Enhancing the sustainability performance of Agri-Food Supply Chains by implementing Industry 4.0

[EN] In order to enhance the sustainability in the supply chain, its members should define and pursue common objectives in the three dimensions of the sustainability (economic, environmental and social). The Agri-Food Supply Chain (AFSC) is a network of different members such as farmers (producers), processors and distributors (wholesales, retailers.), etc.. In order to achieve the performance objectives of the AFSC, Industry 4.0 technologies can be implemented. The aim of this paper is to present a classification of these technologies according to two criteria: objective to be achieved (environmental or social) specified in the main issues to be covered in each objective and member of the AFSC supply chain where it is implemented. In this work, we focus on technologies that deal with environmental and social sustainability because economic sustainability will depend on the specific characteristics of the business (a supply chain using a specific Industry 4.0 technology may be profitable while others do not).This work has been funded by the Project GV/2017/065 "Development of a decision support tool for the management and improvement of sustainability in supply chains" funded by the Regional Government of Valencia. Authors also acknowledge the Project 691249, RUC-APS: Enhancing and implementing Knowledge based ICT solutions within high Risk and Uncertain Conditions for Agriculture Production Systems.Pérez Perales, D.; Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Alarcón Valero, F. (2019). Enhancing the sustainability performance of Agri-Food Supply Chains by implementing Industry 4.0. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. 568:496-503. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28464-0_43S496503568Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Fornasiero, R., Afsarmanesh, H.: Collaborative networks as a core enabler of Industry 4.0. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H., Fornasiero, R. (eds.) PRO-VE 2017. IAICT, vol. 506, pp. 3–17. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65151-4_1Stich, V., Gudergan, G., Zeller, V.: Need and solution to transform the manufacturing industry in the age of Industry 4.0 – a capability maturity index approach. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H., Rezgui, Y. (eds.) PRO-VE 2018. IAICT, vol. 534, pp. 33–42. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99127-6_3Flores, M., Maklin, D., Golob, M., Al-Ashaab, A., Tucci, C.: Awareness towards Industry 4.0: key enablers and applications for internet of things and big data. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H., Rezgui, Y. (eds.) PRO-VE 2018. IAICT, vol. 534, pp. 377–386. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99127-6_32Seuring, S., Müller, M.: From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1699–1710 (2008)Prima, W.A., Xing, K., Amer, Y.: Collaboration and sustainable agri-food supply chain: a literature review. In: MATEC (2016). https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20165802004Pérez Perales, D., Alarcón Valero, F., Drummond, C., Ortiz, Á.: Towards a sustainable agri-food supply chain model. The case of LEAF. In: Ortiz, Á., Andrés Romano, C., Poler, R., García-Sabater, J.-P. (eds.) Engineering Digital Transformation. LNMIE, pp. 333–341. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96005-0_40Savastano, M., Amendola, C., Bellini, F., D’Ascenzo, F.: Contextual impacts on industrial processes brought by the digital transformation of manufacturing: a systematic review. Sustainability 11, 891 (2019)Varela, L., Araújo, A., Ávila, P., Castro, H., Putnik, G.: Evaluation of the relation between lean manufacturing, Industry 4.0, and sustainability. Sustainability 11, 1439 (2019)Bonilla, S.H., Silva, H.R.O., da Silva, M.T., Gonçalves, R.F., Sacomano, J.B.: Industry 4.0 and sustainability implications: a scenario-based analysis of the impacts and challenges. Sustainability 10, 3740 (2018)Bányai, T., Tamás, P., Illés, B., Stankeviciute, Z., Bányai, A.: Optimization of municipal waste collection routing: impact of Industry 4.0 technologies on environmental awareness and sustainability. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 16, 634 (2019)Lin, K.C., Shyu, J.Z., Ding, K.: A cross-strait comparison of innovation policy under Industry 4.0 and sustainability development transition. Sustainability 9, 786 (2017)Kamble, S.: Sustainable Industry 4.0 framework: a systematic literature review identifying the current trends and future perspectives. In: Process Safety and Environmental Protection Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Part B, vol. 117, pp. 408–25. Institution of Chemical Engineers (2018)Franciosi, C., Iung, B., Miranda, S., Riemma, S.: Maintenance for sustainability in the Industry 4.0 context: a scoping literature review. IFAC-Pap. Online 51(11), 903–908 (2018)Bocken, N.M.P., Short, S.W., Rana, P., Evans, S.: A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 42–56 (2014)Bourlakis, M., Maglaras, G., Aktas, E., Gallear, D., Fotopoulos, C.: Firm size and sustainable performance in food supply chains: insights from Greek SMEs. