Accepted Manuscript

Additive manufacturing and sustainability: an exploratory study of the advantages and

challenges

Simon Ford, Mélanie Despeisse

PII: S0959-6526(16)30439-5
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.150
Reference: JCLP 7175

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 7 August 2015

Revised Date: 25 April 2016
Accepted Date: 29 April 2016

Please cite this article as: Ford S, Despeisse M, Additive manufacturing and sustainability: an
exploratory study of the advantages and challenges, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), doi: 10.1016/
j.jclepro.2016.04.150.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Word count: 13556

Additive manufacturing and sustainability:

an exploratory study of the advantages and challenges

Simon Ford* and Mélanie Despeisse

PT
Centre for Technology Management, Institute for Manufacturing,
University of Cambridge, United Kingdom, CB3 0FS
*
corresponding author sjf39@cam.ac.uk

RI
Abstract

SC
The emergence of advanced manufacturing technologies, coupled with consumer demands for more
customised products and services, are causing shifts in the scale and distribution of manufacturing.
In this paper, consideration is given to the role of one such advanced manufacturing process

U
technology: additive manufacturing. The consequences of adopting this novel production technology
on industrial sustainability are not well understood and this exploratory study draws on publically
AN
available data to provide insights into the impacts of additive manufacturing on sustainability.
Benefits are found to exist across the product and material life cycles through product and process
redesign, improvements to material input processing, make-to-order component and product
manufacturing, and closing the loop. As an immature technology, there are substantial challenges to
M

these benefits being realised at each stage of the life cycle. This paper summarises these advantages
and challenges, and discusses the implications of additive manufacturing on sustainability in terms of
the sources of innovation, business models, and the configuration of value chains.
D

Keywords. Additive manufacturing · 3D printing · Industrial sustainability · Resource efficiency ·

TE

Product life cycle · Value chain reconfiguration

EP

1 Introduction
The manufacturing landscape is ever-changing. One of the most significant drivers of this change is
the emergence of advanced manufacturing technologies that are enabling more cost- and resource-
C

efficient small-scale production. In combination with other prominent trends such as servitisation
(Neely, 2008), personalisation (Zhou et al., 2013) and prosumption (Fox and Li, 2012), the emergence
AC

of additive manufacturing (commonly known as 3D printing) as a direct manufacturing process is

leading companies to rethink where and how they conduct their manufacturing activities.

The adoption of additive manufacturing (AM) and other advanced manufacturing technologies
appears to herald a future in which value chains are shorter, smaller, more localised, more
collaborative, and offer significant sustainability benefits (Gebler et al., 2014). Additive
manufacturing mimics biological processes by creating products layer-by-layer. It is inherently less
wasteful than traditional subtractive methods of production and holds the potential to decouple
social and economic value creation from the environmental impact of business activities. Among the
many potential sustainability benefits of this technology, three stand out:

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
• Improved resource efficiency: improvements can be realised in both production and use phases
as manufacturing processes and products can be redesigned for AM;
• Extended product life: achieved through technical approaches such as repair, remanufacture
and refurbishment, and more sustainable socio-economic patterns such as stronger person-
product affinities and closer relationships between producers and consumers (Kohtala, 2015);
• Reconfigured value chains: shorter and simpler supply chains, more localised production,
innovative distribution models, and new collaborations.

However, despite these prospective benefits, AM has not been sufficiently explored from a

PT
sustainability perspective. While it could be an enabler and a driving force for improved industrial
sustainability, the consequences of its implementation on the industrial system could lead to an
alternative scenario in which less eco-efficient localised production, customer demands for
customised goods, and a higher rate of product obsolescence combine to bring about increased

RI
resource consumption.

To date, investigations by researchers into the sustainability implications of AM have either been

SC
done at a broad level (Gebler et al., 2014; Kohtala, 2015) or been highly focused on the issue of
material and energy consumption (Baumers et al., 2011; Faludi et al., 2015). As a nascent research
area in which the impacts of AM on sustainability are unclear, the objective of this paper is to begin

U
to unpack the issues that exist at the intersection of these topics by asking: How can additive
manufacturing enable more sustainable models of production and consumption?
AN
Exploring the topic of AM through the lens of industrial sustainability provides a more
comprehensive understanding of the implications of AM for improving the sustainability of industrial
systems. Such systems are “complex with a large number of actors on a global stage [in which] …
M

actors interact with each other in complex, interlinked value chains, exchanging data, goods (raw
materials, components and products), services and, of course, money” (Royal Academy of
Engineering, 2012). As they include distributed manufacturing systems within them, industrial
D

systems cover the spectrum of digital manufacturing through to peer-to-peer production, and
encompass distributed production modes of mass customisation, bespoke fabrication, mass
TE

fabrication and personal fabrication (Kohtala, 2015).

The paper begins by first providing an overview of AM technologies, their characteristics, and a
description of their industrial applications. This is followed by a review of previous studies on aspects
EP

of the sustainability of AM. The paper then explores examples from current practice. These
examples highlight the ways in which firms have already begun to implement AM and the
consequences of this technology’s adoption on the sustainability within the wider manufacturing
C

system. Using a product life cycle perspective leads to the categorisation of these examples within
four main clusters: product and process redesign, material input processing, make-to-order
AC

component and product manufacturing, and closing the loop. Building on these insights, the paper
discusses how AM creates opportunities for sustainability and the types of organisations that are
realising these opportunities, along with potential sustainability benefits that could come in the
future through the adoption of new business models and the re-distribution of manufacturing.

2 Additive manufacturing

Among the variety of advanced manufacturing technologies that are currently emerging, additive
manufacturing stands out as one with enormous potential for changing the distribution of
manufacturing and society as a whole (Huang et al., 2013; Lipson, 2012).

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
2.1 Review of additive manufacturing technology
The term ‘additive manufacturing’ covers a broad range of production technologies that fabricate
products layer-by-layer, enabling three-dimensional objects to be ‘printed’ on demand. The ASTM
F42 Technical Committee that is responsible for overseeing the development of AM standards
defines the technology as “a process of joining materials to make objects from 3D model data,
usually layer upon layer, as opposed to subtractive manufacturing methodologies” (ASTM, 2012).
Some of the most widely adopted AM technologies are fused deposition modelling (FDM),
stereolithography (SLA), selective laser melting (SLM), selective laser sintering (SLS) and digital light
processing (DLP), but there are a variety of other AM processes too, including polyjet, electron beam

PT
melting (EBM) and laminated object manufacture (LOM) (Petrovic et al., 2011). In terms of materials,
a variety of polymers, metals, ceramics and composites can be used for AM. The use of these
materials is dependent on the type of AM process used (Guo and Leu, 2013).

RI
The first applications of AM were in the area of rapid prototyping and then tooling. These
application areas continue to be exploited to the present day but performance improvements to AM

SC
technologies mean that they are increasingly being used for direct manufacturing. Certain industries
such as aerospace, where the need to produce a small number of highly complex aircraft
components makes the application of AM technologies ideal, are already fully aware of their
potential and are investing in research to improve their reliability and applicability (Guo and Leu,

U
2013; Lyons, 2012). In the medical sector highly personalised one-off products are needed. The
capabilities of AM make it the ideal technique to address this need. This is exemplified by the
AN
manufacturing process for in-ear hearing aids which has almost entirely shifted to AM (Sandström,
2015), while other applications in orthodontics, prosthetics, orthotics, implants and replacement
organs are at various stages of maturity and adoption. The pattern of industrial emergence,
technology adoption and diffusion can be seen to follow the niche development and speciation that
M

has been observed in previous emerging industries (Ford et al., 2014; Phaal et al., 2011).

In addition to these technical and commercial developments there have been a range of other
D

advances made in cold spray-based AM processes that have not been used as prototyping methods
(Sova et al., 2013). Although these have not traditionally been considered as AM, they are being
TE

promoted as such and fit within the ASTM definitions of AM.

Alongside the advances that have been made in AM in the industrial market, a variety of consumer
grade ‘3D printers’ have proliferated on the market. The majority of these home 3D printers (e.g.
EP

RepRap, Makerbot, Ultimaker) are based on the fused deposition modelling (FDM) technology
originally developed by the US firm Stratasys. Their commercialisation was made possible following
the expiry of the first patents protecting this technology, an open source movement that saw
C

hobbyist activity around the technology, and crowdfunding through platforms such as Kickstarter
and Indiegogo. These machines offer the promise that individual consumers will be able to design
AC

and produce personalised products at their convenience (Lipson and Kerman, 2010).

A list of the current characteristics of AM is provided in Table 1, describing both the advantages of
this manufacturing technology relative to established subtractive and transformative methods, and
the challenges to its development and wider adoption.

