Exploring the Key Elements of Sustainable Design from a Social Responsibility Perspective: A Case Study of Fast Fashion Consumers’ Evaluation of Green Projects

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments to the Author

The following comments and questions are meant to assist the authors in developing this paper. After reading the work, the author(s) will need to overcome a few obstacles.

The structure and format of the manuscript need extensive improvements. Please consult the top-tier journals for instructions on the structure and format of the manuscript.

Please rewrite the introduction part. The introduction needs to be shortened and more concise.

The literature review should define the concept of fast fashion and the related existing literature on fast fashion consumption. The current version of the literature review needs more discussion of these important issues. What is the definition of "Social Responsibility Theory"? Please explain why the authors had to include three theories: "cradle-to-cradle, triple bottom line architecture theory, and social responsibility theory".

While the research methodology used in this study is acceptable, the authors should have cited the sources from which they obtained each measurement item correctly. This is as significant as the statements made previously.

There is no discussion section. Please include comparisons between the findings of previous studies and those of the current study in the discussion part.

What are the theoretical contributions?

What are the research limitations?

Please follow the referencing guidelines from the journal.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer： Thank you for your comments!

Sincerely
Yi Ting  2022/12/16  08:34 Taiwan

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is correct: essence, structure, methodology and research results. The literature is exhaustive and contemporary. However, the paper should be corrected in technical details:

- it is necessary to standardize the size of the letters in tables number 2, 4, 5 and 9 (with other tables or the rest of the text), as well as their titles with the rest of text,

- listing all capital letters in references number 6 and 33 is not unified with other references,

- listing all capital letters of PLENITUDE from reference 4 in integral text, 

- year of publication in references should be written in bold letters.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer： Thank you for your comments!
Sincerely
Yi Ting  2022/12/16  08:34 Taiwan

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

I’ve read your manuscript with great interest. It is very urgent, internationally important, and based on in-depth research. However, it needs substantial additions and certain modifications – I hope my recommendations will help to bring it in order.

1)      Title: it’s informative, but try to shorten a bit.

2)      Authors’ affiliation: please, avoid indicating the job title.

3)      Abstract: please, re-write it and focus on your findings. You have to indicate where the analysis was done (in Taiwan).

4)      Key words: please, avoid the words from the title.

5)      Section 3 and subsection 3.1: Research Method -> Method.

6)      Section 3: what was the language of your analysis and questionnaires? Among whom the questionnaires were distributed? I do not understand whether the survey was made by the authors or by Kantar, and, if the second, whether it is possible to reproduce their results?

7)      Section 4 to be titled “Results”.

8)      Where is the section “Discussion”? There, you should interpret your findings, put them into the context of the international research, etc. I’m sure this paper needs extensive section of this kind. There, you may also refer to UN SDGs and many other interesting concepts.

9)      In Conclusions, I’d prefer to see the numbered list of 3-5 main findings (from Results) and interpretations (from Discussion), Please, do not forget about limitations (the principal is that this study is restricted to Taiwan with its specific cultural and socio-economical frames).

10)  The writing is ok, but, please, avoid excessive structuring, when subsections are multiple, but too short and consisting of single paragraphs. Also, please, avoid one-sentence paragraphs.

11)  I encourage you to think about addition of some figures, including photos of the things you discuss. They will increase attractiveness of your work to the possible readers, but I do not insist on doing this.

Author Response

尊敬的審稿人： 感謝您的寶貴意見！
Sincerely
Yi Ting 2022/12/16 08:34 台灣

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

Thanks for your revisions, which have permitted your manuscript to sound much better. However, I still see two issues for improvements:

1)      Methodology: I still cannot understand whether you have performed customer survey yourself. If so, you have to tell more details. Language, average customers’ profile, questionnaire sample, etc. See also my comments from the initial review. Additionally, if the customer survey is a part of your analysis, the first paragraphs of this section should be gathered in a new subsection.

2)      Discussion: this section can be extended. Moreover, you should cite literature there to put your findings into the frame of the international research. Up to 10-15 citations is necessary. For instance, you can cite similar studies undertaken in some other countries, as well as literature about SDGs.

Author Response

Thank you, Reviewer, for your comments again. I really appreciate . New supplementary information is placed on the right column in the red words.

Best regards,

Happy new year!

2022/12/31 12:59

Yi Ting,Chang

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf