Life cycle assessment of additive manufacturing process: A systematic literature

 Corresponding author: Sairul Alam. Copyright © 2025 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0. Life cycle assessment of additive manufacturing process: A systematic literature Sairul Alam * and Riri Ramadhani Putri Department of Management and Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 Publication history: Received on 17 April 2025; revised on 27 May 2025; accepted on 30 May 2025 Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2025.26.2.2079 Abstract Additive Manufacturing (AM) or 3D printing is a breakthrough in the industrial world, providing freedom to create designs that have never existed before and achieve high material efficiency. Nevertheless, it turns out that additive manufacturing still faces significant challenges, particularly in terms of energy consumption and emissions during production. This study conducted a systematic literature review to assess the environmental impact of AM technology using the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method. This study analyzes 80 articles from the Scopus database using VOSviewer software to identify research trends over the past ten years, knowledge gaps, and the challenges faced in implementing sustainable AM. The study results indicate that although the AM method has proven more efficient in material utilization than conventional methods, environmental challenges such as material waste and greenhouse gas emissions produced require further investigation. This study emphasizes the importance of ISO 14044:2006 standards in LCA to evaluate environmental impacts more comprehensively and to support more sustainable decision-making in implementing this technology. This study provides important insights for future studies to focus on reducing the negative environmental effects of the AM process to enhance sustainability in manufacturing processes. Keywords: Additive Manufacturing; 3D-Printing; Systematic Literature Review; VOSViewer 1 Introduction The technology known as additive manufacturing (AM), or 3D printing, has enormous potential in a number of different industries [1], such as aerospace, automotive, and biomedical [2]. In simple terms, the AM process is carried out by directly creating parts from its digital model by combining materials [3], the emergence of AM marks an essential milestone in product development [4]. AM has experienced rapid growth in recent years due to its ability to create 3D objects layer by layer [5] and transform models with complex structures into products directly [6]. Additive manufacturing (AM) technology offers high geometric freedom and flexibility in producing components with many highly complex features [7], raw material savings, excellent production efficiency, and customizable manufacturing. AM has increasingly expanded into commercial applications [8]. AM has revolutionized the manufacturing industry by offering unprecedented design freedom previously impossible with traditional manufacturing methods [9]. AM still faces challenges, such as higher error and failure rates [10]. Although additive manufacturing (AM) can reduce material waste, it does not automatically make it a “more environmentally friendly” process. The production of raw materials for AM often requires additional steps, such as powder automation or wire drawing, depending on the type of process and materials used. In addition, the quality of components from AM cannot be overlooked [11]; this can lead to consumer dissatisfaction, loss of company reputation, economic losses, and environmental impacts from wasted resources due to a lack of product quality [12]. Other losses include limitations on size, longer production times, and high costs for machines and materials. The AM process is slower than traditional methods, with a longer total production time despite no waiting time between production stages [13]. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4388 A variety of resources, including raw materials, energy, and consumables, are utilized in the AM process. This leads to emissions and waste at each stage of the process, and to assess this impact, the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method is used. LCA is a quantitative analytical tool that can measure the environmental impact related to the life cycle of a product from start to finish, according to ISO definitions [14]. LCA encompasses various stages such as raw material production, manufacturing, distribution, use, and end-of-life. This method considers a holistic assessment of the entire life cycle steps: raw material extraction, manufacturing, distribution, use, and disposal/recycling/reuse of waste[15]. LCA in AM aims to identify critical stages with the most significant environmental impact, evaluate various strategies to reduce that impact, and support more sustainable decision-making. Using LCA according to the ISO 14044:2006 standard makes it possible to measure and understand the environmental impact of additively manufactured products, which supports better resource management, lower emissions, and enhanced sustainability of the overall manufacturing process. The LCA method in AM involves several steps, including defining the goals and scope of the study, collecting life cycle inventory data, assessing life cycle impacts, and interpreting the results. Defining the goals and scope includes identifying the product or process to be analyzed and the boundaries of the analysis. All inputs and outputs of the system under analysis, including raw materials, energy, emissions, and trash, are included in the data collection process [16]. Several LCA case studies have been conducted to assess the environmental impact of various AM technologies. For example, research [17] shows that the Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) and Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) processes have higher energy consumption compared to conventional manufacturing processes but produce less material waste. Further research by [18] Although AM technologies like SLS and FDM are more energy-intensive, their material efficiency is higher because they only use the necessary materials to build the structure without generating excessive waste. The still limited research examining the negative impacts of AM requires further studies in this field. AM offers various advantages, such as material efficiency and design flexibility. The environmental impact, primarily related to energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the waste produced, has not been extensively studied. Research generally focuses more on technical and economic benefits than a comprehensive evaluation of the environmental impacts produced. With the increasing popularity of AM technology, it is crucial to develop more research related to environmental effects, guided by ISO 14044:2006 standards, to measure and understand the environmental impacts of AM processes comprehensively. This research aims to systematically review the literature to identify knowledge gaps and areas that require further investigation. A systematic literature review allows for a thorough analysis of existing research. It helps to identify unexplored topics, such as the environmental impact and sustainability of the AM process. 2 Methods The Scopus database is considered the most reliable and well-known bibliographic information source, with comprehensive coverage across various disciplines. Therefore, the researcher chose the Scopus database to conduct bibliometric analysis subsequently. Three hundred thirty-nine journals on additive manufacturing were taken from the Scopus database on July 1, 2024. The keywords (“life cycle assessment”) AND (“additive manufacturing”) OR ("3d printing”) were used to conduct the analysis. This keyword is searched in the article's title, abstract, and keywords. Next, VOS Viewer [19] has been used to create, visualize, build relationships in literature, and analyze bibliometrics. Using a VOS viewer to build networks of co-occurrences of keywords and citation networks [20]. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4389 IDENTIFICATION SCREENING SCANNING Database Scopus (TITTLE-ABS-KEY) life cycle assessment AND additive manufacturing OR d printing Years : 2014 - 2024 339 Publications 337 Publications 335 Publication Language : English Source Type : Journal 218 Publication Document Type : Article 185 Publication Subject Area Engineering, Environmental Science 167 Publication Open Acces : All Open Acces 80 Publication Title, Abstract skim Reading 33 Publication Paper Skim Reading 20 Publication RESEARCH DOMAIN LIMITATIONS RESULT Figure 1 Filtering Process Bibliometrics plays an essential role in conducting systematic literature reviews by providing tools to analyze and visualize large and complex research data. This is particularly beneficial in helping researchers gain a deeper understanding of the developments in the fields of Life Cycle Assessment and Additive Manufacturing and addressing unmet research gaps. In the context of systematic literature reviews, bibliometrics is crucial in organizing a comprehensive and structured literature framework. Using this software, researchers can categorize studies based on specific themes or topics, evaluate the quantity and distribution of publications over time, and identify the most influential research in their research domain. Bibliometric analysis also helps in measuring the engagement and impact of research, such as the number of citations received by a scientific work, which provides valuable insights in assessing the relevance and contribution of a study to the existing literature. Thus, bibliometric software enhances the quality of systematic literature reviews and broadens our understanding of the direction and evolution of knowledge in the researched field. 3 Results and discussion In the results and discussion section, this study analyzes the final findings of 80 documents that were examined from Scopus results using VOSviewer software. 3.1 Scopus Analysis 3.1.1 Title Abs Key The search results yielded a total of 80 articles in format TITLE-ABS-KEY ((("life cycle assessment") AND ("additive manufacturing") OR ("3d printing"))) AND PUBYEAR > 2013 AND PUBYEAR < 2025 AND (LIMIT-TO( SUBJAREA,"ENGI") OR LIMIT-TO (SUBJAREA, "ENVI")) AND (LIMIT-TO(DOCTYPE, "ar")) AND (LIMIT-TO(LANGUAGE, "English")) AND (LIMIT-TO(SRCTYPE, "j" )) AND (LIMIT-TO (OA ,"all")). World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4390 3.1.2 Annual Publication The pattern of publications on Life Cycle Assessment issues and Additive Manufacturing shows a tendency to increase. The highest number of annual publications was in 2023, with a total of 28 articles, followed by 2022 with 14 articles. It can be seen in full in Figure 2. Figure 2 Annual Publication 3.1.3 Publication by Author The author with the most publications related to Life Cycle Assessment and Additive Manufacturing is Godina, R., with three articles and 58 citations. Other authors have published two articles each from a total of 80 articles analyzed. It can be seen in full in Figure 3. Figure 3 Publication by Author 3.1.4 Publication by Country The country with the most published articles is the United States with 13 articles, followed by Italy with 12 articles, the United Kingdom with ten articles, Portugal with nine articles, Spain with eight articles, China with seven articles, Australia, Brazil, and France each with four articles, and Canada with three articles. It can be seen in full in Figure 4. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4391 Figure 4 Publication by Country 3.1.5 Publication by Subject Area The subject area with the most published articles is environmental science, with 56 articles, followed by engineering with 48 articles; energy with 37 articles, and social science with 28 articles. Other subject areas have fewer than 20 published articles. It can be seen in full in Figure 5. Figure 5 Publication by Subject Area 3.2 Vosviewer Analysis 3.2.1 Co-Authorship Networks Co-authorship networks aim to analyze the collaboration networks among authors in a research study. At this stage, it is possible to identify productive authors, collaboration relationships, and groups or clusters of authors who collaborate regularly. Figure 6 displays the findings of the co-authorship analysis. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4392 Figure 6 Co-Authorship Networks From Figure 6, 39 items and 13 clusters were produced. Cluster one, cluster two, and cluster three each have six interconnected researchers. Cluster one includes Campos, S., Esteves, S., Matos, J.R., Oliveira, L., and Pinto, S.M. Cluster two consists of Cresko, J., Das, S., Graziano, D., Huang, R., Masanet, E., and Nimnalkar, S. Cluster three comprises Bowers, L.N., Duling, M.G., Kneep, A.K., Lebouf, R.F., Martin, S.B., and Stefaniak, A.B. Cluster four has five interconnected researchers: Biswas, W.K., Davies, I.J., Gamage, J.R., Jayawardane, H., and John, M. Clusters five and six each have three interconnected researchers, including Bajare, D., Korjakin, A., and Sinka, M. for cluster five, and Godina, R., Kokare, S., and Oliveira, J.P. for cluster six. Clusters seven to nine each have two interconnected researchers, while clusters ten to thirteen have no connections among the researchers. 3.2.2 Keyword Co-Occurrence Keyword co-occurrence is a bibliometric analysis method used to identify and visualize the relationships between keywords that appear together in a collection of scientific documents. The main function of this analysis is to reveal patterns and trends in a specific research field by examining how keywords relate to one another. By mapping the cooccurrence of keywords, researchers can identify key themes and topics that are often studied together and reveal emerging subfields of research. This is very useful for understanding the conceptual structure of a discipline and for identifying areas that are currently the focus of research. The results of the keyword co-occurrence in this study can be seen in Figure 7. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4393 Figure 7 Visualization of the Author’s Network The keyword co-occurrence resulted in five clusters and 64 items. The division of clusters in keyword co-occurrence analysis aims to identify and group keywords that are closely related to each other based on their co-occurrence in scientific publications. Researchers can uncover subfields or specific themes within a discipline by grouping keywords that frequently appear together. Each cluster represents a group of closely related concepts or topics, making it easier to understand the structure and dynamics of research in that field. 3.2.3 Overlay Visualization Keyword Co-Occurrence Overlay visualization provides a dynamic visual representation of bibliometric data that allows researchers to observe the temporal evolution and distribution of various elements within a network, such as keywords, authors, or institutions. With overlay visualization, users can display additional information on the network map, such as publication year or citation intensity, making it easier to identify research trends, topic developments, and temporal relationships among elements. This feature helps researchers understand how research fields change over time and identify emerging topics or those that have long been a primary focus, enabling more informed and strategic decisionmaking in research. The results of the overlay visualization in this study can be seen in Figure 8. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4394 Figure 8 Overlay Visualization 3.2.4 Density Visualization Keyword Co-Occurrence Density visualization helps visualize the density of elements (such as keywords, authors, or publications) within a bibliometric network. This visualization’s primary function is to show dense areas with many interconnected elements, marked by more intense colors, and less dense regions, marked by softer or colourless hues. This helps researchers identify the most active and influential topics or researchers in a particular field and understand the distribution and focus of research within the network. Thus, density visualization provides a clear and intuitive picture of the structure and dynamics of a research field. Density visualization in Figure 9. Figure 9 Density Visualization World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4395 Figure 9 shows that keywords with a yellow background have a very high element density. In the context of a keyword map or a collaboration network of authors, areas with a yellow background indicate the highest concentration, highlighting the topics that are most researched. Accordingly, the synthesis derived from Table 1 reveals that recent studies reveal an increasing emphasis on understanding the environmental implications of additive manufacturing (AM), particularly when compared to conventional methods. Much of this research turns to Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as a means of evaluating energy use, emissions, and material efficiency [21], [22]. There is growing optimism that AM can reduce waste and improve sustainability, especially when applied in decentralized manufacturing contexts or when recycled materials are introduced into the process [23], [24]. That said, many of the works reviewed stop short of offering a full picture. While environmental performance is frequently