Sustainable Product Design Through Bamboo: Strategies, Applications, and Future Pathways

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript comprehensively reviewed bamboo as a sustainable material for a variety of applications and its sustainability value across several dimensions. Overall, the topic of the manuscript is very interesting and useful. However, there are several significant weaknesses from the perspective of an academic publication. First, there are no systematic methods adopted when reviewing the literature. Topics of bamboo applications were just mentioned and discussed directly. It would be necessary to have a systematic way. Second, the aspect of end-of-life treatment of bamboo needs to be discussed. As an important lifecycle stage, how bamboo products get recycled, remanufactured and reused also plays an important role. Third, a case study would be really helpful to demonstrate the successful application of bamboo, following what you propose, but I understand this might be too challenging to achieve. In summary, if this is mainly a review article, then a systematic/thematic method must be used.

There are some other minor things that might improve the manuscript:

I do not think the phrase “absorb” is suited here in line 124. I believe you are trying to state that the bamboo industry creates job opportunities.

It is interesting to see the state-of-the-art treatment/modification techniques for bamboo. I am just wondering whether these will result in more carbon emissions or negative environmental impacts. In other words, is bamboo still considered a good strategic sustainable material if these post-harvest treatments are taken into consideration?

I feel the end of Section 2 needs some conclusion or bridging statements before Section 3 starts.

Similarly, the end of Section 3, especially considering that Section 3 is quite comprehensive, needs a summary paragraph bridging the next section.

Why does line 476 say “chapter”? Is this manuscript a UG/PG thesis?

I would recommend that the titles for your Section 4 subsections match the four core dimensions.

The English level of the manuscript could benefit from a more thorough proofreading, especially on grammar and the choice of words. Overall, it feels like a journal paper written in another language and then translated into English.

Author Response

Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 1)

This manuscript comprehensively reviewed bamboo as a sustainable material for a variety of applications and its sustainability value across several dimensions. Overall, the topic of the manuscript is very interesting and useful. However, there are several significant weaknesses from the perspective of an academic publication. First, there are no systematic methods adopted when reviewing the literature. Topics of bamboo applications were just mentioned and discussed directly. It would be necessary to have a systematic way. Second, the aspect of end-of-life treatment of bamboo needs to be discussed. As an important lifecycle stage, how bamboo products get recycled, remanufactured and reused also plays an important role. Third, a case study would be really helpful to demonstrate the successful application of bamboo, following what you propose, but I understand this might be too challenging to achieve. In summary, if this is mainly a review article, then a systematic/thematic method must be used.

We thank Reviewer 1 for the positive evaluation of the manuscript’s topic and for providing constructive and detailed suggestions to improve its academic rigor and clarity. We appreciate the reviewer’s recognition of the work’s usefulness and interest. In response to the major points raised, we have made substantial revisions to address the methodological approach, deepen the discussion on end-of-life treatment, and enhance the overall structure and language of the manuscript.

There are some other minor things that might improve the manuscript:

I do not think the phrase “absorb” is suited here in line 124. I believe you are trying to state that the bamboo industry creates job opportunities.

Response: Thank you for your thoughtful comment regarding the use of “absorb” in line 124. You are correct that the phrase may not clearly convey the intended meaning in this context. We have revised the sentence to better reflect the idea that the bamboo industry provides and creates employment opportunities in rural areas.

The updated sentence now reads:

“On one hand, the bamboo industry, as a typical socio-ecological coupling system encompassing labor-intensive processes such as cultivation, harvesting, and primary processing (Figure 1), effectively provides employment opportunities for local labor.”

It is interesting to see the state-of-the-art treatment/modification techniques for bamboo. I am just wondering whether these will result in more carbon emissions or negative environmental impacts. In other words, is bamboo still considered a good strategic sustainable material if these post-harvest treatments are taken into consideration?

Response: Thank you for this insightful comment. We agree that post-harvest treatments and modification technologies may introduce additional energy use and environmental burdens, and their impacts must be critically assessed rather than assumed to be benign. In the revised manuscript, we clarify that the sustainability of bamboo should be evaluated from a life cycle perspective rather than solely based on its biological renewability.