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 1. Advantages and challenges of additive manufacturing (adapted from Berman (2012); Chen et al., 2015; Huang et
al., 2013; Petrick and Simpson (2013); Petrovic et al. (2011))

Advantages Challenges

● Small batches of customised products are ● Cost and speed of production

economically attractive relative to traditional ● Changing the way that designers think about
mass production methods and approach the use of additive
● Direct production from 3D CAD models mean manufacturing
that no tools and moulds are required, so there ● Removing the perception that AM is only for

PT
are no switch over costs rapid prototyping and not for direct component
● Designs in the form of digital files can be easily and product manufacture
shared, facilitating the modification and ● Development and standardisation of new
customisation of components and products materials

RI
● The additive nature of the process gives ● Validation of the mechanical and thermal
material savings, as does the ability to reuse properties of existing materials and AM
waste material (i.e. powder, resin) not used technologies

SC
during manufacture (estimated at 95-98% ● Development of multi-material and multi-
recyclability for metal powders) colour systems
● Novel, complex structures, such as free-form ● Automation of AM systems and process
enclosed structures and channels, and lattices planning to improve manufacturing efficiency

U
are achievable ● Post-processing is often required. This may be
● Final parts have very low porosity due to the stair stepping effect that arises from
AN
● Making to order reduces inventory risk, with incrementally placing one layer on top of
no unsold finished goods, while also improving another, or because finishing layers are needed
revenue flow as goods are paid for prior to ● Support structure materials cannot be recycled
being manufactured so need to be minimised through a good build-
M

● Distribution allows direct interaction between up orientation

local consumer/client and producer ● Intellectual property issues, particularly
regarding copyright
● Deficits in designers and engineers skilled in
D

additive manufacturing
● Non-linear, localised collaboration with ill-
TE

defined roles and responsibilities

● Continuously changing set of competitors
EP

2.2 Additive manufacturing and sustainability

Manufacturing is about converting material input into goods and services. The efficiency of this
conversion process is a key determinant of the environmental impact associated with manufacturing
C

(Gutowski, 2009). Additive manufacturing has been identified as having the potential to provide a
number of sustainability advantages. These advantages include the generation of less waste during
AC

manufacturing due to it being an additive process; the capability to optimise geometries and create
lightweight components that reduce material consumption in manufacturing and energy
consumption in use; the subsequent reduction in transportation in the supply chain; and inventory
waste reduction due to the ability to create spare parts on-demand (Chen et al., 2015; Mani, 2014).
Overall “AM is expected to become a key manufacturing technology in the sustainable society of the
future” (Huang et al., 2013, p. 1201).

There are currently few studies investigating and analysing the degree to which these potential
advantages are being realised. The majority of academic studies have focused on the energy
consumption of AM, with research assessing either the relative energy performance of different
types of AM or comparing AM with other manufacturing techniques such as injection moulding
(Baumers, 2011; Chen et al., 2015; Franco, 2012; Le Bourhis, 2013; Sreenivasan, 2010; Yoon et al.,

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
2014). The overall results from these studies vary widely and remain inclusive. From these studies it
is difficult to generalise whether AM has a lower environmental impact than other manufacturing
techniques because the life cycle impact of parts made with AM is highly dependent on machine
utilisation (Faludi et al., 2015), the specification of each piece of AM equipment, and how the
material input is processed. Calls for further studies into this area have been made (Huang et al.,
2013). It is clear however that increasingly machine utilisation through machine and tool sharing is
key to reducing the environmental impact of AM.

The economic and environmental performance of manufacturing systems are strongly intertwined

PT
and this also applies to AM (Chen et al., 2015). Currently available AM techniques can be
economically convenient and compete with traditional processes for small to medium batch
production of metal parts. The machine cost per part is a major component of total cost. Machines
and materials for AM are still expensive but the cost of these will decrease as AM becomes a more

RI
commonly used production technique. Furthermore, AM is expected to become more cost effective
as larger production volumes become more economically feasible than at present.

SC
The design freedoms offered by AM allow product and component redesign. Using additive
techniques, several parts made of the various material can be replaced by one integrated assembly,
which will reduce or eliminate cost, time and quality problems resulting from assembling operations.

U
Assembly cost is minimised or even cut out through part consolidation. Redesign can result in an
optimum strength-to-weight ratio able to meet functional requirements while minimising material
AN
volume. Life cycle analyses have shown that the adoption of AM could have significant savings in the
production of goods. Savings are estimated at $113-370 billion by 2025, with these arising from
reductions in material inputs and handling, along with shorter supply chains (Gebler et al., 2014).
M

The economic benefits due to efficiency and process improvements in design, testing and
manufacturing are greater than the benefits from the avoidance of investment in tooling (Atzeni and
Salmi, 2012). In addition, once the part design is released, the production begins immediately.
D

Reducing the time delay between design and manufacturing results in cost savings. Further cost
reductions can be realised if the component shape is modified to fully exploit AM potentials. Using
TE

additively manufactured components can also lead to cost savings in the use phase. Lightweight
components will reduce energy consumption and could deliver savings of $56-219 billion by 2025
(Gebler et al., 2014).
EP

Despite the potential increase in recycling rate, materials used for AM are not necessarily greener
than materials used in traditional manufacturing. The one exception may be the bio-polymer
polylactic acid (PLA) (Faludi et al., 2015). Potential material savings may be partially offset by the
C

relative toxicity of the material used for AM (Faludi et al., 2015) and the impact of energy usage for
producing the input material as well as the processing itself. Thus the full environmental
AC

performance of AM must take into consideration the energy demand from a system perspective and
not just the process itself (Faludi et al., 2015; Hao, 2010; Reeves, 2008; Sreenivasan, 2010).

On the social sustainability front, the social impact of AM is also still poorly understood. The most
detailed study concerning social issues focuses on work condition and worker’s health as social
indicators (Huang et al., 2013). AM may have health benefits when compared to conventional
manufacturing processes as it allows workers to avoid long-term exposure to harsh and potentially
hazardous work environments. However, little research has been made on the toxicity and
environmental potency of AM processes and materials. Such impacts may exist during the
processing and disposing of the materials used in AM processes. A second social dimension relates
to the democratisation of production that direct digital manufacturing technologies such as AM
provides. The combination of ICT, widely available CAD software and 3D printers is changing

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
consumption patterns. Rather than being entirely passive consumers, users are becoming
empowered to also produce themselves, becoming prosumers within a global manufacturing
community (Chen et al., 2015). While some pro-environmental subgroups of prosumers that make
use of shared maker facilities are aware of the environmental implications of AM practices, the
majority remain unaware and sustainability issues are not integrated into their practices (Kohtala
and Hyysalo, 2015).

This potential for AM to contribute to a more sustainable society is also beginning to be recognised
in policy circles. In the UK, the Additive Manufacturing Special Interest Group that was formed

PT
within the Materials Knowledge Transfer Network identified how AM has the potential to support
future needs in sustainable, high value manufacturing through a more efficient manufacturing
system and new business models (TSB, 2012). Meanwhile, the UK’s Government Office for Science
expects AM to have “a profound impact on the way manufacturers make almost any product”,

RI
stating that it “will become an essential ‘tool’ allowing designs to be optimised to reduce waste;
products to be made as light as possible; inventories of spare parts to be reduced; greater flexibility
in the location of manufacturing; products to be personalised to consumers; consumers to make

SC
some of their own products; and products to be made with new graded composition and bespoke
properties” (BIS, 2013).

3 Research Methods
U
AN
While researchers such as Chen et al. (2015) and Mani (2014) have identified the sustainability
benefits of additive manufacturing and Kohtala (2015) the potential threats, it is important to
examine how these potential benefits and threats are being implemented in practice. This paper
M

investigates the implications of the adoption of AM by organisations and industries through

exploratory case studies (Yin, 2009).
D

The cases were identified through reviews of industry reports from consultants (e.g. Wohlers,
CreditSuisse, PWC), reputable industry news sources (e.g. TCT Magazine, 3D Printing Industry, 3D
TE

Print Pulse, 3Ders), and at the suggestion of industry experts. Following the identification of
potential cases, a life cycle perspective was used to guide the selection of the cases used in this
paper. A theoretical replication logic was adopted to select cases for contrasting results. The novelty
of AM technologies at this point in time means that the selected cases are exemplars of the
EP

application of AM rather than representative of a larger population.

A case description was created for each example based on the data obtained. This data was directly
drawn from company websites and the aforementioned industry news sources. In one case,
C

academic publications were also used to create these descriptions. Selected links to these sources of
data are provided in Table 8 in the Appendix. While there is the potential that this company data
AC

could mis-represent the magnitude of the sustainability benefits achieved, for this exploratory study
it is sufficient to identify the types of benefits being realised rather than quantify them.

A coding process was adopted to extract the sustainability advantages and challenges from the case
descriptions, with these analysed within the frame of the product and material life cycles (Figure 1).
This process led to the identification of the sustainability benefits being realised through AM at
different stages of the product life cycle (Table 2). The examples in this table are clustered according
to the section in which they appear, i.e. the life cycle stage which is the focus of the changes
resulting in the adoption of AM. The specific advantages and challenges from each of these cases are
described in Section 4 and summarised in Tables 3-6. An overall summary of the observed
advantages and challenges across the life cycle stages is provided at the end of Section 5 (Table 7).

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
[FIGURE 1 GOES ABOUT HERE, with following caption:

Figure 1. Life cycle perspective for identifying sustainability benefits of AM]

Table 2. Identified sustainability benefits across various life cycle stages

Consumers/ Closing
Design Production prosumers the loop

PT
RI
Product & Material Repair &
Section Example process design processing Manufacturing Use & service reman Recycling
SAVING
 

SC
4.1.1 project
Component
Rolls-Royce  
and product
redesign

U
GE  


AN
4.1.2 Salcomp
Process
redesign Construction 


M

Metalysis

4.2 Filabot  
Material input
D

EKOCYCLE
processing  
Cube
TE

Bewell
 
Watches

Kazzata  
4.3
EP

Make-to-order Siemens  
component and
Home 3D
product  
printers
C

manufacturing
3D Hubs 
AC

PPP  
4.4
Closing the Caterpillar  
loop
HMT  

4 Additive manufacturing in industry: the sustainability implications

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
In this section the sustainability implications of AM’s adoption begin to be explored. The cases are
grouped and discussed across four stages of the product life cycle: product and process design;
material input processing; make-to-order component and product manufacturing; and closing the
loop.

4.1 Product and process design

AM enables the design of more complex and optimised components thanks to greater freedoms in
shape and geometry, along with simpler assemblies comprising fewer parts and fewer different
materials. The free-form and lightweight structures that are possible are often inspired by nature

PT
and draw on biomimicry concepts. The benefits that can be realised occur over the whole life cycle
of the product and its materials, as illustrated in Error! Reference source not found.. Examples of
product improvements include greater operational efficiency, functionality and durability, and ease

RI
of manufacturing and maintenance (Despeisse and Ford, 2015).

