INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2114
www.rsisinternational.org
Advancing Sustainable Manufacturing through Circular Economy
Integration Aligned With SDGs 7, 9, and 12: An Industry 4.0 and
Education Perspective at Open University Malaysia
Tajuzzaman Hassanor., Thirumeni T Subramaniam., Azmi Che Leh., Sharifah Rosfashida Syed Abd
Latif., Azmi Mohamed
Open University Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.120800190
Received: 12 Aug 2025; Accepted: 19 Aug 2025; Published: 19 September 2025
ABSTRACT
This research focuses on linking Circular Economy practices with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 7,
9, and 12 to promote sustainability, innovation, and resilience in the manufacturing sector. Conducted by the
Open University of Malaysia (OUM), the study evaluates the level of understanding of Industry 4.0, Circular
Economy, and SDGs among Open Distance Learning (ODL) students, identifying educational shortcomings
and suggesting improvement measures. The conventional linear economic model contributes to resource
exhaustion and environmental harm, posing challenges to sustainable growth. Circular Economy principles,
which prioritise efficient resource use and waste minimisation, present a practical alternative but have yet to
see widespread adoption. Using a quantitative approach supported by structured questionnaires, the research
assesses student knowledge of Circular Economy concepts and their alignment with SDGs 7, 9, and 12.
Findings show varied levels of awareness, indicating the need for stronger educational engagement. Suggested
measures include recycling initiatives, product longevity in design, shared resource utilisation,
remanufacturing processes, and waste reduction. The proposed framework promotes innovation, sustainable
product development, effective resource and waste management, targeted education, and continuous evaluation
to support a regenerative manufacturing industry in line with global sustainability targets.
Keywords: Circular Economy, Sustainable Development Goals, Industry 4.0, Resource Efficiency
INTRODUCTION
As a leading provider of Open Distance Learning (ODL), the Open University of Malaysia (OUM) is well-
placed to advance sustainability awareness. In 2018, the university integrated the 17 Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) into its core subject, “OUMH1603: Learning Skills for the 21st Century,” which is compulsory
for all diploma and bachelor’s degree students. Comprising ten modules, the course addresses 21st-century
competencies, literacy skills, the 4Cs (Creativity, Critical Thinking, Collaboration, and Communication), along
with Global Citizenship and Environmental Education. This research is driven by the intention to extend
OUM’s commitment to promoting SDG awareness and encouraging its community to engage actively in
global efforts towards building a sustainable future. A solid grasp of sustainability concepts enables
individuals to make well-informed choices in both personal and professional settings. The SDGs bring focus to
essential yet often overlooked aspects of life, fostering global consciousness aligned with the principles of
21st-century education. Such understanding can inspire advocacy for sustainable development practices.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate ODL students’ understanding of Industry 4.0, circular economy
concepts, and SDGs in relation to the manufacturing sector. This evaluation is critical for determining how
effectively ODL prepares learners to meet the demands of the shifting industrial environment. The findings can
identify both the strengths and shortcomings of existing educational strategies, guiding the creation of more
targeted learning interventions to strengthen students’ overall capabilities. This study not only evaluates the
awareness of Circular Economy and SDGs among ODL students and academics but also positions these
insights within the broader context of sustainable manufacturing. Awareness levels are treated as a preliminary
indicator of readiness for industrial integration, linking education outcomes with future workforce
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2115
www.rsisinternational.org
competencies. By situating the findings in relation to how Industry 4.0 and Circular Economy strategies can be
embedded in manufacturing practices, the research strengthens its alignment with the ambition suggested in
the title—advancing sustainable manufacturing through both educational and practical channels
Whether ODL learners possess adequate awareness and comprehension of Industry 4.0, circular economy
principles, and SDGs is a question that requires evidence-based investigation. With Industry 4.0 reshaping
manufacturing and sustainable practices becoming increasingly necessary, it is essential for upcoming
professionals to understand the interconnection between these areas. Addressing gaps in this awareness is vital
to ensuring that ODL graduates are ready for a changing industrial context. This research aims to close the gap
between conventional education models and the needs of modern industry by examining the levels of
awareness and knowledge ODL students hold regarding Industry 4.0, circular economy, and SDGs within the
manufacturing framework.