While certain treatments—such as resin impregnation, heat treatment, or composite fabrication—do increase energy consumption and may involve chemical inputs, existing life cycle assessment (LCA) studies consistently indicate that the overall carbon footprint of engineered bamboo products remains significantly lower than that of conventional materials such as plastics, steel, concrete, and even many wood-based panels. This advantage primarily stems from bamboo’s rapid growth, high carbon sequestration efficiency, and the long-term carbon storage effect when bamboo is converted into durable products. In this sense, post-harvest processing does not negate bamboo’s environmental value but instead enables longer service life, improved durability, and higher functional efficiency, which are critical factors for reducing impacts per functional unit.

Importantly, we emphasize that not all modification pathways are equally sustainable. The manuscript therefore frames advanced treatments as a “conditional advantage”: bamboo remains a strategic sustainable material only when processing technologies are appropriately matched to application requirements and guided by low-carbon principles. Strategies such as optimizing resin content, prioritizing bio-based or low-emission binders, improving process efficiency, extending product lifespan, and designing for reuse or recycling are highlighted as key levers to offset additional processing emissions.

In summary, when post-harvest treatments are assessed within a full life cycle and system-level context, bamboo still demonstrates strong net sustainability advantages. Its strategic value lies not in being an untreated “natural” material, but in its capacity to combine renewable biomass carbon, engineered performance, and circular design strategies to deliver lower-impact solutions compared with fossil-based or high-energy alternatives.

I feel the end of Section 2 needs some conclusion or bridging statements before Section 3 starts.

Response: Thank you for this constructive suggestion. We agree that a clearer transition is beneficial. Accordingly, we have added a concise concluding and bridging paragraph at the end of Section 2. This new paragraph synthesizes the environmental, socio-economic, and material characteristics of bamboo and explicitly links these foundational attributes to the diverse product applications discussed in Section 3. This revision improves the logical continuity and prepares the reader for the subsequent application-oriented analysis.

Similarly, the end of Section 3, especially considering that Section 3 is quite comprehensive, needs a summary paragraph bridging the next section.

Revised Text Added at the End of Section 2

“Taken together, the environmental sustainability, socio-economic embeddedness, and engineered material properties of bamboo establish it as a multidimensional design resource rather than a single-purpose material. Its low-carbon lifecycle performance provides an ecological rationale for sustainable design, while its deep integration with local industries and cultural practices enables social value creation. Simultaneously, advances in modification techniques and engineered bamboo materials have transformed bamboo into a controllable, high-performance material system capable of meeting modern industrial requirements. These combined characteristics form the material and conceptual foundation for bamboo’s expanding role in contemporary product design. Building upon this foundation, the following section systematically examines how these attributes are translated into practical design applications across different product categories and industries.”

Why does line 476 say “chapter”? Is this manuscript a UG/PG thesis?

Response: Thank you for this helpful comment. The use of the word “chapter” in line 476 was an editorial oversight inherited from an earlier internal draft structure. The manuscript is not a UG/PG thesis but a journal article, and therefore the term was inappropriate in this context.

We have corrected “chapter” to “section” to ensure consistency with journal article conventions and to avoid any misunderstanding regarding the manuscript type.

I would recommend that the titles for your Section 4 subsections match the four core dimensions.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have revised the titles of the subsections in Section 4 to align closely with the four core strategic dimensions discussed, ensuring they are concise, highly summarized, and reflective of the content.

The revised titles are as follows: 4. Four-Dimensional Innovation Framework for Bamboo-Based Product Design

The English level of the manuscript could benefit from a more thorough proofreading, especially on grammar and the choice of words. Overall, it feels like a journal paper written in another language and then translated into English.

Response: Thank you for this important feedback on the manuscript’s language quality. We fully acknowledge the need for thorough proofreading and have taken steps to address it.

We have carefully reviewed and polished the entire manuscript to improve grammar, word choice, sentence structure, and overall readability. This revision was conducted with a focus on academic tone and clarity to ensure the language meets the standards of an international journal. We are confident the manuscript now presents our research more professionally and is ready for further editorial consideration.