4.1.1 Component and product redesign

SC
The new AM design freedoms allow the creation of new material structures such as porous mesh
arrays and open cellular foams. Incorporating these novel structures into the core of components
can enhance the attributes of the component being fabricated. Possible improvements includes

U
increased strength, stiffness, energy efficiency and corrosion resistance (Guo and Leu, 2013). For
example, the strength of an EBM-fabricated component using a Ti6Al4V open cellular foam can be
AN
up 40% greater than a full density EBM-fabricated component (Murr et al., 2010).

Components and products can be redesigned to take advantage of AM’s beneficial properties.
Examples from the UK-funded SAVING (Sustainable product development via design optimization
M

and AdditiVe manufacturING) project include the redesign of belt buckles on aeroplanes in order to
reduce weight; heatsinks to improve airflow and thermal efficiency; and heat exchangers that
provide improved efficiency within constrained geometries.
D

Aerospace is one sector in which AM has found particular application given its high performance
TE

needs and relatively low scale of production. Aside from the significant environmental impacts of the
airline industry, the manufacturing of aero engine components itself has a high impact on the
environment. Substantial waste arises from the manufacturing process. Typical buy-to-fly material
ratios of 4:1 (input material to final component) are common using traditional 5-axis milling
EP

processes, with some components having a ratio as high as 20:1. The EU FP7 MERLIN project sought
to address this environmental impact through the application of AM technologies in civil air
transportation. The project involved a number of leading European aerospace organisations,
C

including Rolls-Royce, Turbomeca and MTU, as well as researchers at the Fraunhofer ILT. One of the
results of this project was an improved AM process, Laser Material Deposition (LMD), for the
AC

manufacture of bladed disks (‘blisks’) used in aero engines. The benefit of this manufacturing
process is that it avoids the generation of waste (‘swarf’). The majority of this swarf material cannot
be recycled; when it can be it is usually done much lower down the value stream and consumes a
similar level of energy to the manufacture of the original material. Early demonstrators developed at
the Fraunhofer ILT show that the LMD process can achieve material savings of approximately 60%,
along with time savings of 30%.

The most noteworthy product redesign to date is that achieved by GE for its LEAP engine that
launches in 2016. After several years developing capabilities in AM, GE will include nineteen
additively manufactured fuel nozzles in the new engine. Designed for additive manufacture, the new
fuel nozzle is five times stronger to aid durability and has been designed in order to provide the best
fuel flow geometry to improve combustion efficiency. Furthermore, GE has been able to realise a

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
significant weight reduction of 25% relative to the existing nozzle. Part of this reduction has been
achieved through simplification; the existing design had 20 separate components while the new
design is a single component.

4.1.2 Process redesign

Just as improvements can be made to product design, so too can improvements be made to the
production process design. Through incorporating AM-produced components (e.g. moulds, tooling)
that make use of forms only possible through AM, the production process can become more energy
and resource efficient (Chen et al., 2015).

PT
An example of this can be seen at the Finnish company Salcomp, a world leader in the production of
electrical plugs and power supplies for mobile phones. In this high volume industry, cost and

RI
efficiency are the major driving forces for maintaining competitive position. Seeking to improve the
production efficiency of its Chennai plant, Salcomp identified that the cooling time in its injection
moulding process was a limiting factor. Working together with EOS, a German developer of direct

SC
metal laser sintering (DMLS) AM technology, Salcomp engineers were able to redesign the vent
structure of the moulds used so that heat would be dissipated more quickly. These moulds were
then produced using the DMLS AM technology. The main benefit of this redesign was that cooling
time was reduced from 14 seconds to eight seconds, enabling 56,000 more units to be produced

U
each month. A secondary benefit was an improvement to quality, with rejection rates reduced from
2.0% to 1.4%.
AN
Current AM systems remain far from automised and need to become so if they are to become more
integrated into manufacturing systems and realise resource efficiency improvements. Part of the
M

need for automation arises from the requirement for post-processing to eliminate the ‘stair
stepping’ effect that results from the incremental layer-by-layer build-up of material. In other cases
post-processing may be required to achieve a particular aesthetic finish. Applying hybrid
manufacturing techniques could be one solution to these problems. Such techniques have existed
D

for a long time, e.g. ultrasonic assisted mechanical machining (Colwell, 1956; Markov and Neppiras,
1966). Hybrid manufacturing processes offer a number of advantages such as improved finish
TE

quality, shorter production time, and reduced tool wear. The integration of AM with traditional
subtractive, joining and transformative processes into these hybrid manufacturing techniques can
also realise these advantages.
EP

The potential for process redesign extends beyond traditional manufacturing into other sectors. One
example is the construction sector, which as a major material, energy and water consumer presents
significant opportunities for resource efficiency improvements (Buyle et al., 2013). Demonstrations
C

of in-situ construction, such as the MX3D bridge, 3D Print Canal House and 3D printed apartment
buildings in China, show what is becoming possible using AM approaches in this industry. These early
AC

examples demonstrate that the environmental impacts of logistics can be reduced through
additively manufacturing using basic materials. This means that fewer materials can be brought to
and from the construction site, also reducing waste overheads. However, the construction industry
is highly conservative and slow to change, with this conservatism arising from the longer life cycle of
infrastructure and concerns about safety and liability. Demonstration of the infrastructure is needed
over a longer timeframe than in other industries in which product life cycles are shorter and includes
process and material certification.

4.1.3 Benefits and limitations

The above examples demonstrate the potential of AM redesigns to improve the overall sustainability
performance of products and processes. Material and energy efficiency can be improved through

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
dematerialisation and reducing energy consumption during processing. Moreover, the adoption of
AM may result in reconfigurations to the value chain. Redesign of products and components can
lead to simpler products that require fewer components, materials, actors, stages and interactions.
Thus improving the performance of products through simplification can reduce the scale of material
flows and lead to a reduction in the environmental impact over the whole supply chain. The shift
from a centralised system of manufacturing to a more decentralised one implies that the
environmental impact of transportation will be reduced while at the same time supporting and
empowering local communities (Chen et al., 2015).

PT
However, there are also barriers and challenges to fully exploiting these potential benefits. Firstly,
current perceptions of AM technology by designers and engineers are biased by its original
application being limited to rapid prototyping and tooling, and thus not being considered fit for
purpose for direct component and product manufacture. Secondly, there are limitations to the

RI
performance of AM technologies. While novel forms can be created through AM, new functionality
such as microelectronics cannot be embedded yet into components and products. AM technologies
need further development to become sufficiently advanced to enable the integration of these types

SC
of new functionalities during the manufacturing process. Changing mindsets and improving the
technical performance of AM technologies is needed to harness the full benefits of AM at the design
stage.

U
Table 3. Summary of observed sustainability advantages and challenges at the design stage
AN
Example Advantages Challenges
SAVING project • Material and energy savings in the • Educating manufacturers about the
production of high value products potential uses and benefits of AM
M

• Improved product functionality and

efficiency in use
Rolls-Royce • Lower energy intensity and waste • Process scale-up
D

avoidance in the manufacturing process • Implementation of distributed

• In-situ repair for maintenance and maintenance system
TE

extended product life • Certification of repair process

GE • Improved durability for extended • Certification of new components
product life • Capturing and replicating learning in
• Improved fuel efficiency during product future applications
EP

use
• Simplification and dematerialisation of
the product
C

Salcomp • More energy efficient production • Capturing and replicating learning in

process future applications
AC

• Improved quality reduced rejection rate

Construction • In-situ manufacturing process • Limited and uncertain performance due
generates less waste to low maturity of the technology for
• Transportation of more basic materials large-scale structures
simplifies supply chains • Requirement for standards and
regulations

4.2 Material input processing

The materials that are used as inputs to AM provide opportunities for sustainability improvements.
Just as there are a variety of AM technologies, so too is there significant variety in the materials used

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
as inputs. The nature of the material is dependent on the specific type of AM process used. The four
major categories of material are liquid, filament/paste, powder and solid sheet (Guo and Leu, 2013).

During the raw material processing stage, there is the potential to rethink how certain raw materials
are processed to minimise the resources needed to bring them into a usable form as inputs for
manufacturing processes. Metal powders used in laser sintering and melting approaches, along with
electron beam melting, are one such case. Significant energy is expended during the process of
refining and processing the metal ores in preparation for manufacturing. One company that is
addressing the high energy consumption of refining metal ores is the UK-based firm Metalysis, which

PT
has commercialised a process for producing titanium powder directly from titanium ore (Lubik and
Garnsey, 2016). This process, the FFC process, requires significantly less energy to produce the
titanium powder than the established Kroll process (Mellor et al., 2015). Furthermore, the process
uses a non-toxic reactant, calcium chloride, during refinement and any leftover CaCl can be reused.

RI
However, the relative immaturity of the technology means there are currently few materials for
which such novel processing techniques have been developed. For those that have, there has yet to
be standardisation. To identify the most resource efficient standards and enable this standardisation

SC
to be achieved, further research is required to explore and validate the mechanical and thermal
properties of AM technologies and materials.

U
Recycled materials sit alongside virgin materials as inputs into the AM process. An example at the
local level can be seen with home 3D printers using fused deposition modelling (FDM) technology.
AN
Waste plastic filament, misprints and undesired outputs can be reclaimed and reused. This is
achieved through use of equipment such as that produced by Filabot. It first involves grinding the
plastic goods into granules and then feeding these granules into a filament producing machine. The
main issue with this approach is colour contamination and a reduction in the material properties of
M

the polymer. The latter issue can be overcome through the use of polylactic acid (PLA), a polymer
commonly used in 3D printing filament, which has the ability to be recycled with little quality loss.
D

At the system level this is achieved through the use of commonly recycled materials and their
conversion into forms suitable for AM. An example of this can be seen in the EKOCYCLE Cube home
TE

3D printer, which uses recycled polyethylene terephthalate (rPET) in its cartridges. These cartridges
currently use 25% recycled PET content and are available in red, white, black and natural colours.
Higher recycled percentages are also possible but are limited by the lower aesthetic quality of the
resultant polymer. As a collaboration between 3D Systems and the Coca-Cola Company, this
EP

initiative seeks to divert used PET bottles, such as those from Coca-Cola, from the waste stream.

