Integrated Design Methods for Sustainable Public Seating in Urban Communities—A Shanghai Case Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper is interesting and shows how to present a methodology that integrates AHP, QFD and FBS to quantify the user needs and maps them into the product structure to identify the factors affecting the sustainability of public seating. Conducted a community co-creation workshop to complete a sustainability assessment with the help of life cycle assessment and scales and ultimately produces sustainable design factors and serialized products for public seating，which introduces a new approach for the sustainable renewal of urban furniture and enhances the quality of urban residents' leisure time.My detailed comments and recommendations related to the paper are presented below.
1. The sources of methods for integrated innovation in this paper appear to be excessive, with the addition of LCA methods, there are at least four, namely AHP, QFD, FBS and LCA. What is the rationale for the necessity of such a multitude of methods? Please elucidate the rationale behind the necessity of these methods.
2.In the interview research part, two semi-structured interviews were used, and there were significant differences in the selection of interviewees, what were the reasons?
3.Figures 4 and 5 are substantially more inclined to be tables than figures.
4.In the aforementioned section of the paper (lines 483 to 491), the author makes mention of national standards. However, an examination of the references reveals no evidence of such standards being cited. It is therefore recommended that this be rectified.
5.LCA is a methodology for evaluating the environmental impact of a product or service throughout its life cycle. The methodology encompasses all stages of a product or service's life cycle, from the acquisition of raw materials, through design, manufacturing, use, recycling, and final disposal. The objective is to quantify the environmental impact of a product or service in order to inform decision-making and eco-design. Nevertheless, in this paper, the LCA method is insufficiently comprehensive and does not fully account for the entirety of the LCA process.Why?
6 You need to discuss the limitations of your research in the Conclusion section.
In brief, I suggest that this manuscript accepted after minor revisions.
Author Response
Comment 1： The sources of methods for integrated innovation in this paper appear to be excessive, with the addition of LCA methods, there are at least four, namely AHP, QFD, FBS, and LCA. What is the rationale for the necessity of such a multitude of methods? Please elucidate the rationale behind the necessity of these methods.
Response： Thank you very much for your suggestion. The study provides a detailed description of the rationale for using the methodology in the methodology overview in the introduction section, specifically in lines 159-211 of the manuscript. It also adds a description of the necessity and the correlation between the methods, specifically in lines 189-196, and 208-211. The methodology adopted in this study is used in two stages: in the stage of transforming user requirements to product design requirements, the integration of the three methods of “AHP-QFD-FBS” is used to scientifically obtain accurate product solutions; in the stage of solution validation, the assessment indicators are extracted using the LCA method, which ensures the effective development of the assessment system and the validation of the study. The promotion of the ecological sustainability of urban furniture.
Comment 2： In the interview research part, two semi-structured interviews were used, and there were significant differences in the selection of interviewees, what were the reasons?
Response: Thank you for your question. Because the purpose of the two semi-structured interviews was different, there were some differences in the interviewees. Based on your suggestion, the study added a description of the purpose of the two interviews to the “Interview Research” section, specifically in lines 304-307 and 317-322 of the manuscript.
Comment 3： Figures 4 and 5 are substantially more inclined to be tables than figures.
Response: thank you very much for your suggestion. The study has changed Figures 4 and 5 in the paper to a tabular form, as shown in lines 313 and 328 of the manuscript.
Comment 4： In the aforementioned section of the paper (lines 483 to 491), the author makes mention of national standards. However, an examination of the references reveals no evidence of such standards being cited. It is therefore recommended that this be rectified.
Response: Thank you for pointing out the omission in the manuscript, the study has supplemented the references to national standards in the corresponding places, as shown in lines 526-532 of the manuscript.
Comment 5： LCA is a methodology for evaluating the environmental impact of a product or service throughout its life cycle. The methodology encompasses all stages of a product or service's life cycle, from the acquisition of raw materials, through design, manufacturing, use, recycling, and final disposal. The objective is to quantify the environmental impact of a product or service in order to inform decision-making and eco-design. Nevertheless, in this paper, the LCA method is insufficiently comprehensive and does not fully account for the entirety of the LCA process. Why?