We believe that the manuscript has been significantly improved by addressing all the reviewers' constructive comments. We are confident that the revised version now meets the high standards expected for publication in your esteemed journal. We thank you again for the opportunity to submit our work and for the guidance provided throughout the review process.

Sincerely,

Fei Rao, Changping Zhou 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript attempts to systematically review the current state of bamboo applications in sustainable product design and proposes a four-dimensional innovation framework. Its strength lies in its broad coverage—spanning material science, ecological value, and socio-cultural dimensions, and its excellent temporal relevance. However, as a review paper, the manuscript suffers from a significant shift toward "descriptive reporting rather than critical synthesis." The authors appear to be compiling an "industry status report" rather than performing a rigorous academic synthesis. In its current form, the paper fails to provide readers with sufficient "instructional value". Therefore, substantial revisions are required to enhance the academic value of the study.

Comments：

1. The manuscript relies too heavily on descriptive statements of what researchers have done. It lacks critical comparison. Please add an in-depth analysis of why certain design approaches succeed or fail compared to others.
2. In Section 2.3, the text notes that heat treatment improves stability but reduces toughness. Please elaborate on how microstructural changes, such as hemicellulose degradation, directly impact the durability limits of the resulting designs.
3. Section 3.5 mentions AIGC in texture generation. Critically evaluate the limitations of AI in addressing physical constraints, such as bending limits, rather than just emphasizing efficiency.
4. Section 4.4 mentions rental and subscription models. Analyze the specific business risks and maintenance challenges these models face due to bamboo's susceptibility to damage and mold.
5. The references lack case studies on bamboo product design from non-Chinese contexts. It is recommended to supplement the bibliography with international literature to enhance the global applicability of the research.
6. As a sustainability-focused review, the paper must address the potential negative impacts of bamboo monocultures on local biodiversity, a critical factor in the "Sustainable Forestry" debate.
7. The conclusion largely restates the abstract without offering differentiated, actionable recommendations for policymakers, materials scientists, or industrial designers to bridge the gap between research and practice.
8. The paper identifies labels like "inexpensive" or "disposable" as challenges, but its solution of "brand storytelling" lacks specific strategies for achieving "premium design" status through material-led innovation.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 2)

This manuscript attempts to systematically review the current state of bamboo applications in sustainable product design and proposes a four-dimensional innovation framework. Its strength lies in its broad coverage—spanning material science, ecological value, and socio-cultural dimensions, and its excellent temporal relevance. However, as a review paper, the manuscript suffers from a significant shift toward "descriptive reporting rather than critical synthesis." The authors appear to be compiling an "industry status report" rather than performing a rigorous academic synthesis. In its current form, the paper fails to provide readers with sufficient "instructional value". Therefore, substantial revisions are required to enhance the academic value of the study.

We are grateful to Reviewer 2 for the thorough and incisive review, which has greatly helped us elevate the scholarly contribution of the manuscript. We appreciate the reviewer’s identification of the need for greater critical synthesis, global perspective, and stakeholder-specific applicability. The revisions made in direct response to these comments have substantially strengthened the paper’s analytical rigor, balance, and practical relevance.

Comments：

1. The manuscript relies too heavily on descriptive statements of what researchers have done. It lacks critical comparison. Please add an in-depth analysis of why certain design approaches succeed or fail compared to others.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback. We agree that a more critical and analytical perspective would strengthen the manuscript. In response, we have revised the text to incorporate comparative analysis, explicitly examining why certain design approaches succeed or fail based on material properties, technological integration, market acceptance, and sustainability performance. The key additions are focused on Sections 3 (Application Spectrum) and 4 (Framework of Innovation Strategies), where we have introduced direct comparisons between traditional vs. modern methods, different material composites, and design philosophies.

These additions provide a clearer critical perspective, explaining the rationale behind successful or unsuccessful design and material choices. The revised manuscript now offers deeper analytical insight while maintaining the original structure and flow.

Thank you again for the constructive suggestion. We believe these changes significantly improve the scholarly rigor of the paper.

2. In Section 2.3, the text notes that heat treatment improves stability but reduces toughness. Please elaborate on how microstructural changes, such as hemicellulose degradation, directly impact the durability limits of the resulting designs.

