1-17. doi:10.17148/ijireeice.2018.681Esteso, A., Alemany, M. M. E., & Ortiz, A. (2017). Métodos y Modelos Deterministas e Inciertos para la Gestión de Cadenas de Suministro Agroalimentarias. Dirección y Organización, 41-46. doi:10.37610/dyo.v0i0.509Esteso, A., Alemany, M. M. E., & Ortiz, A. (2018). Conceptual framework for designing agri-food supply chains under uncertainty by mathematical programming models. International Journal of Production Research, 56(13), 4418-4446. doi:10.1080/00207543.2018.1447706GERHARDS, R., GUTJAHR, C., WEIS, M., KELLER, M., SÖKEFELD, M., MÖHRING, J., & PIEPHO, H. P. (2011). Using precision farming technology to quantify yield effects attributed to weed competition and herbicide application. Weed Research, 52(1), 6-15. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.2011.00893.xGovindan, K., Jafarian, A., Khodaverdi, R., & Devika, K. (2014). Two-echelon multiple-vehicle location–routing problem with time windows for optimization of sustainable supply chain network of perishable food. International Journal of Production Economics, 152, 9-28. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.12.028Gumaste, S. S., & Kadam, A. J. (2016). Future weather prediction using genetic algorithm and FFT for smart farming. 2016 International Conference on Computing Communication Control and automation (ICCUBEA). doi:10.1109/iccubea.2016.7860028Hashem, H., & Ranc, D. (2016). A review of modeling toolbox for BigData. 2016 International Conference on Military Communications and Information Systems (ICMCIS). doi:10.1109/icmcis.2016.7496565Hefnawy, A., Elhariri, T., Cherifi, C., Robert, J., Bouras, A., Kubler, S., & Framling, K. (2017). Combined use of lifecycle management and IoT in smart cities. 2017 11th International Conference on Software, Knowledge, Information Management and Applications (SKIMA). doi:10.1109/skima.2017.8294112Hosseini, S. H., Tang, C. Y., & Jiang, J. N. (2014). Calibration of a Wind Farm Wind Speed Model With Incomplete Wind Data. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 5(1), 343-350. doi:10.1109/tste.2013.2284490Hu, Y., Zhang, L., Li, J., & Mehrotra, S. (2016). ICME 2016 Image Recognition Grand Challenge. 2016 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia & Expo Workshops (ICMEW). doi:10.1109/icmew.2016.7574663A. Irmak, J. W. Jones, W. D. Batchelor, S. Irmak, K. J. Boote, & J. O. Paz. (2006). Artificial Neural Network Model as a Data Analysis Tool in Precision Farming. Transactions of the ASABE, 49(6), 2027-2037. doi:10.13031/2013.22264Jeon, S., Kim, B., & Huh, J. (2017). Study on methods to determine rotor equivalent wind speed to increase prediction accuracy of wind turbine performance under wake condition. Energy for Sustainable Development, 40, 41-49. doi:10.1016/j.esd.2017.06.001Joly, P.-B. (2005). Resilient farming systems in a complex world — new issues for the governance of science and innovation. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 45(6), 617. doi:10.1071/ea03252Joshi, R., Banwet, D. K., & Shankar, R. (2009). Indian cold chain: modeling the inhibitors. British Food Journal, 111(11), 1260-1283. doi:10.1108/00070700911001077Kamata, T., Roshanianfard, A., & Noguchi, N. (2018). Heavy-weight Crop Harvesting Robot - Controlling Algorithm. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(17), 244-249. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.165Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Gawankar, S. A. (2020). Achieving sustainable performance in a data-driven agriculture supply chain: A review for research and applications. International Journal of Production Economics, 219, 179-194. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.05.022Kamilaris, A., Kartakoullis, A., & Prenafeta-Boldú, F. X. (2017). A review on the practice of big data analysis in agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 143, 23-37. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2017.09.037Kelepouris, T., Pramatari, K., & Doukidis, G. (2007). RFID‐enabled traceability in the food supply chain. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(2), 183-200. doi:10.1108/02635570710723804Khan, S. F., & Ismail, M. Y. (2018). An Investigation into the Challenges and Opportunities Associated with the Application of Internet of Things (IoT) in the Agricultural Sector-A Review. Journal of Computer Science, 14(2), 132-143. doi:10.3844/jcssp.2018.132.143Kladivko, E. J., Helmers, M. J., Abendroth, L. J., Herzmann, D., Lal, R., Castellano, M. J., … Villamil, M. B. (2014). Standardized research protocols enable transdisciplinary research of climate variation impacts in corn production systems. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 69(6), 532-542. doi:10.2489/jswc.69.6.532Ko, T., Lee, J., & Ryu, D. (2018). Blockchain Technology and Manufacturing Industry: Real-Time Transparency and Cost Savings. Sustainability, 10(11), 4274. doi:10.3390/su10114274KÖK, M. S. (2009). Application of Food Safety Management Systems (ISO 22000/HACCP) in the Turkish Poultry Industry: A Comparison Based on Enterprise Size. Journal of Food Protection, 72(10), 2221-2225. doi:10.4315/0362-028x-72.10.2221Kvíz, Z., Kroulik, M., & Chyba, J. (2014). Machinery guidance systems analysis concerning pass-to-pass accuracy as a tool for efficient plant production in fields and for soil damage reduction. Plant, Soil and Environment, 60(No. 1), 36-42. doi:10.17221/622/2012-pseLamsal, K., Jones, P. C., & Thomas, B. W. (2016). Harvest logistics in agricultural systems with multiple, independent producers and no on-farm storage. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 91, 129-138. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2015.10.018Laube, P., Duckham, M., & Palaniswami, M. (2011). Deferred decentralized movement pattern mining for geosensor networks. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 25(2), 273-292. doi:10.1080/13658810903296630Li, F.-R., Gao, C.-Y., Zhao, H.-L., & Li, X.-Y. (2002). Soil conservation effectiveness and energy efficiency of alternative rotations and continuous wheat cropping in the Loess Plateau of northwest China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 91(1-3), 101-111. doi:10.1016/s0167-8809(01)00265-1Liakos, K., Busato, P., Moshou, D., Pearson, S., & Bochtis, D. (2018). Machine Learning in Agriculture: A Review. Sensors, 18(8), 2674. doi:10.3390/s18082674Meichen, L., Jun, C., Xiang, Z., Lu, W., & Yongpeng, T. (2018). Dynamic obstacle detection based on multi-sensor information fusion. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(17), 861-865. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.086Louwagie, G., Northey, G., Finn, J. A., & Purvis, G. (2012). Development of indicators for assessment of the environmental impact of livestock farming in Ireland using the Agri-environmental Footprint Index. Ecological Indicators, 18, 149-162. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.11.003Luque, A., Peralta, M. E., de las Heras, A., & Córdoba, A. (2017). State of the Industry 4.0 in the Andalusian food sector. Procedia Manufacturing, 13, 1199-1205. doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.195Malhotra, S., Doja, M. ., Alam, B., & Alam, M. (2017). Bigdata analysis and comparison of bigdata analytic approches. 2017 International Conference on Computing, Communication and Automation (ICCCA). doi:10.1109/ccaa.2017.8229821Mayer, J., Gunst, L., Mäder, P., Samson, M.-F., Carcea, M., Narducci, V., … Dubois, D. (2015). «Productivity, quality and sustainability of winter wheat under long-term conventional and organic management in Switzerland». European Journal of Agronomy, 65, 27-39. doi:10.1016/j.eja.2015.01.002McGuire, S., & Sperling, L. (2013). Making seed systems more resilient to stress. Global Environmental Change, 23(3), 644-653. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.02.001Mekala, M. S., & Viswanathan, P. (2017). A Survey: Smart agriculture IoT with cloud computing. 2017 International conference on Microelectronic Devices, Circuits and Systems (ICMDCS). doi:10.1109/icmdcs.2017.8211551Mishra, S., Mishra, D., & Santra, G. H. (2016). Applications of Machine Learning Techniques in Agricultural Crop Production: A Review Paper. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(38). doi:10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i38/95032Mocnej, J., Seah, W. K. G., Pekar, A., & Zolotova, I. (2018). Decentralised IoT Architecture for Efficient Resources Utilisation. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(6), 168-173. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.07.148Mohanraj, I., Gokul, V., Ezhilarasie, R., & Umamakeswari, A. (2017). Intelligent drip irrigation and fertigation using wireless sensor networks. 2017 IEEE Technological Innovations in ICT for Agriculture and Rural Development (TIAR). doi:10.1109/tiar.2017.8273682Montecinos, J., Ouhimmou, M., Chauhan, S., & Paquet, M. (2018). Forecasting multiple waste collecting sites for the agro-food industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 932-939. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.127Yandun Narváez, F., Gregorio, E., Escolà, A., Rosell-Polo, J. R., Torres-Torriti, M., & Auat Cheein, F. (2018). Terrain classification using ToF sensors for the enhancement of agricultural machinery traversability. Journal of Terramechanics, 76, 1-13. doi:10.1016/j.jterra.2017.10.005Nguyen, T., ZHOU, L., Spiegler, V., Ieromonachou, P., & Lin, Y. (2018). Big data analytics in supply chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review. Computers & Operations Research, 98, 254-264. doi:10.1016/j.cor.2017.07.004Nilsson, E., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., Mochizuki, J., & Uvo, C. B. (2016). Hydro-climatic variability and agricultural production on the shores of Lake Chad. Environmental Development, 20, 15-30. doi:10.1016/j.envdev.2016.09.001Nolan, P., Paley, D. A., & Kroeger, K. (2017). Multi-UAS path planning for non-uniform data collection in precision agriculture. 2017 IEEE Aerospace Conference. doi:10.1109/aero.2017.7943794Oberholster, C., Adendorff, C., & Jonker, K. (2015). Financing Agricultural Production from a Value Chain Perspective. Outlook on Agriculture, 44(1), 49-60. doi:10.5367/oa.2015.0197Opara, L. U., & Mazaud, F. (2001). Food Traceability from Field to Plate. Outlook on Agriculture, 30(4), 239-247. doi:10.5367/000000001101293724Ott, K.-H., Aranı́bar, N., Singh, B., & Stockton, G. W. (2003). Metabonomics classifies pathways affected by bioactive compounds. Artificial neural network classification of NMR spectra of plant extracts. Phytochemistry, 62(6), 971-985. doi:10.1016/s0031-9422(02)00717-3Panetto, H. (2007). Towards a classification framework for interoperability of enterprise applications. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 20(8), 727-740. doi:10.1080/09511920600996419Paulraj, G. J. L., Francis, S. A. J., Peter, J. D., & Jebadurai, I. J. (2018). Resource-aware virtual machine migration in IoT cloud. Future Generation Computer Systems, 85, 173-183. doi:10.1016/j.future.2018.03.024Pilli, S. K., Nallathambi, B., George, S. J., & Diwanji, V. (2015). eAGROBOT — A robot for early crop disease detection using image processing. 2015 2nd International Conference on Electronics and Communication Systems (ICECS). doi:10.1109/ecs.2015.7124873Pinho, P., Dias, T., Cruz, C., Sim Tang, Y., Sutton, M. A., Martins-Loução, M.-A., … Branquinho, C. (2011). Using lichen functional diversity to assess the effects of atmospheric ammonia in Mediterranean woodlands. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48(5), 1107-1116. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02033.xPrathibha, S. R., Hongal, A., & Jyothi, M. P. (2017). IOT Based Monitoring System in Smart Agriculture. 2017 International Conference on Recent Advances in Electronics and Communication Technology (ICRAECT). doi:10.1109/icraect.2017.52Reardon, T., Echeverria, R., Berdegué, J., Minten, B., Liverpool-Tasie, S., Tschirley, D., & Zilberman, D. (2019). Rapid transformation of food systems in developing regions: Highlighting the role of agricultural research & innovations. Agricultural Systems, 172, 47-59. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.022Ribarics, P. (2016). Big Data and its impact on agriculture. Ecocycles, 2(1), 33-34. doi:10.19040/ecocycles.v2i1.54Rosell, J. R., & Sanz, R. (2012). A review of methods and applications of the geometric characterization of tree crops in agricultural activities. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 81, 124-141. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2011.09.007Roshanianfard, A., Kamata, T., & Noguchi, N. (2018). Performance evaluation of harvesting robot for heavy-weight crops. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(17), 332-338. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.200Routroy, S., & Behera, A. (2017). Agriculture supply chain. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 7(3), 275-302. doi:10.1108/jadee-06-2016-0039Ruiz-Garcia, L., Steinberger, G., & Rothmund, M. (2010). A model and prototype implementation for tracking and tracing agricultural batch products along the food chain. Food Control, 21(2), 112-121. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2008.12.003Saggi, M. K., & Jain, S. (2018). A survey towards an integration of big

Corporate Digital Responsibility : does it pay to be good? Understanding how active CDR can lead to a competitive advantage for firms

The objective of this research is to determine, using a mixed-method approach with pre-filled surveys and interviews, to what extent active corporate digital responsibility can lead to a competitive advantage for companies. To this end, the following three research questions were posed: Can active CDR lead to a competitive advantage for businesses? What factors have an influence on the impact of CDR on business performance? What impact will CDR have on future business? Initially, a survey for companies was created based on the literature research and filled with secondary research. Also, to answer the research questions, a guided interview was conducted with seven respondents. The survey showed that mainly performance benefits can arise for the companies through active CDR. Presumed advantages could be identified that have a positive impact on access to certain markets, differentiation, stakeholder involvement or compliance. Furthermore, factors were identified that could have an influence on the impact of active CDR on performance. The company size is suspected to influence the impact of CDR on business performance. The study also explored the future impact of CDR on future business. Significant impacts from legislative changes and a change from "voluntary" to "mandatory" are captured. Based on this foundation, it is advisable to conduct further investigations and studies to evaluate and assess the issue on a company-specific basis.O objectivo desta investigação é determinar, utilizando uma abordagem de método misto com inquéritos e entrevistas pré-preenchidos, até que ponto a responsabilidade digital empresarial activa pode conduzir a uma vantagem competitiva para as empresas. Para o efeito, foram colocadas as três questões de investigação seguintes: Pode a RDC activa conduzir a uma vantagem competitiva para as empresas? Que factores influenciam o impacto da RDC no desempenho das empresas? Que impacto terá a RDP nos negócios futuros? Inicialmente, foi criado um inquérito às empresas com base na pesquisa bibliográfica e preenchido com pesquisa secundária. Além disso, para responder às questões de investigação, foi realizada uma entrevista orientada com sete inquiridos. O inquérito mostrou que, através de um RDC activo, podem surgir principalmente benefícios para o desempenho das empresas. Foram identificadas presumíveis vantagens que têm um impacto positivo no acesso a determinados mercados, na diferenciação, no envolvimento das partes interessadas ou na conformidade. Além disso, foram identificados factores que podem influenciar o impacto do RDC activo no desempenho. Suspeita-se que a dimensão da empresa influencie o impacto do RDC no desempenho da empresa. O estudo também explorou o impacto futuro do RDC nas actividades futuras. São registados os impactos significativos das alterações legislativas e da mudança de "voluntário" para "obrigatório". Com base nesta fundamentação, é aconselhável efectuar mais investigações e estudos para avaliar e analisar a questão numa base específica para cada empresa

Service Level Modell – Erweiterung der Kundenbasis für das Internet der Dinge

In der vorliegenden Masterarbeit wird die Thematik eines Service-Level-Modells für das Kunden-Reporting eines hochtechnologisierten Unternehmens analysiert. Die stetig kürzer werdenden Technologiezyklen, der zunehmende Druck von anderen Wettbewerbern sowie die Flut an aufkommenden Kleinkunden, durch Technologien des Internet der Dinge, verlangen nach einer konsequenten Report-Standardisierung. Aufgrund der unterschiedlichen Ansätze im Kunden-Reporting des Unternehmens wurde untersucht, inwiefern die Erfahrungen mit Großkunden auf Kleinkunden nachhaltig und zielgerichtet adaptiert werden können. Die Analyse der theoretischen Grundlagen unterstreicht die Relevanz dieser Thematik und verdeutlicht die Gemeinsamkeiten zwischen dem unternehmensinternen Management-Reporting sowie dem Reporting für B2B-Kunden. Im Anschluss daran erfolgt eine Bestandsaufnahme des Customer-Reportings in Bezug auf das Foundry-Unternehmen. Dabei wurden alle kundenrelevanten Berichte der Fachabteilungen begutachtet. Im Nachgang dazu konnten entsprechende Optimierungsansätze herausgearbeitet sowie ein nachhaltiges Reporting-Konzept für Kleinkunden aufgezeigt werden. Das erarbeitete Konzept soll zukünftig seitens der Foundry als Grundlage für aufkommende Neukunden mit niedrigem Produkt-Volumina dienen. Betrachtet man nun das Resultat dieser Untersuchung bleibt festzuhalten, dass durch dieses Instrument dem Effekt der Informationsüberflutung auf Kundenseite deutlich entgegengewirkt wird. Überdies wird erreicht, dass auf Seiten der Foundry sowie dem B2B-Kunden ein homogenes Verständnis, in Bezug auf die technischen Inhalte, generiert wird. Insgesamt betrachtet, liefert diese Arbeit einen wertvollen Beitrag zum Thema Customer-Reporting im hochtechnologisierten Umfeld. Man kann daher den Schluss ziehen, dass es gelingen kann, den vielfältigen Anforderungen der aufkommenden Kleinkunden mit einem generellen Reporting-Standard zu begegnen