Response: Thank you for your comments. In this study, after analyzing user needs, ten sustainable elements were obtained, for which the elements were divided into three directions: sustainable cultural features, sustainable user experience, and sustainable ecological and environmental protection. The LCA method used in this study mainly extracts assessment indicators for the direction of ecological and environmental sustainability, but it is not applicable to the assessment of cultural characteristics sustainability and user experience sustainability. Therefore, some of the steps of the LCA method are used in the assessment process, taking into account the stages and objects for which the LCA method is used. The study explains the basic principles of the LCA method, which are described in lines 197-208, and provides additional explanations of the necessity of the method, which are described in lines 208-211.
Comment 6： You need to discuss the limitations of your research in the Conclusion section.
Response: Thank you very much for your suggestion. The study adds limitations and directions for adjustments during the study in the conclusions section of the manuscript, see lines 704-710 of the manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript examines the sustainable development of urban communities, with a particular emphasis on urban furniture within community parks. It assesses the viability of integrating sustainable elements into urban furniture by identifying and applying these elements in practical scenarios. The research employs three analytical models to evaluate user-proposed demand indicators, thereby scientifically deriving design solutions. Furthermore, it identifies sustainable indicators that influence public seating in community parks, offering strategic insights at the design level for the sustainable development of public seating in communal spaces. While this paper holds potential for publication in the journal Sustainability, the authors are advised to consider the following points for improvement:
1. In the Introduction, the account of Shanghai's furniture development should be expanded, and relevant literature should be cited to enhance the manuscript.
e.g., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11627;
https://doi.org/10.19531/j.issn1001-5299.201705005.
2. The reasons for choosing Gumi Park as the study area should be explained more clearly in the manuscript.
3. The conclusion of the manuscript mentions the direction of future research. It is suggested that the direction of research be expressed in more detail or that the angle from which the research will be carried out be proposed.
4. The data obtained in the design evaluation stage are shown in the table, and it is suggested that specific values be presented again in the explanatory text so that a clear comparison of the data obtained from the research program with the existing products can clearly show the indicators of the improvement of the research program.
5. The discussion part of the manuscript has a lot of content, and it is recommended to refine it to express the core research questions, results, and other content.
6. Pay attention to the language standardization, there are a few language expression problems in the picture.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish grammar should be improved in the paper.
Author Response
Comment 1： In the Introduction, the account of Shanghai's furniture development should be expanded, and relevant literature should be cited to enhance the manuscript.
e.g., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11627;
https://doi.org/10.19531/j.issn1001-5299.201705005.
Response: Thank you very much for your suggestion. The study of Shanghai furniture is described in the introduction of the manuscript in the analysis of the existing problems of urban furniture, and the addition of the literature supporting the existing problems is described in lines 51 and 61-63 of the manuscript.
Comment 2： The reasons for choosing Gumi Park as the study area should be explained more clearly in the manuscript.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The study has added to the project background description in Manuscript 2.2 regarding the reasons for selecting Gumee Park as the study area, as described in lines 275-282 of the manuscript.
Comment 3： The conclusion of the manuscript mentions the direction of future research. It is suggested that the direction of research be expressed in more detail or that the angle from which the research will be carried out be proposed.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. In response to your suggestion, the study adds in the conclusion section that a specific direction for future research is to emphasize the emotional impact of urban furniture for users, as described in pp. 710-715 of the manuscript.
Comment 4： The data obtained in the design evaluation stage are shown in the table, and it is suggested that specific values be presented again in the explanatory text so that a clear comparison of the data obtained from the research program with the existing products can clearly show the indicators of the improvement of the research program.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. Based on your suggestion, we have re-presented the comparative data presented by the scale in the Design Evaluation section in the explanatory text, with a nod to the positive feedback that the highlighted metrics will bring to the user. See lines 559-566 and 573-580 in the manuscript.
Comment 5： The discussion part of the manuscript has a lot of content, and it is recommended to refine it to express the core research questions, results, and other content.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The study has refined the discussion section of the manuscript to highlight the impact that the ten indicators will have on the sustainability of urban furniture and their application in this study. See lines 609-664 of the manuscript.
Comment 6： Pay attention to the language standardization, there are a few language expression problems in the picture.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The study rechecked the linguistic expressions in the charts to ensure standardization of speech.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
thank you for your interesting work! To enhance its impact and quality please consider the following aspects:
title: Research on Integrated Design Methods for Sustainable Urban Furniture in
Communities - Taking Shanghai Gumei Community Park as an Example
Be more concise and transparent in the title; this research is a case study on sustainable public seating limited to the area of Shanghai Gumei Community Park.
e.g., title: "Integrated Design Methods for Sustainable Public Seating in
Urban Communities - A Shanghai Case Study"
abstract:
Apart from dealing with the central object under scrutiny - public seating - please also include (if it is your original development) the claim to your method - integrated design framework AHP-QFD-FBS.