Response: Thank you for your insightful comment. In response, we have elaborated on the microstructural changes during heat treatment and their direct implications for design durability. The revisions are as follows:

Revised Manuscript Text

However, this process may result in a decrease in material toughness due to the degradation of hemicellulose, which acts as a key amorphous polymer providing viscoelasticity and impact resistance in the cell wall matrix. The reduction of hemicellulose content increases material brittleness and reduces fracture energy, thereby lowering resistance to dynamic or impact loads. Consequently, while heat-treated bamboo exhibits superior dimensional stability for static applications (e.g., tabletops, wall panels), its reduced toughness imposes durability limits in designs subjected to repeated stress, sharp impacts, or high flexural fatigue (e.g., certain structural joints, high-traffic flooring, or sport equipment components).

These additions clarify the microstructure-property relationship and explicitly link the microstructural change (hemicellulose degradation) to specific design performance limitations, addressing your point directly.

3. Section 3.5 mentions AIGC in texture generation. Critically evaluate the limitations of AI in addressing physical constraints, such as bending limits, rather than just emphasizing efficiency.

Response: Thank you for the valuable feedback. We have revised the manuscript to critically address the limitations of AI, particularly AIGC, in handling physical constraints such as bending limits, rather than merely emphasizing its efficiency. The specific changes are as follows:

In Section 3.5:

Furthermore, research has leveraged AIGC (Artificial Intelligence Generated Content) technology to assist in the intelligent generation and innovation of bamboo weaving patterns, significantly enhancing design efficiency and providing new technological pathways for the modern transformation of traditional craftsmanship [42]. However, it is important to critically recognize that AI-driven pattern generation remains largely confined to visual and aesthetic exploration. It does not inherently account for physical and structural constraints such as material bending limits, tensile strength, or dimensional stability, which are crucial in translating digital patterns into viable physical products. Therefore, while AIGC accelerates ideation and pattern variation, its outputs must be rigorously evaluated and adapted through physical prototyping, structural simulation, or collaboration with craftsmen to ensure manufacturability and performance integrity.

Addition in Section 5.2.3:

Furthermore, virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) technologies can revolutionize the teaching and transmission of traditional bamboo craftsmanship, creating immersive cultural experiences and consumer interactions that strengthen emotional connections to bamboo products and enhance brand storytelling. Future AI tools should evolve beyond stylistic generation to incorporate physical and mechanical constraints—such as bendability, joint strength, and material behavior—through integration with finite element analysis (FEA) and digital twin systems, ensuring that AI-aided designs are not only visually innovative but also structurally feasible and materially coherent.

These revisions provide a balanced perspective on AI’s role—acknowledging its efficiency gains while critically addressing its current shortcomings in handling physical design limitations. Thank you for the opportunity to improve the manuscript.

4. Section 4.4 mentions rental and subscription models. Analyze the specific business risks and maintenance challenges these models face due to bamboo's susceptibility to damage and mold.

Response: Thank you for the valuable feedback. The rental and subscription business models for bamboo products introduce unique challenges due to bamboo's inherent material properties. Bamboo is susceptible to moisture absorption, dimensional instability, and biological degradation such as mold, which can accelerate wear, compromise structural integrity, and affect aesthetic quality in high-turnover or multi-user scenarios. These factors increase maintenance frequency, raise operational costs for inspection, cleaning, drying, and repair, and may shorten product service life—posing risks to profitability and customer satisfaction.

To mitigate these risks, a preventive strategy integrating material modification, design adaptation, and service protocols is essential. Employing engineered bamboo composites with enhanced water resistance and mold inhibitors, alongside modular and reinforced designs, can improve durability. Additionally, implementing clear usage guidelines, regular conditioning cycles, and climate-controlled logistics can maintain product condition. These measures collectively reduce lifecycle costs and support the feasibility of bamboo in circular business models.

5. The references lack case studies on bamboo product design from non-Chinese contexts. It is recommended to supplement the bibliography with international literature to enhance the global applicability of the research.