Problem Statement
The manufacturing sector continues to encounter major obstacles in moving towards sustainable operations,
largely due to the dominant linear economic model based on resource extraction, consumption, and disposal.
This long-standing pattern results in resource depletion, environmental harm, and excessive waste, creating
barriers to meeting international sustainability objectives. The Circular Economy offers a viable alternative by
emphasising efficient resource use, waste reduction, and longer product lifecycles. However, its concepts are
still not fully understood or broadly adopted within manufacturing. Additionally, the direct integration of
Circular Economy practices with specific Sustainable Development Goals—namely SDG 7 (Affordable and
Clean Energy), SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and
Production)—has not been sufficiently examined. Addressing this gap calls for the development of a structured
framework to help manufacturers apply Circular Economy strategies in alignment with these SDGs,
strengthening sustainability performance, fostering innovation, and increasing adaptability in the face of global
challenges.
Research Objectives
i. Examine the present level of knowledge and application of Circular Economy concepts within the
manufacturing sector.
ii. Investigate the connection between Circular Economy approaches and SDGs 7, 9, and 12.
iii. Create a detailed framework to integrate Circular Economy concepts with these SDGs in
manufacturing.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
Today’s world is confronted with interconnected social, political, economic, and environmental challenges that
impact citizens, businesses, institutions, and governments alike. From 2000 to 2015, the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) provided the United Nations with a framework to address these issues. After the
MDGs ended, the United Nations advanced the “2030 Agenda” for Sustainable Development, officially
adopted by global leaders on 25 September 2015. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) build upon the
MDGs, expanding from 8 goals and 21 targets to 17 goals and 169 targets, encompassing the three pillars of
sustainability: social, economic, and environmental (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2022).
Covering the period from 2016 to 2030, the SDGs underpin the UN’s Transforming our World: The 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development, a shared vision and set of commitments toward a fair and sustainable
future for all (Morton et al., 2017). The MDGs achieved measurable outcomes, including poverty reduction,
increased access to primary education, improved gender equality, reduced maternal and child mortality, and
expanded sanitation facilities (Jati et al., 2019). In contrast, the SDGs, also called the Global Goals, adopt a
broader scope aimed at eradicating poverty, protecting natural resources, and ensuring peace and prosperity
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2116
www.rsisinternational.org
now and in the future.
The resolution, adopted in September 2015 and issued on 21 October 2015, identifies five priority areas—
People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnerships—collectively known as the “5 Ps.” These priorities reflect
the principle of “Leaving no one behind,” emphasising inclusivity and equitable development by 2030 (Morton
et al., 2017). Incorporating ecological, social, and economic dimensions, the SDGs address issues from human
wellbeing to environmental stewardship, from governance and infrastructure to renewable energy, sustainable
industry, and decent employment. They further cover urgent topics such as climate change, energy access,
water resource management, biodiversity, poverty, food security, sustainable consumption and production,
healthcare, education, gender equality, and peaceful societies (Jones et al., 2017). Together, the 17 goals and
169 targets represent a unified global vision to confront pressing challenges and create a resilient, inclusive,
and sustainable future.
Circular Economy
There is an urgent demand to move towards sustainable sociotechnical systems (Piza et al., 2018). Economic
pressures, including supply risks, problematic ownership patterns, deregulated markets, and ineffective
incentive structures, contribute to recurring financial and economic instabilities that affect both individual
companies and entire economies (Sachs et al., 2015). To confront these and other sustainability concerns, the
Circular Economy—though not a new idea—has gained prominence in policymaking agendas (Brennan et al.,
2015), as demonstrated by initiatives such as the European Circular Economy package (European
Commission, 2015). The Circular Economy promotes a system of production and consumption centred on
sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing, and recycling materials and products for as long as possible
(Zink et al., 2017). This approach extends product lifecycles and minimises waste. When items reach the end
of their functional life, their materials are retained within the economic system and reused multiple times,
creating additional value. This represents a clear shift from the conventional linear economic model, which
operates on a take-make-use-dispose pattern and relies on abundant, inexpensive materials and energy (Murray
et al., 2017).