Finally, AM can also allow the conversion of waste and by-products into products. There are
C

examples demonstrating that material traditionally considered as waste can be upcycled to

manufacture luxury products using AM. Upcycling is advocated by the cradle-to-cradle community
AC

(Braungart and McDonough, 2002) and enables value to be created from what would otherwise be
considered a waste. One such example from our cases is provided by Bewell Watches. Wood flour
and dust is a typical by-product from timber and wood processing, and is considered waste. These
wood wastes have found applications as a filler in thermosetting resins, wood-plastic composites
and building products. Bewell Watches manufactures customised wood watches using these wood
by-products combined with binding agents to create a wood filament for AM, thus diverting material
from waste streams and creating value for the company and its customers. There are however
limitations on material recirculation due to quality and purity issues which could prevent recycling of
the products when they reach their end-of-life. Current technologies for wood-polymer composite
recycling are in their infancy and the national infrastructures required for their recycling are missing
(Teuber et al., 2016).

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 4. Summary of observed sustainability advantages and challenges at the material input processing stage

Example Advantages Challenges

Metalysis • Lower environmental impact of • Material and process standardisation
titanium powder production through • Process scale-up for new materials
lower energy consumption
• Process reactants are non-toxic and can
be recycled locally
Filabot • Democratised material recycling • Limited to polymer filament

PT
• Localised material recycling • Possibility of colour and material
contamination
EKOCYCLE Cube • Diversion of PET waste streams into • Limited material options

RI
new applications • Limited percentage of recycled content
• Input recycled materials are from • Compatibility of proprietary non-
larger-scale recycling systems, standard material input format
potentially more efficient than local

SC
recycling systems
Bewell Watches • Diversion of by-product from waste • Limited recyclability of product at its
stream end-of-life due to mixed materials

U
• Upcycling
AN
4.3 Make-to-order component and product manufacturing
The economics of AM make it ideal for make-to-order component and product manufacturing,
allowing production of spare parts for replacement, and lower cost customisation and
M

personalisation. Holding a database of digital designs allows products to be manufactured on

demand using AM. Doing so can help eliminate or at least minimise inventory waste, reduce
inventory risk with no unsold finished goods, with the potential of improving revenue flow as goods
D

are paid for prior to being manufactured.

TE

Traditionally, when a component in a product breaks the consumer will either discard or repair the
product depending on the value of the product and the cost and ease of its repair. Repairing the
product usually require obtaining a replacement component from the manufacturer or its
distributors. For such organisations maintaining an inventory of replacement parts is costly and
EP

there is great uncertainty over future demand for these parts. The alternative, producing one-off
spare parts on demand, is prohibitively expensive using traditional manufacturing technologies.
However, the economics of AM makes the one-off production of spare parts more cost attractive,
C

with the added benefit that the 3D CAD files containing component designs can be easily shared
once they have been created. At present however there is limited access to such files.
AC

Kazzata is a digital repository that provides a selection of 3D CAD files of replacement parts that
users can download and manufacture. The number of files available from Kazzata is currently very
limited so in addition it provides a service that links consumers with spare part needs to designers
who can provide CAD design services. Following the design of the spare part, the consumer can then
receive either the 3D CAD file for themselves to manufacture, or the replacement component
directly from Kazzata. Similar design and engineering services can be provided by the rapidly growing
number of AM service bureaus. Barriers to a wider system of spare parts include component
certification and legal issues concerning liability.

In industry, one organisation making the shift towards make-to-order product manufacturing for
spare parts is Siemens Power Generation Services (Siemens PGS). As one of the businesses within

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Siemens AG it provides support, maintenance and repair services to customers operating rotating
power equipment such as gas steam and wind turbines, generators and compressors. Having
identified the combustion system in gas turbines as one particular application whereby AM could
improve customer value in spare parts repair and manufacturing, Siemens PGS acquired direct metal
laser sintering (DMLS) AM systems from EOS in 2007. Within this combustion system, Siemens PGS
has redesigned the burner ‘swirler’ to make use of the design freedoms afforded by AM. Through
using AM the burner tip can be repaired more quickly and with less waste. It is estimated that the
repair time is ten times quicker than the previous approach. Less waste is generated as little of the
burner is now discarded; only the top 18 mm edge of the burner tip is removed prior to repair. Using

PT
AM also allows for much easier upgrading to the latest design and is a step towards the business’
future vision of spare parts being manufactured on demand closer to the customer’s location.

As described in this section, the configuration of the manufacturing system can change dramatically

RI
with the introduction of AM. The shift from traditional mass production methods and economies of
scale to small batch production of customised or personalised goods is made possible at a lower
cost. The development and diffusion of consumer 3D printers in homes and offices, such as

SC
Ultimaker, Cube and Makerbot Replicator, are also blurring the line between consumers and
manufacturers. Technology users are playing the role of both producers and consumers, making
them prosumers. They can design and manufacture products on-demand to the exact specifications

U
required and at the point of use in space and time. In addition, 3D printers can be combined with
Filabot and other in-situ recycling systems to convert waste back into filament and use it as input for
AN
3D printing new products. In this fashion, home 3D printers are beginning to enable more
distributed, small-scale and localised manufacturing. Their wider adoption is anticipated to have
major effects on the whole supply chain. Logistics are simplified as fewer, more basic material inputs
are needed. Furthermore, inventories of components and products can be reduced or eliminated,
M

thus in turn reducing the economic losses and environmental impacts associated with unsold and
obsolete components (Chen et al., 2015).
D

From a sustainability perspective, the additive nature of AM makes it a more resource efficient
manufacturing process as less waste is generated compared to subtractive techniques. While it can
TE

be argued that AM is more energy intensive per unit produced (relative performance), AM allows
units to be produced to exactly match the demand (make-to-order) and thus offers the potential for
better absolute performance. Higher raw material utilisation leads to dematerialisation and reduced
waste (Chen et al., 2015).
EP

As well as reducing energy and resource consumption, the make-to-order model of distribution also
allows direct interaction between local consumers/clients and producers, with collaborative learning
C

and user innovation benefits of this approach (de Jong and de Bruijn, 2013). Networks such as 3D
Hubs provide an online platform that links owners of 3D printers with customers. The owners are
AC

typically prosumers who have spare printing capacity and want to increase utilisation. This provides
access to local manufacturing. It delivers the same benefits as described above but increases
equipment utilisation as customers do not need to own and operate their own equipment. The
number of hubs in the network is rapidly growing. At the time of writing, there are over 25,000 3D
printers accessible within the 3D Hubs network.

The challenge of this distribution model is that non-linear, localised collaboration between actors
with ill-defined roles and responsibilities could result in conflicts and incompatibilities (Petrick and
Simpson, 2013; Chen et al., 2015). Additionally, a continuously changing set of actors and
competitors creates an uncertain investment environment that makes business strategy formulation
and competitive positioning difficult. Companies and entrepreneurs entering this market must have

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
extreme resilience, flexibility and responsiveness to rapidly adapt to market changes (Gartner,
1985).

Table 5. Summary of observed sustainability advantages and challenges at the manufacturing stage

Example Advantages Challenges

Kazzata • Increased access to digital designs for • Limited availability of digital designs
spare parts • Cost of acquiring new digital designs
• Novel design made possible through • Capturing and replicating learning in

PT
Siemens
AM future applications
• Quicker component repair
• Less high-value waste generated

RI
• Upgradability of component being
repaired
• Potential for the on demand

SC
manufacture of spare parts
Home 3D printers • More localised manufacturing • Limited functionality and utility
• Simpler supply chains • Reliability and quality of 3D printing
• Democratised design process

U
• Raised awareness of manufacturing • Limited digital designs available
process and its impacts • Encourages materialistic society and
AN
consumerism
3D Hubs • Improved access to equipment • Services are currently fragmented and
• Increased equipment utilisation unevenly distributed
M

• More localised production through • Majority of services are lower-end

proximity of producer to customer consumer 3D printers
D

4.4 Closing the loop

Attempts at closing the loop can be achieved at various stages and scales in AM. The highest value
TE

recovery possible is achieved locally during the manufacturing process when the unused AM
material (powder or resin) is reclaimed. For metal powders it is estimated that 95-98% can be
recycled (Petrovic et al., 2015).
EP

At the product end-of-life stage, in-situ recycling systems can be linked to AM, diverting material
from waste streams and into new applications. However this links to the material standardisation
issue previously discussed. The greater the diversity in materials entering the recycling system then
C

the greater the complexity of processes required during the recycling process, along with the
potential for loss of value when materials cannot be separated. This then speak again for the need
AC

for the further development and validation of material properties and AM technologies.

The AM process has the potential to increase the value recovered embedded in waste. For instance,
the example of reusing the plastics such as PET commonly used in consumer products and
transforming them into fashion products. This can be readily achieved with the relatively simple AM
equipment that is available to the general public either as products (e.g. EKOCYCLE Cube, Filabot
linked to a 3D printer that uses filaments such as the MakerBot) or as services (e.g. 3D Hubs).