Response: Thank you for your constructive suggestion regarding the inclusion of international perspectives to strengthen the global applicability of the manuscript. We acknowledge that expanding the bibliographic scope beyond Chinese-focused case studies will enrich the discourse on bamboo product design innovation. Accordingly, we have supplemented key international literature identified from the provided corpus, specifically focusing on studies that integrate traditional craftsmanship with modern design methodologies and digital technologies in diverse contexts. These additions align with our proposed innovation strategies—particularly cultural narrative design and digital manufacturing process innovation—and demonstrate the transregional relevance of bamboo as a sustainable design material.

The following revisions have been made to the manuscript in response:

Section 3.4

Furthermore, international studies demonstrate systematic approaches to revitalizing traditional bamboo weaving by integrating it with modern product design through scientific frameworks and consumer research. For instance, research has successfully incorporated traditional bamboo weaving techniques into modern home appliance design using Kansei Engineering, transforming renewable craft into functional contemporary products while preserving cultural heritage [38].

Section 3.5

The adoption of computer simulation software [44] and artificial intelligence (AI) [45] in international research provides robust methodologies for analyzing and innovating bamboo product design. These tools facilitate the study of innovative applications, enable consumer-participatory design processes, and help bridge the perception gap between designers and users.

Section 5.2.3

Building on the potential of digital tools, Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) technologies can transform the pedagogy and dissemination of traditional bamboo craftsmanship. By enabling immersive, interactive experiences, they facilitate deeper emotional engagement with bamboo products and enrich brand narratives. Internationally, VR-based systems are already being developed to preserve, experience, and innovate upon traditional bamboo weaving techniques [46]. These systems not only support skill transmission and interactive design but also reduce cognitive barriers and enhance efficiency in culturally-informed design workflows, opening new pathways for sustainable craft revitalization and product innovation.

References

38. Zhang, M.; Dou, L.; Qiu, Z. Integrating traditional bamboo weaving techniques into modern home appliance design : A Case study on air purifiers. Glob. NEST J. 2025, 27, 07475.
39. Lu, L. Research on the Innovative Application of Bamboo in Modern Product Design with the Aid of Computer Simulation Software Research on the Innovative Application of Bamboo in Modern Product Design with the Aid of Computer Simulation. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1648, 022143, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1648/2/022143.
40. Wu, Y. Interactive Evolutionary Design of Handbag Integrating Bamboo Weaving Material. For. Prod. J. 2023, 73, 267–278, doi:10.13073/FPJ-D-22-00061.
41. Liu, Y. Research on the Design System of Bamboo-Woven Products Based on Traditional Bamboo-Weaving Craft VR Experience. For. Prod. J. 2025, 75, 238–250, doi:10.13073/FPJ-D-25-00005.
42. As a sustainability-focused review, the paper must address the potential negative impacts of bamboo monocultures on local biodiversity, a critical factor in the "Sustainable Forestry" debate.

Response: Thank you for the insightful observation regarding the biodiversity implications of bamboo cultivation. In Section 2.1, we have integrated a concise discussion to acknowledge this critical aspect. The revised text now notes that while bamboo plantations can enhance carbon sequestration and soil stability, large-scale monocultures may reduce local biodiversity and alter ecosystem structures. We emphasize that sustainable bamboo management—such as mixed-species planting, maintaining understory vegetation, and adhering to responsible harvesting cycles—is essential to mitigate these risks and align with broader sustainable forestry goals.

Revised Manuscript (Section 2.1):

In addition to its carbon sequestration benefits, the ecological management of bamboo resources requires careful consideration. While bamboo forests contribute significantly to carbon storage and erosion control, large-scale monoculture plantations may lead to reduced biodiversity and altered ecosystem dynamics. Sustainable practices—including mixed-species cultivation, preservation of understory flora, and regulated harvesting—are therefore crucial to minimizing ecological trade-offs and ensuring that bamboo cultivation aligns with holistic sustainable forestry principles.

7. The conclusion largely restates the abstract without offering differentiated, actionable recommendations for policymakers, materials scientists, or industrial designers to bridge the gap between research and practice.