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 152, 112–130 (2014)Garbie, I.H.: An analytical technique to model and assess sustainable development index in manufacturing enterprises. Int. J. Prod. Res. 52(16), 4876–4915 (2014)Beier, G., Niehoff, S., Ziems, T., Xue, B.: Sustainability aspects of a digitalized industry - a comparative study from China and Germany. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Green Technol. 4, 227–234 (2017)Pérez, D., Verdecho, M.J., Alarcón, F: Industry 4.0 for the development of more sustainable decision support tools for agri-food supply chain management. In: 13rd International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Industrial Management, XXIII, Gijón, Spain (2019)Xiaolin, L., Linnan, Y., Lin, P., Wengfeng, L., Limin, Z.: Procedia engineering county soil fertility information management system based on embedded GIS. Procedia Eng. 29, 2388–2392 (2012)Satyanarayana, G.V.: Wireless sensor based remote monitoring system for agriculture using ZigBee and GPS. In: 2013 (CAC2S), pp. 110–114 (2013)Phillips, A.J., Newlands, N.K., Liang, S.H.L., Ellert, B.H.: Integrated sensing of soil moisture at the field-scale: measuring, modeling and sharing for improved agricultural decision support. Comput. Electron. Agric. 107, 73–88 (2014)Liopa-tsakalidi, A., Tsolis, D., Barouchas, P.: Application of mobile technologies through an integrated management system for agricultural production. Procedia Technol. 8, 165–170 (2013). (Haicta)Yerpude, S., Singhal, T.K.: Impact of Internet of Things (IoT) data on demand forecasting. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 10, 5 (2017)Wolfert, S., Ge, L., Verdouw, C., Bogaardt, M.: Big data in smart farming – a review. Agric. Syst. 153, 69–80 (2017)Castka, P., Balzarova, M.A.: ISO 26000 and supply chains-on the diffusion of the social responsibility standard. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 111(2), 274–286 (2008)Stock, T., Obenaus, M., Kunz, S., Kohl, H.: Industry 4.0 as enabler for a sustainable development: A qualitative assessment of its ecological and social potential. Process. Saf. Environ. 118, 254–267 (2018)Verdecho, M.J., Pérez, D., Alarcón F.: Proposal of a customer-oriented sustainable balanced scorecard for agri-food supply chains. In: 12th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Industrial Management, Girona, Spain, 12–13 July (2018)Valcour, P.M., Hunter, L.W.: Technology, organizations, and work-life integration. In: Kossek, E.E. Lambert, S.J. (eds.), Work and Life Integration: Organizational, Cultural, and Individual Perspectives, pp. 61–84. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2005)Arntz, M., Gregory, T., Zierahn, U.: The risk of automation for jobs in OECD countries: a comparative analysis. In: OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, no. 189. OECD Publishing, Paris (2016)Grubert, J., Langlotz, T., Zollmann, S., Regenbrecht, H.: Towards pervasive augmented reality: context-awareness in augmented reality. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 23, 1 (2016)Velthuis, A.G.J.: New Approaches to Food-Safety Economics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2003)Sándor, Z.P., Csiszár, C.: Development stages of intelligent parking information systems for trucks. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica 10(4), 161–174 (2013)Scognamiglio, V., Arduini, F., Palleschi, G., Rea, G.: Biosensing technology for sustainable food safety. Trends Analyt. Chem. 62, 1–10 (2014)Brynjolfsson, E., McAfee, A.: The Second Machine Age. Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. W.W. Norton & Company, London (2014)Smith, A., Caiazza, T.: Automation in everyday life (2017). http://assets.pewresearch.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/14/2017/10/03151500/PI_2017.10.04_Automation_FINAL.pdfHefferon, K.L.: Nutritionally enhanced food crops; progress and perspectives. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 16, 3895–3914 (2015)Glass, S., Fanzo, J.: Genetic modification technology for nutrition and improving diets: an ethical perspective. Curr. Opin. Biotech. 44, 46–51 (2017)Moe, T.: Perspectives on traceability in food manufacture’. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 9(5), 211–214 (1998)Latino, M., Corallo, A., Menegoli, M.: From Industry 4.0 to Agriculture 4.0: how manage product data in agri-food supply chain for voluntary traceability, a framework proposed. In: 20th International Conference on Food and Environment (ICFE), Rome (2018)Linus, U.O.: Traceability in agriculture and food supply chain: a review of basic concepts, technological implications, and future prospects. J. Food Agric. Environ. 1(1), 101–106 (2003)Maumbe, B.M., Okello, J.: Uses of information and communication technology (ICT) in agriculture and rural development in Sub-Saharan Africa: experiences from South Africa and Kenya. IJICTRDA 1(1), 1–22 (2010)Dlodlo, N., Kalezhi, J.: The internet of things in agriculture for sustainable rural development. In: International Conference on Emerging Trends in Networks and Computer Communications (ETNCC) (2015