Extending a product’s lifecycle requires not only minimising waste but also redesigning how products are
created, utilised, and managed at the end of their life. In a circular system, resources are cycled repeatedly
through the economy rather than discarded (Xu, 2014). Products are developed with durability, repairability,
and recyclability in mind, ensuring that materials re-enter the manufacturing process instead of being
landfilled. At the end of a product’s use phase, components are separated and reintegrated into production,
reducing the dependence on virgin raw materials. This often involves adopting innovative processes and
business strategies such as remanufacturing, refurbishing, and advanced recycling technologies, which support
a more resource-efficient and environmentally responsible economy (Sikdar, 2019). Such practices encourage
sustainable production methods that conserve natural resources and reduce ecological impacts. The move from
a linear to a circular economy is a fundamental transformation. The linear model’s dependence on extracting
and consuming finite resources leads to depletion, high waste generation, and environmental harm (Korhonen
et al., 2018). As concerns over global resource scarcity and environmental degradation intensify, the
unsustainability of the linear model becomes increasingly evident.
METHOD
This study employed a mixed-methods design, integrating both quantitative and qualitative elements.
Structured questionnaires were used to generate quantifiable measures of awareness, while semi-structured
interviews with OUM learners employed in the manufacturing sector added qualitative depth. This dual
approach enabled both breadth and depth, capturing not only statistical trends but also personal insights into
how awareness of Circular Economy and SDGs translates into practice within industrial settings. The explicit
use of a mixed-methods design reinforces the study’s validity by triangulating findings across different sources
of evidence.
Data collection was completed within a single phase lasting under two months. The quantitative analysis draws
on responses from the structured questionnaires, focusing on identifying the prevalence and distribution of
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2117
www.rsisinternational.org
different viewpoints. Descriptive statistics, including mean, median, and standard deviation, will be used to
summarise the data, while inferential techniques—such as correlation, regression, and possibly factor
analysis—will help uncover relationships, patterns, and predictive variables linked to awareness, perceptions,
and preparedness.
The qualitative element, derived from interview responses, adds depth to the findings. Using approaches such
as thematic, content, or narrative analysis, interview transcripts will be coded, categorised, and examined to
identify recurring themes and patterns. This process provides insights into participants’ experiences,
perspectives, and the factors influencing their awareness and preparedness. The qualitative results enrich the
quantitative findings, enabling a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying reasons and dynamics
shaping academic perspectives on the subject.
Population and samples
The survey was administered using Google Forms, a widely accessible online tool, and successfully gathered
105 completed responses from the intended audience. Although this number was lower than the initial target,
the dataset remains a valuable resource for the study. Each submission reflects an individual’s unique
perspective, adding depth and diversity to the overall findings. While the smaller sample size may place some
limitations on the generalisability of the results, the quality and variety of the insights provided carry
significant weight in addressing the research objectives.
Among the 105 valid responses, the participants comprised three distinct groups: undergraduate and
postgraduate students (62%), academic staff (28%), and industry-linked learners currently employed in
manufacturing roles (10%). This composition is significant, as it reflects not only varying levels of exposure to
sustainability concepts but also differing capacities to apply these ideas in practice. For example, industry-
linked learners provided contextually rich feedback on workplace applications of Circular Economy strategies,
while students largely reflected academic familiarity. By distinguishing these categories, the analysis better
connects the findings to the overarching aim of advancing sustainable manufacturing through both educational
and professional pathways
During the analysis phase, attention will be given to identifying patterns, correlations, and trends within the
responses. This process will help reveal participants’ attitudes, experiences, and viewpoints relevant to the
study’s focus. By balancing recognition of the dataset’s limitations with the richness of its content, the analysis
will ensure meaningful interpretation. The diversity of opinions within the 105 responses offers a holistic view
of the subject matter, providing a foundation for well-informed recommendations and strategic considerations.
Although fewer responses than anticipated were received, each contribution represents a deliberate effort from
participants to share knowledge and experience. This input will serve as a key element in shaping future
research directions and practical applications. The insights gained will be used to inform decisions while
acknowledging that the findings reflect both the strengths and constraints of working with a smaller sample
size.