Response: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful comment. In response, the Conclusion has been substantially revised to move beyond a summary of findings and to provide stakeholder-specific, actionable recommendations. The revised Conclusion now explicitly addresses (i) policy-level actions for standardization, incentives, and circular-economy governance; (ii) research priorities for materials scientists, including data-driven material databases, functional bamboo composites, and durability assessment; and (iii) design and industry-oriented strategies for industrial designers, emphasizing material-driven design logic, digital fabrication, and product–service system integration. These additions clarify how the proposed framework can be operationalized in practice and strengthen the paper’s contribution to bridging research, design, and industrial implementation.

Revised Conclusion

6. Conclusion

Bamboo represents a strategically important sustainable material capable of simultaneously addressing environmental, technological, and socio-cultural challenges in contemporary product systems. Beyond its rapid renewability and carbon sequestration capacity, bamboo demonstrates growing potential as an engineered, design-driven material through advances in composite technologies, digital manufacturing, and culturally informed innovation. This study positions bamboo not merely as an alternative to conventional materials, but as a systemic design resource embedded within low-carbon production, circular economy logic, and cultural value creation.

Building on the four proposed strategies—material-driven performance optimization, process innovation and digital fabrication, cultural narrative and emotional design, and system transformation through service design—this research offers differentiated pathways for key stakeholders to bridge the gap between research and practice. For policymakers, priority actions include establishing standardized classification and performance evaluation systems for bamboo-based materials, integrating bamboo products into green procurement and carbon accounting frameworks, and supporting regionally embedded bamboo industries through incentives that link ecological benefits with rural development and circular-economy goals. For materials scientists, future research should focus on developing data-driven bamboo material databases, improving long-term durability and reliability assessment, and advancing multifunctional bamboo composites tailored to high-value applications such as consumer electronics, transportation interiors, and smart products. For industrial designers and manufacturers, bamboo calls for a shift toward material-driven design thinking, in which its anisotropic structure, tactile qualities, and cultural symbolism actively inform form generation, user experience, and brand narratives. The integration of parametric design, digital fabrication, and product–service systems is essential to scale bamboo applications while maintaining performance consistency and circularity.

In conclusion, the transition of bamboo from a “substitute material” to a “material of choice” depends on coordinated action across policy, science, and design. By aligning technological innovation with cultural meaning and systemic sustainability, bamboo can play a pivotal role in shaping future product systems that are ecologically responsible, economically viable, and socially meaningful.

8. The paper identifies labels like "inexpensive" or "disposable" as challenges, but its solution of "brand storytelling" lacks specific strategies for achieving "premium design" status through material-led innovation.

Response: Thank you for this valuable observation. We agree that achieving premium status for bamboo requires concrete, material-led design strategies, not just narrative framing. In response, we have significantly revised the manuscript to bridge this gap.

Specifically, we have enhanced Sections 4.1 and 4.2 to articulate a concrete strategy for premium material-led innovation. This involves moving beyond simple substitution to a material-driven design philosophy, where bamboo's anisotropic structure is the primary generative logic for high-performance forms (e.g., biomimetic structural optimization). We explicitly connect this to the development of functionalized, high-performance bamboo composites (e.g., flame-retardant, electromagnetic shielding) designed specifically for high-value applications like consumer electronics and automotive interiors. Crucially, we frame digital fabrication (CNC, robotic machining) not as a generic tool, but as an enabler for achieving the precision, complex geometries, and repeatable quality required for premium industrial integration. Therefore, the revised manuscript now positions "brand storytelling" as the final layer of communication, built upon a demonstrable foundation of superior engineered performance, precision manufacturing, and innovative form generation derived from bamboo's inherent material intelligence. This reframes premium design as a tangible outcome of material-process co-innovation.

We believe that the manuscript has been significantly improved by addressing all the reviewers' constructive comments. We are confident that the revised version now meets the high standards expected for publication in your esteemed journal. We thank you again for the opportunity to submit our work and for the guidance provided throughout the review process.

Sincerely,

Fei Rao, Changping Zhou

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks to the author. The paper has been significantly improved by addressing the comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have made a substantial effort to address the concerns raised in the previous round of review. The manuscript now meets the standards for publication. I recommend the acceptance of this manuscript in its current form.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx