From Industry 4.0 to 6.0: How AI and digital twins will reinvent manufacturing
Industry 6.0 incorporates cognitive ecosystems that allow machines and humans to learn adaptively, anticipate risks, and align with regulatory and sustainability mandates. This includes risk monitoring systems that oversee environmental and social impacts and real-time collaboration across upstream and downstream supply chain actors.
A group of European researchers has outlined how artificial intelligence and advanced automation are transforming manufacturing value chains, charting the path from Industry 4.0 to Industry 6.0. The study explores the integration of digital twins, cognitive automation, and sustainable governance in the ceramics sector as a testbed for the next industrial era.
The research, titled AI-Driven Transformations in Manufacturing: Bridging Industry 4.0, 5.0, and 6.0 in Sustainable Value Chains and published in Future Internet, provides one of the first conceptual models of Industry 6.0, presenting new pillars that link human–machine collaboration with sustainability goals and adaptive intelligence.
How Industry 6.0 extends beyond digitalization
The paper traces the historical trajectory from Industry 3.0, when mechanized processes and linear value chains dominated, to the digitally integrated Industry 4.0 era. The authors emphasize that while Industry 4.0 brought predictive analytics, automation, and smart systems, it did not fully integrate human values or systemic sustainability. Industry 5.0 attempted to bridge this gap by prioritizing human-centric design and social responsibility, but the researchers argue that Industry 6.0 requires a more profound reconfiguration.
According to their framework, Industry 6.0 incorporates cognitive ecosystems that allow machines and humans to learn adaptively, anticipate risks, and align with regulatory and sustainability mandates. This includes risk monitoring systems that oversee environmental and social impacts and real-time collaboration across upstream and downstream supply chain actors. In practice, this means logistics systems enhanced by digital twins, predictive maintenance powered by artificial intelligence, and circular practices embedded directly into production and distribution.
The ceramics sector was chosen because it exemplifies the pressures industries face in Europe today. It is energy-intensive, exposed to global competition, and under strict sustainability reporting obligations such as the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. By analyzing this sector, the authors demonstrate how Industry 6.0 can move firms beyond incremental improvements and toward systemic transformation.
What drives the shift to cognitive and sustainable models
The research identifies key technologies that will define Industry 6.0: artificial intelligence, digital twins, cognitive automation, and Internet of Things integration. These capabilities enable manufacturers to anticipate disruptions, adapt to demand fluctuations, and comply with environmental, social, and governance frameworks. Unlike earlier approaches that treated digitalization and sustainability as separate initiatives, the proposed model integrates them into a single value-creation system.
A central contribution of the study is its identification of six interdependent pillars of Industry 6.0. These include:
- A cognitive digital ecosystem that supports real-time data integration across supply chains.
- Human–machine collaboration emphasizing symbiosis rather than substitution.
- Systemic sustainability, embedding circular economy principles and resilience strategies.
- Ethics and governance, aligning operations with international standards.
- A holistic value ecosystem, where multiple stakeholders co-create value.
- Cognitive adaptivity, a newly proposed pillar highlighting autonomous learning and anticipatory intelligence.
The authors argue that cognitive adaptivity is what differentiates Industry 6.0 most clearly from its predecessors. By enabling systems that can learn and self-adjust, manufacturers can handle uncertainty while maintaining competitiveness and compliance.
Evidence from interviews with industry stakeholders shows that companies in the ceramics sector are already deploying IoT sensors, AI-based optimization tools, and collaborative robots. These technologies are being used not just to cut costs but to meet sustainability targets and manage risks across increasingly complex supply networks.
What the findings mean for global manufacturing
The study provides both theoretical and managerial implications. On the theoretical front, it links the Industry 6.0 model directly to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, framing cognitive automation and adaptive intelligence as enablers of long-term resilience. It moves the discussion of industrial transformation beyond efficiency to include ethics, governance, and systemic value creation.
For managers, the study offers a roadmap for embedding Industry 6.0 principles into corporate strategy. It highlights that regulatory compliance, such as environmental reporting, can no longer be treated as a cost of doing business but must be integrated into operational and technological frameworks. Risk monitoring, cognitive logistics, and human–machine collaboration become strategic capabilities rather than optional add-ons.
The authors acknowledge limitations in their study, noting that it is based on a single sector and heavily weighted toward tile manufacturers. They recommend extending the model to other manufacturing sectors and conducting longitudinal studies to validate its broader applicability. Nevertheless, the ceramics case demonstrates that Industry 6.0 is not a distant aspiration but an emerging reality in industries facing high energy use and regulatory oversight.
The researchers also stress the importance of governance. Ethical frameworks, transparent decision-making, and cross-sector cooperation are positioned as essential components of Industry 6.0. Without them, the adoption of advanced technologies risks amplifying inequality, resource depletion, and unsustainable practices.
- FIRST PUBLISHED IN:
- Devdiscourse