Initiatives such as Better Future Factory help raise awareness and educate the public about small-
scale plastic waste recycling and AM. Its Perpetual Plastic Project (PPP) investigated the possibilities
of using plastic waste as an input for 3D printing. The materials tested are commonly used plastics
for everyday products such as plastic cups, bottles, caps and supermarket plastic bags; i.e. polylactic

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
acid (PLA), polystyrene (PS), low density polyethylene (LDPE), polyamide (PA) and polypropylene
(PP). While the project found that some plastics are recycled more successfully than others, it also
demonstrated the feasibility and relative ease of plastic recycling for 3D printing applications. One
such plastic, the bio-polymer PLA, can provide a wide range of material properties and thus
substitute for different plastics. Through the greater use of PLA and less diversity in the range of
plastics consumed, simpler recycling systems may be realised. In addition, PLA has the ability to be
recycled with no quality loss when treated by specialised companies (e.g. Plaxica). It can be fed back
into the same system and thus enable a closed-loop circulation of material (Chen et al., 2015).

PT
During repair, maintenance and remanufacturing, the make-to-order model can be applied with the
same benefits of minimising the inventory waste as spare parts could be produced locally only when
needed, with lower energy intensity processes. This is even more the case with modular and
upgradable components, such as that previously described at Siemens PGS. AM repair technologies

RI
enable products to be maintained on a more localised basis, potentially in-situ. This is another
advantage of the LMD AM technology co-developed by Rolls-Royce. As well as for component
manufacture, LMD can also be used for the in-situ repair of damaged blisks. As a result, this

SC
technology offers the potential for maximising the use and extending the lifespan of the blisk. The
equipment manufacturer Optomec has also commercialised a technology, LENS, that was originally
developed at Pratt & Whitney and which can be applied to blisk repair.

U
Cold spray AM has a long history in its application to remanufacturing. Caterpillar has been using
AN
this technology for remanufacturing diesel engines since the early 1970s. During the subsequent
four decades, Caterpillar improved and expanded its remanufacturing processes, Cat Reman, by
replacing products before they break with a mixture of new and used parts. Over the last five years,
they achieved an average of 94% of product end-of-life take back. This resulted in increased profit
M

margins while simultaneously delivering products of the highest quality; remanufactured engines
and parts are of the same quality of new ones. Today, 40% of the components in a reman engine are
new and could be further reduced to 25% through better quality control, less scrapping of parts that
D

could be remanufactured (i.e. better availability of reman components), new innovative repair
techniques and AM. These new techniques can be applied for expensive parts such as metal spraying
TE

of the worn surfaces of piston rods followed by machining to obtain surfaces as good as new.

Another application of this technique is the repair of engine heads and blocks with cracks or similar
faults by method of milling, metal spraying, grinding and polishing. For Caterpillar, remanufacturing
EP

makes both economic and environmental sense. Although the cost of remanufactured engines
depends on the number of parts which can be remanufactured, it is estimated that a
remanufactured engine costs 60% of the price of a new one, reman parts are sold at the price of 40%
C

of new ones. The opportunity that remanufacturing presents extends beyond Caterpillar. In the UK
alone it is estimated that remanufacturing has the potential to create £5.6bn for manufacturers and
AC

support the creation of over 310,000 new manufacturing jobs while reducing greenhouse gas
emissions (Lavery et al., 2013).

Hybrid technologies combining additive and subtractive processes hold the potential to scale up
remanufacturing and repair of high value components. Following the promising results of the
Innovate UK RECLAIM project, the spin-out company Hybrid Manufacturing Technologies (HMT)
developed the AMBIT™ multi-task system combining laser cladding, machining and inspection. This
new hybrid systems addresses the issue of automation as it allows repair/remanufacture in a fully
automated manner. This allows the process to be applied more broadly, more accurately and more
productively to remanufacture high volume, high value parts at lower cost. As with LMD, this
technology has been applied to the repair of turbine blades.

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 6. Summary of observed sustainability advantages and challenges at the use and end-of-life stages

Example Advantages Challenges

PPP • Small and simple equipment, quick and • Limits on recyclability of plastics due to
easy to use as mobile or small-scale quality loss
recycling station • Educating consumers about recycling 3D
• Accessible and fun to use for the printed plastics
general public, raising awareness of
plastic waste recycling
• In-situ recycling of common plastic

PT
waste from everyday products and
packaging
Caterpillar • Improved product utilisation • Replication of business model to other

RI
• Reduced material consumption sectors
• Designed for longevity
• Aligned with business model

SC
HMT • Automated processes, all process steps • Limited integration of AM with other
integrated into one techniques in design and production
• High accuracy, thus high quality finish • Required mindset shift for designers and
• Potential for high volume

U
engineers
• Remanufacturing and repair of high
value components at low(er) cost
AN
5 AM as part of a transition towards a more sustainable industrial system
M

The examples in this paper demonstrate some of the ways in which AM is beginning to transform the
D

industrial system and enable improvements to resource efficiency and new models of sustainable
production and consumption. These examples provide some initial insights in response to the
TE

question asked at the outset of this paper: how can additive manufacturing enable more sustainable
models of production and consumption? The following sections build on observations from these
examples with a discussion of how AM is creating opportunities for improved sustainability, who is
realising these opportunities, and the effect of AM on business models and the distribution of
EP

manufacturing.

5.1 AM opportunities for enabling sustainability

C

Taking a product life cycle perspective, this paper has principally considered the opportunities
through which AM could contribute towards sustainability. AM is an emerging manufacturing
AC

process and its adoption has direct impacts at this stage of the product life cycle. What is apparent
from this study is that it is also beginning to deliver sustainability benefits at other stages of the
product life cycle. The examples in this paper illustrate some of the nascent benefits which are
slowly being realised, with the pace of adoption and diffusion varying across the different stages.

While AM can be considered as a direct substitute for traditional manufacturing processes, its
primary economic benefits lie in the production of customised single or small batches of goods. As
technology and market demonstrations of these advantages are being made, a growing number of
organisations are adopting the technology or drawing on the offerings of service bureaus. In its
current manifestation, AM will be a direct substitute for some organisations but for many it will be
complementary to existing production, or a means of market entry because of the way that it lowers
the cost of small-scale customised production.

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A second major benefit of AM is the design freedoms it allows. The examples illustrate the potential
sustainability improvements that can be made from the redesign of components, products and the
process itself. Thus while AM can be used to directly replicate and produce existing components and
products, this fails to take full advantage of these freedoms. Being able to take advantage of AM’s
design freedoms requires design for AM skills and competences that individuals and organisations
cannot attain overnight. It requires that national policies be implemented to initiate educational
programmes so that designers and engineers are acquiring the skills needed in industry, and that
organisations invest in acquiring AM competences. For those organisations that have experience in

PT
the use of AM for rapid prototyping, this competence development may be more readily achieved as
it makes the transition towards direct digital manufacturing.

Developing these organisational competences in design for additive manufacture enables digital

RI
designs to be produced and retained so that spare parts can be produced on demand when repairs
are required. Coupled with modular design, repair, remanufacturing and refurbishment approaches
will enable product life extension and enhancement. The relatively ease and affordability of

SC
producing such spare parts and integrating modular upgraded components may lead companies to
rethink their business model, an issue that is discussed further in Section 5.3.

U
5.2 Realising AM opportunities for sustainability
As social constructions, technologies are developed and adopted within the complex network of
AN
existing infrastructure, technologies, behaviours, norms and attitudes of its constituents (Bijker and
Law, 1992; Metcalfe, 1998). The social construction of technology tell us that history matters and
that the investments made by individuals and organisations in hard and soft technology lead
M

complex systems to exhibit path dependence (David, 1985; Shapiro and Varian, 1999). Within these
complex systems, asynchronies between supply and demand create opportunities for value creation
and capture (Ford et al., 2014; Metcalfe, 1998).
D

The type of value that can be created or captured varies. In the case of AM there are clear resource
TE

efficiency benefits that are being realised that have both economic and environmental benefits.
These are most notable in aerospace where the use of high value materials and the high degree of
waste generated during production provides strong economic incentives for adopting the new
technology. For companies competing in this space, the economic motive is primary, with the
EP

environmental benefits being a positive side-effect. While behaviours may be most often motivated
by the creation or capture of economic value, there are also cases where behaviours are motivated
by social or environmental values. Such is the case for cleantech ventures such as Filabot, which
C

have the direct aim of commercialising technologies to reduce negative environmental impacts.
Through taking something considered as waste, Filabot’s products can add value by supporting
AC

localised polymer recycling.

The examples in Section 4 show how some of the opportunities that AM technologies create for
more sustainable production and consumption are beginning to be realised. The ability of an
organisation or entrepreneur to respond to such opportunities is dependent on organisational
antecedents, resources and cognitive capabilities (Eckhardt and Shane, 2003; Short et al., 2009).
These factors help to understand who responds to opportunities, why they do so and where
innovations may be expected to originate in the future.

Sometimes the innovators are established companies who already have achieved and maintained
competitive positions in their markets. While possessing greater resources than new entrants, such
companies face the ambidexterity challenge of continuing to exploit their existing technologies while

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
concurrently exploring new technological domains and markets (March, 1991; Tushman and O’Reilly,
1996). Constrained by the existing capabilities they have developed and the need to serve existing
customers, established organisations can be slower to respond to opportunities that may appear
financially unattractive and without the growth prospects that their investors expect (Christensen,
1997; Leonard-Barton, 1995). In comparison, although entrepreneurial ventures possess far fewer
resources, their relative advantages lie in having fewer sunk investments and the flexibility to
experiment with novel product-market combinations and business models (Lubik and Garnsey,
2015).

PT
Although the examples explored in this paper are just a small sample they indicate that for
established companies such as GE, Rolls-Royce and Siemens, adopting AM provides a means through
which they can serve their existing customers in new ways and attempt to retain or improve their
competitiveness. How these three companies built their competences is illustrative. In the case of

RI
GE it first entered into a partnership with Morris Technologies to explore the potential of AM. Then
when it began to see the direct benefits that could be achieved it realised that it needed to acquire
Morris Technologies and the tacit knowledge and skills possessed by its employees. In contrast,

SC
Rolls-Royce acquired competences through collaboration with other aerospace companies,
universities and AM equipment suppliers in an EU-funded consortium, while Siemens did so through
direct interaction with its equipment supplier, EOS. In each there were transfers of AM knowledge

U
that allowed the companies to begin to integrate AM into their activities.
AN
In contrast, the entrepreneurial ventures described in this paper are involved in niche exploration,
assuming risk and mobilising resources in order to develop products and services in response to
perceived opportunities. This covers a range of niches that haven’t yet been exploited by larger
companies. They include the development of new material inputs (Metalysis), using a new material
M

input arising from a waste by-product (Bewell Watches), launching consumer 3D printers (e.g.
Makerbot, Ultimaker), growing a two-sided network of 3D printers (3D Hubs), or launching
equipment for localised polymer filament recycling (Filabot). The market entry of these and similar
D

ventures contribute to the AM ecosystem in ways that would not be done by established companies
requiring larger revenue streams. Through experimenting in these niches, these ventures are helping
TE

the industry emerge and transition the manufacturing system towards one in which production is
more localised and closed-loop material flows are achieved.

Given these market dynamics, these patterns can be expected to continue. Established firms will
EP

take the relatively lower-risk approach serving existing customers through component and product
redesign, and the provision of spare parts and repair services. Sustainability benefits will be realised
from these activities while there continues to be alignment between economic and environmental
C

goals. Meanwhile entrepreneurial ventures will experiment by introducing new products and
services into new market niches, thereby bringing wider system change. This experimentation will be
AC

closely monitored by established firms. The latter can employ a ‘watch and see’ approach as the
niches are occupied by the risk-taking new ventures, then acquire those ventures demonstrating
growth prospects or that have established a strategic position (Christensen and Raynor, 2003). Such
was the approach adopted by the leading AM firm Stratasys when it acquired Makerbot in 2013.

5.3 AM and (sustainable?) business models

The business model is concerned with how companies create value, who they create value for, and
how they capture that value (Andries et al., 2013). It is a “structural template of how a focal firm
transacts with customers, partners, and vendors. It captures the pattern of the firm’s boundary
spanning connections with factor and product markets” (Zott and Amit, 2008, p.5). As described in
Section 5.1, adopting AM could cause established companies to reconsider their business models,
which in turn may change the sustainability impacts of their practices. One of the areas in which AM

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
creates new business opportunities is in repair, refurbishment and remanufacturing. Companies are
beginning to discover the implications of using AM technologies on extending product life cycles and
closing the loop. It is proposed that the availability of AM technologies for repair, refurbishment and
remanufacturing, and the subsequent extension to product life cycles, will create incentives for
companies to adopt product-service business models.

The examples in this paper begin to show the forms of product-service business models that are
arising. Such business models can be classified as being product-, use- or result-oriented (Gaiardelli
et al., 2014). Of these, product-oriented and result-oriented business models are apparent around

PT
the adoption and application of AM. Product-oriented business models can include a number of
product-related services. In the AM service space these services include spare parts and
consumables delivery; updates/upgrades; remanufacturing, refurbishing, cleaning, safe keeping;
recycling and take back; repair and maintenance. These services are being provided as part of the

RI
product-service business models of companies such as Caterpillar, GE and Siemens, through their
remanufacturing, maintenance and upgrade services respectively. Pay-per-use services are
becoming available within the result-oriented service space. Here Rolls-Royce is famed for its “Power

SC
by the Hour” pay-per-use approach. Extending the product life cycle of blisks through AM could
enhance this offering, allowing repairs to be conducted more locally, quickly and cost effectively,
and satisfying its customers’ needs for a high level of flight utilisation. For both these product-

U
oriented and result-oriented product-service business models, it is anticipated that providing these
product-services will extend product life cycles and give rise to slower, less resource-intensive
AN
consumption. Further investigations are required into how product-service business models align
business and sustainability interests, and whether they decouple the social and economic value
created from the environmental impacts of production and consumption.
M

Outsourcing services are another type of result-oriented product-service business model. 3D Hubs,
Kazzata and other service bureaus provide such services. Outsourcing allows customers to access
AM without the high investment costs of capital. As a consequence it lowers the barriers to entry for
D

prosumers and entrepreneurs. The availability of these services provides sustainability benefits in
the form of increased equipment utilisation. Other utilisation improvements could be realised
TE

through use-oriented product-services, in the form of sharing, pooling or renting. The economic
viability of providing these types of services is currently limited however by the need for skilled
machine operators.
EP

5.4 Re-distributed manufacturing

Along with creating opportunities for innovation and new business models, AM is reconfiguring the
distribution of manufacturing activity. From the Industrial Revolution onwards, manufacturing has
C

progressively become more centralised. However, the emergence of advanced digital manufacturing
technologies such as AM is creating opportunities for manufacturing to become de-centralised. In
AC

this sense manufacturing activity that was once distributed is now being re-distributed as more
localised manufacturing becomes economically realisable (Pearson et al., 2014).

An AM-based vision of the future may be one in which: “The factories of the future will be more
varied, and more distributed than those of today […] The production landscape will include capital
intensive super factories producing complex products; reconfigurable units integrated with the fluid
requirements of their supply chain partners; and local, mobile and domestic production sites for some
products. Urban sites will become common as factories reduce their environmental impacts. The
factory of the future may be at the bedside, in the home, in the field, in the office and on the
battlefield” (BIS, 2013).

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
In such a world, more localised manufacturing could radically transform supply and distribution
networks. The greater application of AM and other digital manufacturing technologies means that
“logistics may be more about delivering digital design files – from one continent to printer farms in
another – than about containers, ships and cargo planes” (PWC, 2014). This shift towards the
delivery of digital files and basic materials rather than complex assembled products implies that AM
will have substantial positive effects on the environmental impacts of transportation. Product and
component redesign will amplify these effects. For example, simplifying complex multi-component
products into single-component products will in turn simplify the complex value chains associated
with them, with value chains becoming less hierarchical and having fewer production stages. Such

PT
changes to the structure of value chains will be slow as change is first dependent on companies
engaging in component and product redesign. Change will slowly filter through the production
system as companies first engage in component and product redesign and then afterward begin to
re-negotiate their position in the value chain. Furthermore, localised manufacturing using basic

RI
materials may also allow the material inputs to be sourced more locally, also resulting in shorter
supply chains with lower transportation costs.

SC
Although conceptually such changes suggest that environmental benefits will arise from these
reconfigurations, questions arise regarding the relative resource efficiency of centralised mass
production versus de-centralised, localised small-scale production (Kohtala, 2015). Using principles

U
of lean production and eco-efficiency, larger factories have evolved to become more resource
efficient. In the near-term, the resource efficiency of small-scale production may be less resource
AN
efficient as the lack of automation and lower equipment utilisation will not allow scale efficiencies to
be realised. This may be an intermediate state as the technology is adopted and becomes better
understood. However, the current lack of understanding about how AM-based production systems
and value chains will affect overall resource consumption indicates that further studies are required
M

if a more informed view of the sustainability impacts of AM implementation is to be obtained. These

should go beyond studies that focus solely on the use of a single piece of equipment but consider
the wider production network and life cycle analyses of components and products manufactured
D

within these networks.

TE

5.5 Sustainability advantages and challenges of AM adoption

Drawing on prior literature and the analysis and discussion of the cases in the previous sections,
Table 7 provides a summary of the observed sustainability advantages and challenges arising from
EP

the adoption of AM. The advantages listed are ones that have been demonstrated for particular
applications. However, due to the immaturity of AM technologies for direct manufacturing, their
wider adoption and the realisation of these benefits is contingent on overcoming the significant
challenges highlighted. As an exploratory study, this table provides a starting point for identifying
C

the positive contributions that AM could bring across the product life cycle and the challenges
ahead. However it is not a comprehensive listing of advantages and challenges. The rapid pace of
AC

change in this industry means that it is highly likely that new applications of AM with further
sustainability benefits will soon be created.

While the concept of sustainability covers the environmental, social and economic, the use of the
product and material life cycles as a conceptual framework has meant that environmental aspects of
sustainability have emerged most prominently in this study. While some aspects of social
sustainability have also emerged, these are relatively few. Employment and the distribution of
labour, health and safety, ethics, quality of life, creativity and self-expression are just some aspects
that are not featured in this study. It is clear that further investigations into the social sustainability
of AM are needed that build upon and complement those previously conducted (Huang et al., 2013;
Kohtala, 2015).