The following chain of arguments should be supported with evidence:
leisure needs not met -> the use of public furniture decreases -> the use of integrated design framework AHP-QFD-FBS helps to enhance utilization rate.
The same goes for other parts of the article, e.g.,
lines 40-43:
"its transformation can be used as a refined means of urban renewal and
bring positive effects to urban ecological construction[1]. Simultaneously, urban furniture
serves various functions such as humanistic expression, fostering resident interaction, and
creating a sense of place."
lines 57-59:
"multiple platform heights can be reasonably used to satisfy residents' diversified
activities."
lines 99-103
"It can be seen that existing research on
the sustainability of community urban furniture focuses on the direction of material re-
newal, cultural communication, and community integration, but there are fewer studies
that can identify the problems from the residents' perspective and enhance the inclusive-
ness of the facilities from multiple perspectives."
These excerpts are vital for your argument in terms of originality of method, please refine:
lines 104-108:
"Existing research on the sustainability of community urban furniture from a user per-
spective mainly includes interview research, workshop participation, behavioral analysis,
and other forms to achieve resident participation. The research methodology is mainly
qualitative, leaning towards subjective generalization, and fewer studies have trans-
formed user needs into data for quantitative analysis."
lines 137-139:
"The following three research methods are commonly used in the research on the
transformation of user requirements to product design: Analytic Hierarchy Process, Qual-
ity Function Deployment, and Function-Behavior-Structure."
It appears that an integrated framework, including and interweaving "Analytic Hierarchy Process, Quality Function Deployment, and Function-Behavior-Structure" is one of your claims to an original methodological contribution of your article. If so, this needs to be stated clearly in chapter 2.1 and must be supported by additional contemporary sources (e.g., disiderata statements and/or outlooks in other recent articles on the subject).
There are some minor spelling and grammar issues, editing advised.
Author Response
Comment 1： Be more concise and transparent in the title; this research is a case study on sustainable public seating limited to the area of Shanghai Gumei Community Park.
Response: Thank you very much for your suggestion. The title of the study has been revised and is now titled “Integrated Design Methods for Sustainable Public Seating in Urban Communities --A Shanghai Case Study”.
Comment 2： Apart from dealing with the central object under scrutiny - public seating - please also include (if it is your original development) the claim to your method - integrated design framework AHP-QFD-FBS.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. This paper is about an interesting object urban furniture, aims to analyze the sustainability and experience of community urban furniture from the perspective of users' needs, therefore chooses to use the integration of “AHP-QFD-FBS” for the process of needs transformation, and the three methods involved in the integration framework are not original to this paper.
The following chain of arguments should be supported with evidence:
Comment 3： leisure needs not met -> the use of public furniture decreases -> the use of integrated design framework AHP-QFD-FBS helps to enhance utilization rate.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. In response to the unmet leisure needs and reduced utilization of urban furniture raised in the manuscript, the study adds relevant literature support in lines 26-31 of the introduction of the manuscript. Meanwhile, regarding the existing problems of urban furniture in the introduction, the study adds a summary of existing studies after analysis, which is shown in lines 68-71. In addition, the study provides a detailed explanation of how this paper uses the integrated design framework “AHP-QFD-FBS” to improve the accuracy of demand transformation and urban furniture utilization in the summary section of the introduction, as shown in lines 223-242 of the manuscript.
Comment 4：
lines 40-43: "Its transformation can be used as a refined means of urban renewal and bring positive effects to urban ecological construction[1]. Simultaneously, urban furniture serves various functions such as humanistic expression, fostering resident interaction, and creating a sense of place."
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. Here in the manuscript is a description of the extended function of urban furniture, and the study adds supporting literature to this content, as described in lines 39-43 of the manuscript.
Comment 5：
lines 57-59: "Multiple platform heights can be reasonably used to satisfy residents' diversified
activities."
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The content here in the manuscript is cited information and the author, Yanling Zhang, states in her study that public seating in community spaces needs to be set at a variety of heights to meet the recreational needs of the users. The study places the cited literature here has been placed in the references.
Comment 6：
lines 99-103: "It can be seen that existing research on the sustainability of community urban furniture focuses on the direction of material renewal, cultural communication, and community integration, but there are fewer studies that can identify the problems from the residents' perspective and enhance the inclusive-ness of the facilities from multiple perspectives."