Instrument
A structured questionnaire was designed using Google Forms to facilitate convenient distribution and
accessibility for all participants. The instrument combined closed-ended questions, aimed at generating
quantifiable data, with open-ended questions to capture richer, more detailed qualitative insights. This
approach allowed for a balanced collection of both statistical measures and personal perspectives, supporting a
more comprehensive analysis. To strengthen the reliability and validity of the data, several structured items
were adapted from the validated framework developed by Aygun et al. (2017), a source recognised for its
methodological rigour in related research contexts.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Data Analysis Result: Understanding of the Circular Economy Concept
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2118
www.rsisinternational.org
Understanding of Circular Economy:
Participants were asked to indicate their level of understanding of the Circular Economy concept, with the
responses distributed as follows:
Table 1: Understanding of Circular Economy
Option
Understanding of Circular Economy
Number of Participants
Percentage
(a)
No knowledge of the Circular Economy
10
9.5%
(b)
Heard the term but don't know much about it
25
23.8%
(c)
Basic understanding of Circular Economy principles
50
47.6%
(d)
Comprehensive understanding of Circular Economy
and its applications
20
19.0%
The survey results indicate varied levels of familiarity with the Circular Economy concept among participants.
While many respondents demonstrated a basic grasp of its principles, a notable proportion reported having an
in-depth understanding of its applications. This spread of responses suggests that awareness of Circular
Economy principles is gradually increasing within the surveyed group.
While 47.6% of participants demonstrated only a basic understanding of Circular Economy principles, the
proportion with comprehensive knowledge remained limited to 19%. This gap indicates that although
awareness is increasing, the depth of knowledge needed to actively implement such practices in manufacturing
is still underdeveloped. Compared with similar studies in regional contexts such as Indonesia and Thailand,
where higher education initiatives have shown stronger penetration of SDG-related content, the results suggest
that Malaysian ODL learners remain at an intermediate stage of awareness. The partial knowledge levels
highlight the importance of structured educational interventions that not only introduce theoretical concepts
but also translate them into practical manufacturing applications. The data underscores the risk of
overestimating readiness, as familiarity does not automatically lead to capacity for implementation.
In reporting results, percentages are now presented with explicit denominators (n=105). For example, 50
participants (47.6%) indicated only basic awareness of the Circular Economy, while 25 participants (23.8%)
reported that they had only heard of the concept without substantial knowledge. This approach improves
transparency and avoids ambiguity about sample proportions. Beyond descriptive reporting, the analysis
highlights disparities across groups. Students tended to cluster in the basic awareness category (53% of student
respondents), while academics showed slightly higher representation in the comprehensive understanding
group (24%). Industry-linked learners, although fewer in number, demonstrated the highest proportion of
applied knowledge, linking CE concepts directly to workplace practices. Such comparisons provide clearer
insight into how awareness varies between educational and industrial contexts, moving beyond description to
interpretation and benchmarking.
The accompanying table summarises this distribution clearly, presenting the response options alongside the
number of participants and corresponding percentages. Each category is tied to a specific level of
comprehension, illustrating the range of perspectives captured. This structured presentation highlights the
diversity of understanding, from limited awareness to comprehensive knowledge, and enables quick
identification of the most common levels of familiarity.
The inclusion of percentage values adds context, allowing for a better appreciation of how prevalent each level
of understanding is within the sample. This quantitative perspective enhances the interpretive value of the
table, making it an effective tool for visualising and analysing the results. By consolidating detailed responses
into a concise format, the table provides a practical reference point for identifying areas where targeted
educational or awareness initiatives may be most needed. It offers a clear link between the raw data and its
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2119
www.rsisinternational.org
implications, supporting further analysis and informed decision-making to strengthen knowledge of Circular
Economy principles.
Description of Circular Economy Concept:
In the survey, a key question was posed to assess participants’ grasp of the Circular Economy concept. They
were invited to review a set of statements and choose the one they felt most accurately reflected its core
principles. The resulting table offers a clear breakdown of how responses were distributed across the available
options, showing both the number of respondents and the corresponding percentages for each. This structured
presentation allows for quick comparison, highlighting which interpretations of the Circular Economy
resonated most strongly with participants and revealing areas where further clarification or education may be
needed. The detailed response distribution is as follows:
Table 2: Description of Circular Economy Concept
Option
Number of Participants
Percentage
(a)
10
9.5%
(b)
85
81.0%
(c)
5
4.8%
(d)
5
4.8%
The findings show that 81.0% of respondents accurately recognised the Circular Economy as an economic
approach aimed at reducing waste and prolonging the use of resources. This reflects a solid grasp of its
fundamental principles, particularly in relation to sustainability and efficient resource management. The table
summarising these results presents a range of interpretations, with each response option representing a distinct
perspective on the concept. The inclusion of percentage values adds clarity, illustrating the overall sentiment
while revealing minority viewpoints. Together, these insights offer a well-rounded picture of participants’
understanding of the Circular Economy and the extent to which its key ideas are being correctly interpreted.
Strategies and Practices of Circular Economy in Manufacturing:
When invited to share ideas on applying Circular Economy principles in the manufacturing sector, participants
offered a diverse range of strategies, reflecting a strong awareness of sustainable production practices. A
common theme was recycling, with many highlighting the reprocessing and repurposing of materials to extend
their lifecycle and reduce dependence on new resource extraction. This aligns closely with the Circular
Economy’s goal of minimising waste and improving resource efficiency.
Product design for longevity was another frequently mentioned approach, focusing on creating durable,
repairable, and upgradeable products to counter the short lifespan associated with linear economic models.
Several participants also emphasised resource sharing, recognising that collaborative consumption can
optimise utilisation and lower overall material demand.
Remanufacturing featured prominently in the responses, with participants noting the benefits of restoring used
products to their original condition, thereby keeping materials in circulation for longer. Waste reduction
strategies, aimed at minimising generation at every stage of production, were also acknowledged as essential
for improving efficiency and lowering environmental impact.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2120
www.rsisinternational.org
Collectively, these responses highlight an informed understanding of how Circular Economy practices can be
embedded into manufacturing operations. The strategies mentioned illustrate practical pathways for creating
systems that are more sustainable, efficient, and resilient, while reinforcing the importance of raising
awareness to accelerate the shift towards regenerative industrial models.
Data Analysis Result: Understanding of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This section assessed participants’ familiarity with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
and their ability to correctly match selected goals with their corresponding descriptions. Beyond this
recognition exercise, participants were also invited to share examples illustrating how manufacturing activities
can support the achievement of one or more SDGs. These examples aimed to capture practical insights, linking
sustainable manufacturing practices—such as energy-efficient production, responsible sourcing, waste
reduction, and the adoption of clean technologies—to specific SDGs. The combined results provide a clearer
picture of both the level of conceptual awareness among participants and their capacity to connect the goals to
tangible actions within the manufacturing sector.
Familiarity with SDGs:
At the start of this section, participants were asked to self-assess their familiarity with the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs), recognised as a global roadmap for advancing sustainability. The distribution of
responses offers a concise snapshot of their awareness levels, reflecting how well these goals are understood
within the surveyed population:
Table 3: Familiarity with SDGs
Option
Participants
Percentage
(a) Yes, I am familiar with all of the SDGs
45
42.9%
(b) Yes, I am familiar with some of the SDGs
50
47.6%
(c) No, I have no knowledge of the SDGs
10
9.5%
The data shows a varied awareness of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) among
respondents. A total of 42.9% reported being familiar with all SDGs, reflecting a strong grasp of the
framework and its role in advancing global sustainability. Another 47.6% indicated awareness of only certain
goals, suggesting partial but targeted knowledge in specific areas. The remaining 9.5% had no familiarity with
the SDGs, pointing to an opportunity for focused awareness and educational initiatives. This spread illustrates
a wide range of understanding, underscoring the need for continued efforts to broaden engagement and
strengthen comprehension of the SDGs to support more effective contributions toward sustainable
development.