Salinity, chitin and GA 3 effects on seed germination of chervil (Anthriscus cerefolium)

Abstract The seed germination observation of chervil (Anthriscus cerefolium) lasted 35 days at a temperature of 20 ο C. The effect of sodium chloride (NaCl), chitin and gibberillic acid (GA 3 ) on seed germination of chervil was studied for 35 days at a temperature of 22 ο C under controlled growth chamber conditions. For this, various aqueous solutions of NaCl (80, 120, 180, 240 mM NaCl), chitin (1, 2, 3, 4% ) and GA 3 (100, 200, 500, 1000 ppm GA 3 ) were used as germination substrates. The above solutions used solely or combined and added on Petri dishes containing fifty chervil seeds. The seed germination of chervil in the control (H 2 O) was 44%. In the 80 mM NaCl concentration there was an increase in the germination (64%) while in higher NaCl concentrations the germination reduced. The seed germination percentage of the chervil in the substrates with 1% and 2% chitin as the 200, 500 and 1000 ppm GA 3 was increased than the corresponding one in H 2 O. With increasing rate of chitin and GA3 the seed germination of the chervil was reduced. In the combinations of 80 mM NaCl+ 1% Chitin, 120 NaCl + 1% chitin, 120 NaCl + 100 GA 3 , 180 NaCl + 2% chitin and 180 NaCl + 200 GA 3 germination increased and the Timson Index of germination velocity was higher than the corresponding velocity in H 2 O

Effects of biochar on pepperoncini (Capsicum annuum L cv. Stavros) germination and seedling growth in two soil types

Abstract Biochar is a solid material obtained from the carbonization of biomass. The effect of biochar on the germination and seedling growth of pepperoncini pepper (Capsicum annuum L. cv. Stavros) was studied under controlled growth chamber conditions in two experiments. The substrates in the pre-test experiment (first experiment) were 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, and 10% biochar (at 24°C or 28°C), while in the second experiment they were acidic (pH 6.1) or alkaline soil (pH 7.2), with or without biochar at 24°C. Three replicates (Petri dishes) for each treatment were placed at random in a growth chamber for 12 days at a 16/8h light/dark photoperiod, 12 klx light intensity and 80% relative humidity. In biochar substrates the seed germination percentage in Η 2 Ο-control was high at 24°C and low at 28°C. At 28°C it was also increased (4°C) and it was higher than the corresponding one in the Η 2 Ο-control. At both temperatures (24°C and 28°C) there was a tendency for increased height growth. The percentage of seed germination in acidic soil substrates was low (42%), while in alkaline soil substrates high (82%). All biochar applications in acidic soil substrates increased the seed germination percentage, which varied between 53% and 67%. Biochar application in alkaline soils substrates did not influence seed germination. Seedling height in acidic soil substrates was 0.15cm, while in alkaline soil substrates it was 1.63cm. Biochar application in acidic soils increased the seedling height, while in alkaline soils it was reduced when compared to the control