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. The focus here in the manuscript is a summary of current research on the sustainability of urban furniture in communities, and the research adds to the literature sources for the information here, as shown in lines 104-108 of the manuscript.
These excerpts are vital for your argument in terms of originality of method, please refine:
Comment 7：
lines 104-108: "Existing research on the sustainability of community urban furniture from a user per-spective mainly includes interview research, workshop participation, behavioral analysis,and other forms to achieve resident participation. The research methodology is mainly qualitative, leaning towards subjective generalization, and fewer studies have trans-formed user needs into data for quantitative analysis."
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. This is a summary of user participation methods commonly used in existing studies exploring the sustainability of urban furniture in communities, and this study adds to the literature sources for this information. In response to your comments, the steps for collecting and quantifying user input are detailed in lines 223-242 of the manuscript.
Comment 8：
lines 137-139: "The following three research methods are commonly used in the research on the transition of user requirements to product design: Analytic Hierarchy Process, Qual-
ity Function Deployment, and Function-Behavior-Structure."
Response: Thank you for your comments. The strengths of the three research methods here are explained in detail in lines 142-161 of the manuscript. Based on the positive effects of the three research methods on the design process, this study integrates them to obtain a scientifically objective research program. The specific advantages of the methods are as follows.
The advantages of the AHP method in dealing with the user requirements section are:
- Multiple ambiguous user demand factors can be hierarchically summarized into progressive levels, and a structural model containing goal, criterion, and indicator levels can be established to visually express user demand indicators.
- Qualitative and quantitative combination, through the calculation of indicator weights and priorities, to obtain the decision-making program, able to deal with the traditional quantitative techniques can not solve the problemQFD method in the product demand transformation part, its advantages are reflected in:
- Specifying user requirements in the design process to improve the accuracy of requirements transformation into product solutions.
- for the manufacturing of industrial products, the method can be used to propose the optimal characteristics of products by mapping user requirements to engineering characteristics and product attributes.
FBS model in the design mapping part, its advantages are reflected in:
- Establishing a mapping mechanism between design concepts and product structure, and converting design requirements from fuzzy to precise.
- Take over the subjective demand indicators, combined with the demand into specific product parts structure.
Comment 9： It appears that an integrated framework, including an interweaving "Analytic Hierarchy Process, Quality Function Deployment, and Function-Behavior-Structure" is one of your claims to an original methodological contribution of your article. If so, this needs to be stated clearly in chapter 2.1 and must be supported by additional contemporary sources (e.g., disiderata statements and/or outlooks in other recent articles on the subject).
Response: Thank you very much for your comments.
- The integrated framework of “AHP-QFD-FBS” used in this study is not original by the authors, and there have been several studies in various fields combining these three methods. For example, YH Luo（Luo Y, Ni M, Zhang F. A design model of FBS based on interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy sets[J]. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 2023, 56: 101957.） proposed in his study to combine AHP, HOQ and FBS models to reduce the ambiguity of user requirements in product design and reduce the subjectivity and limitations of individual methods; and Jinsong Huang（HUANG Jinsong,LIU Lin,LI Xiaoying. Integrated AHP/QFD/FBS innovative design and evaluation of elderly bathing aids[J]. Furniture and Interior Decoration,2022,29(10):54-59.DOI:10.16771/j.cn43-1247/ts.2022.10.010.）used the integrated AHP-QFD-FBS method to obtain a key design structure that meets the user's needs and to produce a design solution for a bathing aid for the elderly.
- The core discussion point of the study is to fully consider residents' needs in the program of sustainable design of community urban furniture, to transform residents' needs into effective design pain points, and to transform the pain points into embodied design solutions. The innovations are: 1) the process of collecting opinions, this study interviews multiple stakeholders of community parks to collect as much information as possible about users' needs in terms of experience and sustainable construction; 2) the design transformation process of residents' needs, the study uses the integrated framework of “AHP-QFD-FBS” in the design process of community urban furniture, and obtains specific sustainable design elements through layer-by-layer screening and weighting calculation to ensure the accurate transformation of users' needs; 3) in the evaluation stage of community furniture, the ten sustainable elements are categorized as into three aspects: cultural characteristics, user experience, and ecological and environmental protection. The LCA method is used to evaluate the sustainable aspects of ecological and environmental protection to ensure the effectiveness of the assessment.