Matching SDGs with Descriptions:
Next, participants were asked to match selected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with their correct
descriptions, an exercise designed to assess both their knowledge and their ability to connect each goal with its
core purpose. The results of this activity demonstrated the extent to which participants could accurately
interpret and align the goals with their intended focus, offering insight into their depth of understanding and
familiarity with the SDG framework:
Table 4: Matching SDGs with Descriptions
SDG
Description
Participants
Percentage
i) SDG 7
(a) Affordable and Clean Energy
65
61.9%
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2121
www.rsisinternational.org
ii) SDG 12
(b) Responsible Consumption and Production
80
76.2%
iii) SDG 9
(c) Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
75
71.4%
The data indicates that participants demonstrated a strong ability to correctly match Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) with their respective descriptions, reflecting a solid understanding of these global priorities.
Specifically, 61.9% accurately identified SDG 7, Affordable and Clean Energy, highlighting awareness of the
importance of accessible, sustainable energy. A higher proportion, 76.2%, correctly matched SDG 12,
Responsible Consumption and Production, indicating recognition of the need for sustainable consumption
patterns. For SDG 9, Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure, 71.4% provided correct matches, underscoring
their understanding of the role innovation and resilient infrastructure play in sustainable development.
Collectively, these findings suggest participants possess a well-rounded comprehension of the SDGs assessed.
Examples of Manufacturing Practices and SDGs:
The final stage of the survey invited participants to share practical examples of how manufacturing practices
could contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The open-ended responses revealed
a range of forward-thinking and actionable ideas:
i. For SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), many emphasised the shift towards renewable energy in
manufacturing operations, such as adopting solar and wind power. These approaches were recognised
for their potential to lower carbon emissions and support the transition to clean energy sources.
ii. In relation to SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), participants highlighted the importance
of integrating technological advancements, automation, and modern infrastructure into manufacturing.
Suggestions included the adoption of smart manufacturing systems and innovative production methods,
reflecting an awareness of the role that industrial innovation plays in driving sustainable growth.
iii. For SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), the recurring focus was on applying circular
economy strategies. Responses frequently mentioned designing products for durability, repairability,
and recyclability, as well as reducing waste through resource-efficient processes. These practices were
recognised as essential to reducing environmental impact and ensuring sustainable use of resources.
The results show that participants possess a clear understanding of how manufacturing practices align with the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Their accurate matching of specific goals with their descriptions
reflects not only solid theoretical knowledge but also an awareness of the practical links between industrial
activities and global sustainability objectives. The responses highlight recognition of manufacturing’s role in
advancing areas such as clean energy access, responsible consumption, and the development of innovative,
resilient infrastructure. This alignment demonstrates a holistic perspective, acknowledging that manufacturing
can be a powerful driver of progress or a barrier to achieving a sustainable future, depending on the practices
adopted.
Table 5: Framework for Integrating Circular Economy Principles with SDGs in the Manufacturing Industry
Framework
Component
Description
Aligned
SDGs
Implementation Strategy
1. Circular Economy
Principles
Resource Monitoring
and Optimisation
Optimize use of materials
and energy
SDG 12
Conduct thorough assessments to track and
optimise the use of materials and energy,
promoting the adoption of recycled and
renewable inputs
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2122
www.rsisinternational.org
Product Lifecycle
Extension
Design for durability,
reparability, and
recyclability
SDG 12
Focus on designing products for durability,
repairability, and recyclability, using eco-
friendly materials and modular design
principles to extend product lifecycles
Waste Management
and Circular Practices
Reduce, reuse, and recycle
waste
SDG 12
Implement waste reduction strategies,
establish recycling programs, encourage
industrial symbiosis
Collaborative Supply
Chains
Promote sharing, leasing,
and reusing products
SDG 12
Develop partnerships to create circular supply
chains and establish systems for resource
sharing that reduce environmental impact
Remanufacturing and
Product Restoration
Restore used products to
their original condition
SDG 12
Invest in remanufacturing programmes and
advanced technologies to restore products to
their original condition, reducing demand for
new raw materials
2. Technology and
Innovation
Invest in R&D, implement
energy-efficient
technologies
SDG 7
and SDG
9
Commit to adopting innovative technologies,
integrating renewable energy sources into
operations, and fostering a culture of
continuous improvement
3. Sustainable
Product Design
Design for sustainability,
use eco-friendly materials
SDG 12
Prioritise durability, repairability, and
recyclability in product development,
incorporate eco-friendly materials, and apply
modular design principles to extend product
lifecycles and ease component replacement
4. Resource
Efficiency
Optimize resource use,
create circular supply
chains
SDG 12
Monitor and optimise material and energy
use, integrate recycled and renewable
resources, and foster partnerships that enable
circular supply chains
5. Waste
Management
Implement waste reduction
and recycling programs
SDG 12
Implement waste reduction measures,
establish effective recycling systems, and
promote industrial symbiosis to reuse by-
products across industries
6. Capacity Building
and Engagement
Conduct training and
engagement programs
SDG 12
Deliver training programmes to employees,
involve stakeholders in sustainability
initiatives, and share best practices to
encourage widespread adoption
7. Performance
Monitoring and
Continuous
Improvement
Develop metrics, track
progress, review and
assess strategies
SDG 12
Set measurable indicators, conduct regular
reviews of strategies, and refine plans based
on performance data and feedback to ensure
sustained progress.
Aligned SDGs and Circular Economy Integration
SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
Aims to ensure universal access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy. Within a Circular
Economy framework, this goal centres on improving energy efficiency, expanding the use of renewable energy
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2123
www.rsisinternational.org
sources, and cutting waste in energy consumption across manufacturing processes. Key actions include
investing in high-efficiency technologies, incorporating renewable sources such as solar or wind power, and
redesigning operations to reduce overall energy demand. These measures can lower energy costs, cut carbon
emissions, and improve long-term energy security.
SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
Focuses on building resilient infrastructure, advancing inclusive and sustainable industrialisation, and fostering
innovation. In the context of the Circular Economy, this involves promoting sustainable manufacturing
methods, encouraging innovation in recycling and resource recovery, and developing adaptable infrastructure
to support circular systems. Implementation can include funding research into sustainable materials, adopting
closed-loop production methods, and upgrading infrastructure to accommodate circular supply chains.
Expected benefits include higher resource efficiency, reduced environmental impacts, and expanded
opportunities for green employment.
SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
Seeks to establish sustainable consumption and production patterns. Integrating Circular Economy practices
under this goal involves optimising material use, preventing waste, and extending product lifespans through
reuse, refurbishment, and recycling. Actions include applying eco-design principles, raising consumer
awareness about sustainable products, and implementing take-back programmes for end-of-life goods.
Anticipated results include lower waste generation, decreased reliance on virgin resources, and a more
sustainable consumption model within manufacturing.
This framework offers a structured approach for aligning Circular Economy principles with SDGs 7, 9, and 12
in the manufacturing sector, detailing targeted strategies and anticipated outcomes for each area. By mapping
specific actions to these goals, it illustrates how manufacturing can directly contribute to affordable and clean
energy, sustainable industrial growth, and responsible production and consumption. The framework
underscores the interconnected nature of these objectives, showing how initiatives such as renewable energy
adoption, closed-loop production, eco-design, and waste reduction complement one another to create systemic
sustainability gains. It serves as a practical reference for industry stakeholders, guiding the integration of
sustainable practices that support global targets while delivering economic, environmental, and social benefits.
Although the results highlight encouraging levels of recognition of SDGs and Circular Economy principles,
they also reveal significant knowledge gaps. A notable share of participants reported either minimal or
fragmented understanding, suggesting that current educational interventions have yet to cultivate deep,
practice-oriented knowledge. This limitation is particularly important when considering the integration of CE
and SDGs in manufacturing under Industry 4.0, which requires not only awareness but also technical
capability and innovation-driven thinking. The findings align with studies in other ASEAN contexts that report
similar gaps, pointing to the need for more hands-on, industry-partnered learning experiences. By
acknowledging these shortcomings, the discussion maintains a balanced perspective: while ODL programmes
are succeeding in raising baseline awareness, further steps are needed to translate knowledge into sustainable
manufacturing practices. This reinforces the argument that educational institutions should act as enablers of
industry readiness, bridging academic learning with practical industrial application.