addressed, economic feasibility and social impact are not consistently examined. Moreover, methodological inconsistencies particularly in how system boundaries and impact categories are defined can limit comparability and generalizability[25]. This issue is compounded by the fact that many assessments remain confined to a cradle-to-gate scope, rather than considering full product life cycles [26]. In the construction and materials sectors, experiments with biocomposites and waste-based inputs show promise, though practical challenges such as material handling or variability in properties continue to complicate large-scale implementation[27], [28]. At the same time, some researchers have begun incorporating life cycle costing and probabilistic models, broadening the discussion beyond environmental metrics alone[29], [30]. New manufacturing approaches, such as WAAM and near-net-shape electrochemical processes, have also entered the discourse, offering notable efficiency gains and suggesting further avenues for future investigation [31], [32]. Table 1 Systematic Literature Review Author Proposed Key Contribution Area of application Limitation [21] The paper aims to systematically analyze comparative studies focusing on the environmental impacts of additive manufacturing (AM) and conventional manufacturing (CM). Comprehensive Literature Review, Identification of Research Gaps, Insights into Decentralized vs. Centralized Systems Manufacturing and Supply Chain Management, Environmental Impact Assessment, Energy Efficiency in Manufacturing Research on the environmental impact of transportation between additive manufacturing and conventional manufacturing is still limited. The long-term benefits of decentralized versus centralized manufacturing systems are still unclear. The evaluation of the impact of transportation on additive manufacturing and the environmental performance of decentralized supply chains is also lacking. [33] The paper proposes a comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate the environmental impacts of additive manufacturing (AM) using recycled carbon fibres (CFs) compared to virgin CFs. Detailed Life Cycle Inventory (LCI), Environmental Impact Analysis, Comparison of Scenarios, Insights into Solvolysis, Promotion of CF Recycling Sustainable Manufacturing, Composite Materials, Lifecycle Assessment, Material Science and Engineering The study lacks an economic assessment, data on recovered fibre properties, and adaptations for sizing and composites. The functional unit (a testing coupon) also complicates defining fiber functionality loss. [34] The journal proposes a life-cycle assessment (LCA) of 3D concrete printing and traditional casting processes for Comparative Analysis, Environmental Impact Assessment, Innovative Material Use, Life-Cycle Data Sustainable Construction, Material Science, Environmental Policy, The study only considered Portland cement and did not evaluate alternative cement matrices that are more environmentally World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 26(02), 4387–4402 4402 [30] A. Gonçalves, B. Ferreira, M. Leite, and I. Ribeiro, “Environmental and Economic Sustainability Impacts of Metal Additive Manufacturing: A Study in the Industrial Machinery and Aeronautical Sectors,” Sustain. Prod. Consum., vol. 42, no. September, pp. 292–308, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2023.10.004. [31] J. I. Sword, A. Galloway, and A. Toumpis, “Analysis of Environmental Impact and Mechanical Properties of Inconel 625 Produced Using Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing,” Sustain. , vol. 16, no. 10, 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16104178. [32] A. Dolganov, M. T. Bishop, M. Tomatis, G. Z. Chen, and D. Hu, “Environmental assessment of the near-net-shape electrochemical metallisation process and the Kroll-electron beam melting process for titanium manufacture,” Green Chem., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 1952–1967, 2020, doi: 10.1039/c9gc04036f. [33] K. R. Chatzipanagiotou et al., “Life Cycle Assessment of Composites Additive Manufacturing using Recycled Materials,” ICCM Int. Conf. Compos. Mater., 2023. [34] M. Sambucci, I. Biblioteca, and M. Valente, “Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of 3D Concrete Printing and Casting Processes for Cementitious Materials Incorporating Ground Waste Tire Rubber,” Recycling, vol. 8, no. 1, 2023, doi: 10.3390/recycling8010015. [35] I. Agustí-Juan and G. Habert, “Environmental design guidelines for digital fabrication,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 142, pp. 2780–2791, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.190. [36] B. Naghshineh, F. Lourenço, R. Godina, C. Jacinto, and H. Carvalho, “A social life cycle assessment framework for additive manufacturing products,” Appl. Sci., vol. 10, no. 13, 2020, doi: 10.3390/app10134459. [37] A. B. Stefaniak et al., “Towards sustainable additive manufacturing: The need for awareness of particle and vapor releases during polymer recycling, making filament, and fused filament fabrication 3-D printing,” Resour. Conserv. Recycl., vol. 176, no. August 2021, p. 105911, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105911. [38] M. A. Olawumi, B. I. Oladapo, O. M. Ikumapayi, and J. O. Akinyoola, “Waste to wonder to explore possibilities with recycled materials in 3D printing,” Sci. Total Environ., vol. 905, no. July, p. 167109, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167109. [39] R. Lostado-Lorza, M. Corral-Bobadilla, C. Sabando-Fraile, and F. Somovilla-Gómez, “Enhancing thermal conductivity of sinterized bronze (Cu89/Sn11) by 3D printing and thermal post-treatment: Energy efficiency and environmental sustainability,” Energy, vol. 299, no. March, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.131435.