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 7. Summary of observed sustainability advantages and challenges of AM adoption

Advantages Challenges

Product redesign
• Design freedoms • Educating designers and engineers about the
• Use of biomimicry concepts potential uses and benefits of AM
• Optimised geometries and performance to meet • Supporting the skills development of prosumers,
functional requirements designers and engineers
• Product dematerialisation • Integrating sustainability considerations using

PT
• Simplified assemblies, products and components Design for Environment or eco-design principles
• Reduced cost, time and quality problems through • Certifying new components
simplified assemblies • Capturing and replicating learning in future

RI
• Reduced time between design and applications
manufacturing
• Improved product functionality
• Improved product durability

SC
• Upgradability through modular design
• Democratised design process
Material input processing

• Improved resource efficiency of raw material

U • Resource efficiency improvements and recycling

AN
processing as AM requires different forms of potential limited to certain materials
material inputs • Scaling-up processes for new materials
• Reduced toxicity of material processing • Lack of knowledge and understanding of the
• Localised material recycling environmental performance of material
M

• Democratised material recycling processing techniques

• Diversion of waste and by-products from the • Validating material properties
waste stream • Certifying materials
• Upcycling of waste materials into new • Standardising materials and processes
D

applications • Increasing percentage of recycled content in

material inputs
TE

• Limited recyclability of products at their end-of-

life due to mixed materials
• Avoiding material contamination
• Improving resource efficiency of small-scale local
EP

recycling systems
Component and product manufacturing
• • Limited speed and reliability of AM technologies
C

Reduced energy intensity

• Reduced waste generation • Limited quality and aesthetics of products
• • Improving manufacturing capability of AM to
AC

Improved quality and reduced rejection rates

• Improved resource efficiency reduces costs integrate functional materials
• Make-to-order manufacturing at the point of use • High machine costs
in space and time to the exact specifications • Improving cost effectiveness and energy
required efficiency at higher production volumes
• Improved access to digital designs and • Lack of knowledge and understanding of the
manufacturing systems enables make-to-order environmental performance of AM technologies,
manufacture of components and products supply chains and products made through AM
• Flexibility through make-to-order manufacturing • Educating designers and engineers about the
• Reduced cost of customisation and benefits of integrating AM into hybrid
personalisation technologies
• Improved manufacturing process efficiency • Integrating AM with hybrid technologies in design
through AM-produced tools and moulds and production

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
• Reduced material inputs and handling reduce • Limited automation
costs • Certifying manufacturing processes
• Reduced inventory waste including unsold and • Requirements for standards and regulations
obsolete products • Quality control in distributed networks
• Localised manufacturing through proximity of • Maximising machine usage within distributed
producers and customers networks
• Simplified assemblies lead to simpler and flatter • Maximising machine usage in the home by
supply chains prosumers
• Simplified supply chains through transportation • Optimising AM build process
of more basic materials • Limited availability of digital designs

PT
• Raised awareness of manufacturing process and • Cost of acquiring new digital designs
its impacts • Fragmentation and uneven distribution of current
• Increased equipment utilisation AM services
• Improved productivity, cost and resource

RI
• Potential for AM to contribute to a materialistic
efficiency using hybrid technologies society and consumerism
• Automated manufacturing processes using • Individual prosumers may over-produce and over-
hybrid technologies

SC
consume leading to irresponsible prosumption
• Higher quality finish achieved using hybrid • Capturing and replicating learning in future
technologies applications
Product use

•
•
Lightweight products

U • Uncertain performance of products and

AN
Improved operational efficiency components due to low maturity of technology
• Improved functionality and durability • Uncertain performance of products and
• Component upgrade for product life extension components over extended lifespan

Repair and remanufacturing

M

• Reduced waste generation during repair process • Replicating business models in other sectors
• Reduced process time for repair • Implementing distributed maintenance systems
• Improved product utilisation through repair and •
D

Certifying repair and remanufacturing processes

remanufacturing • Certifying spare parts to overcome liability issues
• In-situ repair and remanufacturing enabled by • Benefits of AM-based product-service business
TE

availability of digital designs model have yet to be demonstrated

• In-situ and spot repair extends product life
• Component upgrade during repair process
• Product-service business models for repair and
EP

remanufacturing align business and sustainability

interests
Recycling
C

• Improved material efficiency through recycling • Limited recyclability of plastics due to quality
• Use of recycled materials and waste by-products
AC

losses
as inputs • Non-recyclability of AM-produced multi-material
• Simplified assemblies with less material diversity goods
improves opportunities for recycling • Educating consumers about recycling AM plastics
• Localised recycling systems • Incompatibility between non-standardised, non-
• Raised awareness of material recycling recyclable materials
• Increased acceptance of recycled material
content
• Democratised material recycling

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
6 Conclusions

This paper has considered the ways in which AM can enable more sustainable models of production
and consumption. Investigating AM’s adoption through a life cycle perspective, four major
categories have been identified in which AM is enabling sustainability benefits to be achieved:
product and process redesign; material input processing; make-to-order component and product
manufacturing; and closing the loop. This has led to the identification of the sustainability
advantages that AM brings across the product and material life cycles, along with the challenges that
must be overcome if these benefits are to be realised.

PT
Given the advantages that AM seen in examples, it is clear that AM will play a part in the transition
towards a more sustainable industrial system as the application of AM technologies creates

RI
opportunities for more sustainable production and consumption. Lessons from past studies of
organisational behaviour and entrepreneurship suggest that established companies will primarily
focus on serving existing customers and apply AM technologies in the redesign of components and

SC
products, while entrepreneurial ventures explore and develop the niches that emerge in the AM
business ecosystem. AM also provides opportunity for organisations to experiment with their
business models. The transition to direct digital manufacturing will lead to digital designs being kept
on file; the ability to reproduce these files as spare parts for repair and remanufacturing will enable

U
product life extension and provides incentives for product-service business models. The exploitation
of these opportunities will lead to changes in the distribution of manufacturing and the
AN
reconfiguration of value chains. However, significant changes do not appear imminent as change is
contingent on organisations first redesigning components and products to have fewer
subcomponents, with this simplification subsequently leading to simplified supply chains.
M

Given its additive nature, AM is inherently a technology that will support sustainable production and
consumption. How significant a part AM will play in the transition towards a more sustainable
industrial system remains unclear however and there are dangers that unintended consequences
D

with negative sustainability impacts may arise from its adoption and application. While sustainability
benefits are evident, substantial challenges also exist (Table 7). It is important that as this technology
TE

and associated industrial activity emerges that we as a society understand its potential positive and
negative impacts so that positive impacts can be embedded and ensure that AM does not become a
missed opportunity for improving sustainability.
EP

A host of further studies are therefore required to investigate these advantages and challenges. At
this exploratory stage of research into the implications of AM on industrial sustainability, such
studies require deep-dive single case studies and comparative case studies of different sectors,
C

organisations, products and components, along with models of AM-based production systems. Such
studies can provide richer insights into the effects of AM on sustainability, including the means
AC

through which opportunities are exploited and sustainability benefits are realised, the barriers
preventing these benefits from being captured, and the specific contexts within which each of these
occur. Furthermore, while this study has emphasised the consequences of AM on environmental
sustainability, these future studies should not neglect to analyse the effects of adopting this novel
production technology on social sustainability.

Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [grant number
EP/K039598/1].

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

References
Andries P, Debackere K, Van Looy B, 2013. Simultaneous experimentation as a learning strategy:
Business model development under uncertainty. Strategic Entrepreneurship 7(4), 288–310.
ASTM, 2012. ASTM F2792-12a: Standard Terminology for Additive Manufacturing Technologies.
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
Atzeni E, Salmi A, 2012. Economics of additive manufacturing for end-usable metal parts.

PT
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 62(9-12), 1147–1155.
Baumers M, Tuck C, Bourell DL, Sreenivasan R, Hague R, 2011. Sustainability of additive
manufacturing: measuring the energy consumption of the laser sintering process. Proceedings of the

RI
IMechE Vol. 225 Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 2228–2239.
Berman B, 2012. 3-D printing: The new industrial revolution, Business Horizons 55, 155–162.

SC
Bijker WE, Law J, 1992. Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change,
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

U
BIS, 2013. Future of manufacturing: a new era of opportunity and challenge for the UK - summary
report.
AN
Braungart M, McDonough W, 2002. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. North
Point Press, New York.
Buyle M, Braet J, Audenaert A, 2013. Life cycle assessment in the construction sector: A review.
M

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 26, 379-388.

Chen D, Heyer S, Ibbotson S, Salonitis K, Steingrímsson JG, Thiede S, 2015. Direct Digital
D

Manufacturing: Definition, Evolution, and Sustainability Implications, Journal of Cleaner Production

(in press), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.009.
TE

Christensen CM, 1997. The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail.
Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
EP

Christensen CM, Raynor M, 2003. The innovator's solution: creating and sustaining successful
growth. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Colwell LV, 1956. The effects of high-frequency vibrations in grinding. Trans ASME 78(4), 837–846.
C

David PA, 1985. Clio and the Economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review 75(2), 332–337.
AC

de Jong JPJ, de Bruijn E, 2013. Innovation Lessons from 3-D Printing. MIT Sloan Management Review
54(2), 43–52.
Despeisse M, Ford SJ, 2015. The Role of Additive Manufacturing in Improving Resource Efficiency
and Sustainability. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Advances in Production
Management Systems (APMS 2015).
Eckhardt JT, Shane SA, 2003. Opportunities and Entrepreneurship. Journal of Management 29(3),
333–349.
Faludi J, Bayley C, Bhogal S, Iribarne M, 2015. Comparing environmental impacts of additive
manufacturing vs traditional machining via life-cycle assessment, Rapid Prototyping 21(1), 14–33.

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Ford SJ, Routley MJ, Phaal R, Probert DR, 2014. The industrial emergence of commercial inkjet
printing. European Journal of Innovation Management 17(2), 126–143.
Fox S, Li L, 2012. Expanding the scope of prosumption: a framework for analysing potential
contributions from advances in materials technologies, Technological Forecasting & Social Change
79(4), 721–733.
Franco A, Romoli L, 2012. Characterization of laser energy consumption in sintering of polymer
based powders. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 212(4), 917–926.

PT
Gaiardelli P, Resta B, Martinez V, Pinto R, Albores P, 2014. A classification model for product-service
offerings. Journal of Cleaner Production 66, 507–519.
Gartner WB, 1985. A Conceptual Framework for Describing the Phenomenon of New Venture

RI
Creation. Academy of Management Review 10(4), 696-706.
Gebler M, Schoot Uiterkamp AJM, Visser C, 2014. A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing

SC
technologies, Energy Policy 74 (C), 158–167.
Guo N, Leu MC, 2013. Additive manufacturing: technology, applications and research needs.
Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering 8(3), 215–243.

U
Gutowski TG, Branham MS, Dahmus JB, Jones AJ, Thiriez A, 2009. Thermodynamic Analysis of
AN
Resources Used in Manufacturing Processes. Environmental Science and Technology 43(5), 1584–
1590.
Hao L, Raymond D, Strano G, Dadbakhsh S, 2010. Enhancing the Sustainability of Additive
M

Manufacturing. Procedings of the 5th International Conference on Responsive Manufacturing -

Green Manufacturing (ICRM 2010).
Huang SH, Liu P, Mokasdar A, Hou L, 2013. Additive manufacturing and its societal impact: a
D

literature review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 67, 1191–1203.

TE

Kohtala C, 2015. Addressing sustainability in research on distributed production: an integrated

literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production 106, 654–668.
Kohtala C, Hyysalo S, 2015. Anticipated environmental sustainability of personal fabrication. Journal
EP

of Cleaner Production 99, 333-344.

Lavery G, Pennell N, Brown S, Evans S, 2013. Next Manufacturing Revolution, available at
http://www.nextmanufacturingrevolution.org/nmr-report-download/ [last accessed 14 April 2016].
C

Le Bourhis F, Kerbrat O, Hascoet JY, Mognol P, 2013. Sustainable manufacturing: evaluation and
AC

modeling of environmental impacts in additive manufacturing. International Journal of Advanced

Manufacturing Technology 69, 1927–1939.
Leonard-Barton D, 1995. Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of
Innovation, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Lipson H, 2012. Frontiers in Additive Manufacturing: The Shape of Things to Come, The Bridge:
Linking Engineering and Society 42(1), 5–12.
Lipson H, Kerman M, 2010. Factory @ Home: The Emerging Economy of Personal Fabrication –
Overview and Recommendations. A report commissioned by the US Office of Science and
Technology Policy.

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Lubik SJ, Garnsey EW, 2016. Early Business Model Evolution in Science-based Ventures: The Case of
Advanced Materials. Long Range Planning (in press), doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2015.03.001.
Lyons B, 2012. Additive Manufacturing in Aerospace: Examples and Research Outlook. The Bridge:
Linking Engineering and Society 42(1), 13–19.
Mani M, Lyons KW, Gupta SK, 2014. Sustainability Characterization for Additive Manufacturing.
Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 119, 419–428.
March JG, 1991. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science 2(1),

PT
71–87.
Markov AI, Neppiras E, 1966. Ultrasonic machining of intractable materials, Iliffe, London.

RI
Mellor I, Grainger L, Rao K, Deane J, Conti M, Doughty G, Vaughan D, 2015. 4 – Titanium powder
production via the Metalysis process. In: Qian M, Froes FH (Eds.), Titanium Powder Metallurgy:
Science, Technology and Applications, 51–67.

SC
Metcalfe JS, 1998. Evolutionary Economics and Creative Destruction. Routledge, London.
Murr LE, Gaytan SM, Medina F, Martinez E, Martinez JL, Hernandez DH, Machado BI, Ramirez DA,
Wicker RB, 2010. Characterization of Ti6Al4V open cellular foams fabricated by additive

U
manufacturing using electron beam melting. Materials Science and Engineering A 527(7–8), 1861–
AN
1868.
Neely A, 2008. Exploring the Financial Consequences of the Servitisation of Manufacturing,
Operations Management Research 1(2), 103–118.
M

Pearson H, Noble G, Hawkins J, 2014. Re-distributed manufacturing workshop report, 7-8 November,
available at https://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/pubs/re-distributed-manufacturing-workshop-
report/ [last accessed 10 December 2015].
D

Petrick IJ, Simpson TW, 2013. 3D Printing Disrupts Manufacturing: How Economies of One Create
TE

New Rules of Competition, Research-Technology Management 56(6), 12–16.

Petrovic V, Gonzalez JVH, Ferrando OJ, Gordillo JD, Puchades JRB, Grinan LP, 2011. Additive layered
manufacturing: sectors of industrial application shown through case studies, International Journal of
EP

Production Research 49(4), 1061–1079.

Phaal R, O’Sullivan E, Routley MJ, Ford SJ, Probert DR, 2011. A Framework for Mapping Industrial
Emergence. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 78(2), 217–230.
C

PWC, 2014. 3D printing and the new shape of industrial manufacturing, available at
AC

http://www.pwc.com/us/en/industrial-products/assets/3d-printing-next_manufacturing-pwc.pdf
[last accessed 10 December 2015].
Reeves P, 2008. Could Additive Manufacturing contribute towards environmental sustainability and
carbon reduction across the supply chain? Econolyst: the 3D printing & additive manufacturing
people, available at http://www.econolyst.co.uk/resources/documents [last accessed 10 December
2015].
Royal Academy of Engineering, 2012. Industrial Systems: capturing value through manufacturing.
Royal Academy of Engineering, London, available at www.raeng.org.uk/indsys [last accessed 10
December 2015].

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Sandström C, 2015. Adopting 3D Printing for Manufacturing - evidence from the Hearing Aid
Industry. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 102, 160–168.
Shapiro C, Varian HR, 1999. Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy. Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Short JC, Ketchen DJ, Shook CL, Ireland, RD, 2009. The Concept of ''Opportunity'' in Entrepreneurship
Research: Past Accomplishments and Future Challenges. Journal of Management 36(1): 40–65.
Sova A, Grigoriev S, Okunkova A, Smurov I, 2013. Potential of cold gas dynamic spray as additive

PT
manufacturing technology. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 69(9-12),
2269–2278.
Sreenivasan R, Goel A, Bourell DL, 2010. Sustainability issues in laser-based additive manufacturing.

RI
Physics Procedia 5, 81–90.
Teuber L, Osburg V-S, Toporowski W, Militz H, Krause A, 2016. Wood polymer composites and their

SC
contribution to cascading utilisation. Journal of Cleaner Production 110, 9-15.
TSB, 2012. Shaping our national competency in additive manufacturing: Technology innovation
needs analysis conducted by the Additive Manufacturing Special Interest Group for the Technology

U
Strategy Board, Technology Strategy Board Knowledge Transfer Network Special Interest Group on
Additive Manufacturing.
AN
Tushman ML, O’Reilly CA, 1996. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and
revolutionary change. California Management Review 38(4), 8–30.
M

Yin RK, 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage, London.
Yoon HS, Lee JY, Kim HS, Kim MS, Kim ES, Shin YJ, Chu WS, Ahn SH, 2014. A Comparison of Energy
Consumption in Bulk Forming, Subtractive, and Additive Processes: Review and Case Study.
D

International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 1(3), 261–279.

TE

Zhou F, Ji Y, Jiao RJ 2013. Affective and cognitive design for mass personalization: status and
prospect, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 24, 1047-1069.
Zott C, Amit R, 2008. Business Model Design and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms.
EP

Organization Science 18(2), 181–199.

C

Appendix
AC

Table 7. Selected data sources for the examples used in this study

Example Data sources

3D Hubs https://www.3dhubs.com/
http://www.solidsmack.com/cad-design-news/3d-hubs-co-founder-brian-
garret-discusses-the-companys-20000th-3d-printer-milestone/
Bewell Watches http://www.bewellwatch.com/
http://www.abnewswire.com/pressreleases/designing-team-from-poland-
create-newly-wooden-watches-by-3d-printing-technology_21711.html
Caterpillar http://www.caterpillar.com/en/company/sustainability/sustainability-
report.html

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
http://www.product-life.org/en/archive/case-studies/caterpillar-
remanufactured-products-group
http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case_studies/caterpillar
Construction http://mx3d.com/projects/bridge/
http://3dprintcanalhouse.com/
http://3dprint.com/38144/3d-printed-apartment-building/
http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jan/31/chinese-firm-creates-worlds-
tallest-3d-printed-building
EKOCYCLE Cube http://cubify.com/en/Ekocycle

PT
http://www.coca-colacompany.com/cokestyle/ekocycle-transforming-3d-
printing-using-recycled-plastic-bottles
Filabot http://www.filabot.com/

RI
http://www.wired.com/2013/01/filabot-plastic-recycler/
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/rocknail/filabot-plastic-filament-maker
GE http://www.gereports.com/post/102897646835/

SC
http://www.gereports.com/post/80701924024/
HMT http://www.hybridmanutech.com/technology.html
http://qm.the-mtc.org/downloads/qM-Q4-2014.pdf (Value Reclaimed, pp.10-

U
14)
https://www.catapult.org.uk/-/leading-a-remanufacturing-revolution
AN
Home 3D http://www.makerbot.com/
printers https://ultimaker.com/en/products
Kazzata http://www.kazzata.com/
M

http://3dprintingindustry.com/2014/05/21/kazzata-first-marketplace-3d-
printed-spare-parts/
Metalysis http://www.metalysis.com/transforming-metals
D

Lubik and Garnsey (2015); Mellor et al. (2015)

PPP http://www.perpetualplasticproject.com/
TE

http://www.betterfuturefactory.com/work/perpetual-plastic-project-ppp
Rolls-Royce http://www.merlin-project.eu
http://www.ilt.fraunhofer.de/en/publication-and-press/annual-
EP

report/2011/annual-report-2011-p82.html
http://www.optomec.com/3d-printed-metals/lens-emerging-
applications/blisk-repair/
Salcomp http://www.eos.info/press/customer_case_studies/salcomp
C

SAVING project http://www.manufacturingthefuture.co.uk/case-studies/

AC

Siemens http://www.siemens.fi/pool/cc/events/elp14/esitykset/navrotsky.pdf
http://www.eos.info/press/customer_case_studies/siemens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyEgbyNg0Q8

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
Design Production

RI
SC
Component & product
Product design Process design Material processing Consumers/

U
manufacturing
prosumers

AN
M
D
TE
EP
Other waste/by-products
C

Closing the
AC

MATERIAL AND PRODUCT loop

LIFE CYCLE STAGES

Figure 1. Life cycle perspective for
identifying sustainability benefits of
AM