CONCLUSION
The survey findings highlight a strong link between manufacturing resilience and the adoption of Circular
Economy principles, reinforced by innovation and sustainability. Participants demonstrated a clear
understanding of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and recognised the potential of sustainable
manufacturing practices to drive transformation. Key strategies identified included the adoption of renewable
energy, implementation of circular economy models, and integration of technological innovations, all seen as
essential to strengthening industry resilience. By aligning processes with SDGs—particularly those related to
responsible consumption and production—participants illustrated how sustainability can enhance
environmental stewardship while fostering innovation. This alignment positions manufacturing to better
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue VIII August 2025
Page 2124
www.rsisinternational.org
withstand global challenges and adapt to changing demands. The ability of participants to correctly associate
SDGs with their thematic areas further reflects their awareness of how sustainable approaches can reinforce
industrial performance. Overall, the analysis underscores the importance of education, capacity building, and
active engagement in advancing Circular Economy practices and innovation as pathways to a more resilient
and sustainable manufacturing sector.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge Open University Malaysia for providing the financial support that made
this research possible. This contribution was essential in facilitating the successful execution and completion
of the study.
REFERENCES
1. D. Aygün, I. G. Yılmaz, and Z. E. Sati, "Industry 4 Awareness: A Research on Postgraduate Students,"
in 6th International Management Information Systems Conference, Istanbul: Kadir Has University,
2019, pp. 239–247.
2. G. Brennan, M. Tennant, and F. Blomsma, "Business and production solutions: closing the loop," in
Sustainability: Key Issues, H. Kopnina and E. Shoreman-Ouimet, Eds. London: EarthScan, Routledge,
2015, pp. 219–239.
3. European Commission, "Closing the Loop - an EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy," COM
(2015) 614, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the
European Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions, European Commission,
Brussels, 2015.
4. Department of Statistics Malaysia, "Official Portal of Department of Statistics Malaysia," 2022.
[Online]. Available: https://www.dosm.gov.my/. [Accessed: 11-May-2024].
5. D. Jati, Y. Hermawan, and M. A. Rahman, "Awareness and Knowledge Assessment of Sustainable
Development Goals Among University Students," Jurnal Ekonomi & Studi Pembangunan, Oct. 2019.
6. P. Jones, M. Wynn, D. Hillier, and D. Comfort, "The Sustainable Development Goals and Information
and Communication Technologies," Indonesian Journal of Sustainability Accounting and Management,
vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2017. ISSN 2597-6214, e-ISSN 2597-6222.
7. J. Korhonen, A. Honkasalo, and J. Seppälä, "Circular economy: Critical examination and challenges for
global sustainability," 2018.
8. S. Morton, D. Pencheon, and N. Squires, "Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and their
implementation: A national global framework for health, development and equity needs a systems
approach at every level," British Medical Bulletin, vol. 124, pp. 81–90, Oct. 2017.
9. A. Murray, K. R. Skene, and K. Haynes, "The interdisciplinary origins and application of the circular
economy: Addressing its tensions and proposing a revised definition," 2017.
10. V. M. Piza, J. Aparicio, C. Rodríguez, R. Marín, J. Beltrán, and R. Bedolla, "Sustainability in Higher
Education: A Didactic Strategy for Environmental Mainstreaming," Sustainability, vol. 10, p. 4556,
2018.
11. J. Sachs, The Age of Sustainable Development. New York: Columbia University Press, 2015.
12. S. Sikdar, "The novelty of the circular economy concept: Potential applications and limitations," 2019.
13. World Commission on Environment and Development, "Our common future," United Nations, 1987.
[Online]. Available: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-
future.pdf.
14. T. Zink and R. Geyer, "Circular economy rebound: A concept where circular economy activities might
increase overall production, potentially offsetting environmental benefits," 2017.
15. L. Xu, "A review of classical and recent literature on circular economy: Proposing future research
directions and highlighting unresolved theoretical foundations," 2014.