Research on the Recyclable Design of Wooden Furniture Based on the Recyclability Evaluation
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAuthors detail reciclability or reuse of furniture, which is much important for sustainability. The paper is well detailed and only some minor corrections are necessary. Please see attached manuscript.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Some minor errors are detected are are highligh in text
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article Research on the Recyclable Design of Wooden Furniture Based on the Recyclability Evaluation deals with the current issue of disposing of old furniture and proposes an interesting method of evaluation that could potentially be used to dispose of all waste furniture of different categories more efficiently.
The paper is written clearly and legibly, has a good and transparent structure and division, and presents the latest research and achievements in different countries of the world. Thus, the work has remarkable global significance because it is not limited to just one province or country.
This topic certainly requires attention and supports additional valuable research. Further results and instructions can help designers in the different designs of furniture, manufacturers who take care of waste disposal and production of new materials and products, but mostly customers/users whose awareness of product recycling must be greater, independent of state apparatuses and government decisions.
Although the paper is correctly written and does not require any major changes, I advise you to review the article from the technical side and remove technical and written deficiencies that are not by the journal's instructions.
The remark mainly refers to supplementing the literature, where there is no DOI mentioned in any citation, so (almost) most of the papers are unfortunately impossible to find. I ask the authors to correct this shortcoming so that a wider readership can also use the recommended cited literature. If the article does not have a DOI, I suggest putting a link to the pdf. of the article or the website where the text can be found.
There are several omissions in the description of the images:
Figure 3 – Some letters are omitted (e.g. missing number at l2; safety not checked, word separation on a new line)
Figure 4 - It is not mentioned in the text of the article, so please add it (page 11)
Figure 6 - Some words are not transparent
Table 1: reshape the expression from "when we compare..." to "while comparing..."
Thank you.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe quality of the English language is acceptable, technical (English) writing according to the author's instructions must be checked and corrected.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe problem of the life cycle of products and furniture, in particular, is very real. The furniture industry is growing globally, and more and more furniture is going to landfills instead of being reused, repaired or recycled. This is why a serious change is needed on the part of state institutions, businesses and consumers. The proposed manuscript addresses various aspects of the life cycle issues of wood furniture and is, therefore, relevant.
A few remarks can be made on the contents of the manuscript:
1. More keywords can be added, such as recycling system, eco-design, evaluation index systems etc.
2. It is fully unclear what kind of chair and what materials it is, which is used as an example to illustrate the specific implementation steps of the method. No information about the data collection.
3. Chapter "Discussions" is not fully related to the chapters "Method" and "Application scenarios of recyclability evaluation"
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript considers the new ideas and methods of wooden furniture recyclable deisgn. The focus of the paper was to explore the realization of the evaluation index system and evaluation model of the recyclability of wood furniture by introducing the recyclabiliyy evaluation concept.
Introduction and problem definition are well presented and described as well as the limitations and shortcomings on evaluation criteria on recyclability of furniture today. The fuzzy hierarchical analysis method and TOPSIS evaluation method are presented very clearly and it was provided a good introduction to the application scenarios of recyclability evaluation.
The manuscript can be accepted with the following revisions:
1. Figures must come immediately after the first time it is mentioned in the text, not far away, like Figure 1 in the manuscript should be corrected.
2.Traditionally, Tables and Figures should be mentioned in a sentence before they appear in the manuscript, like Table 3, Table 4, and Figure 4 should be corrected.
3. Some new references could be added, like:
"A Review on Sustainability Characteristics Development for Wooden Furniture Design" Sustainability 2022, 14, 8748. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148748
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe manuscript considers the new ideas and methods of wooden furniture recyclable deisgn. The focus of the paper was to explore the realization of the evaluation index system and evaluation model of the recyclability of wood furniture by introducing the recyclabiliyy evaluation concept.
Introduction and problem definition are well presented and described as well as the limitations and shortcomings on evaluation criteria on recyclability of furniture today. The fuzzy hierarchical analysis method and TOPSIS evaluation method are presented very clearly and it was provided a good introduction to the application scenarios of recyclability evaluation.
The manuscript can be accepted with the following revisions:
1. Figures must come immediately after the first time it is mentioned in the text, not far away, like Figure 1 in the manuscript should be corrected.
2.Traditionally, Tables and Figures should be mentioned in a sentence before they appear in the manuscript, like Table 3, Table 4, and Figure 4 should be corrected.
3. Some new references could be added, like:
"A Review on Sustainability Characteristics Development for Wooden Furniture Design" Sustainability 2022, 14, 8748. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148748
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors; according to me, this paper contains useful information regarding the recyclable design of wooden furniture based on the recyclability evaluation.
In the scope of the study; based on the whole life cycle theory of products, the recyclable design ability of wooden furniture at all stages of design, manufacturing, sales, use, recycling were researched and analyzed, and feasible suggestions to the government, enterprises and consumers were proposed, respectively. In particular, an evaluation index system and evaluation model for the recyclability of wooden furniture were developed with an aim to quantitatively analyze the recycling of wooden furniture.
My specific comments and revisions are listed below:
- The title of the study is appropriate. It covers the content of the study.
- In the study, the problem is well expressed, literature is given and the purpose of the study is clearly stated. The literature research is up-to-date and has the quality to express the problem well.
- The article is within the scope of the journal. However, it may be more appropriate to change the article type to review.
- The writing format is not acceptable in the paper. It is recommended that this paper should be reorganized (titles, subtitles etc.) as a common scientific methodological systematic (Introduction, Materials and Methods, Result and Discussion, Conclusion).
- The methodology and applications are sufficient and well-defined.
- The results are discussed according to the purpose.
- Results and discussion section is quite discussed with together results and is satisfactory.
- The most important part of such review studies is the conclusion part. The conclusion section of this study is not satisfactory. It should be enlarged and conclusions should be added, and also more recommendations and projections should be made for the future of this field, especially after the comprehensive review. The scientific qualification of the study will be the conclusions obtained as a result of wide-ranging literature review and developed evaluation index system and its application.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 6 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsCongratulations.
The topic covered is quite interesting and the approach they give is innovative.
The introduction is clear and concrete, it presents an initial overview of what the reader will find in the article.
The theoretical background is complete and presented in an orderly manner.
The Existing problems and challenges are clearly presented.
Methods is complete and well-structured from the mathematical model.
The discussion and conclusions are in line with everything presented in the article.
The proposal is very interesting, it presents viable alternatives that can provide a solution to the problem of pollution due to waste of wooden furniture.
Throughout the article, the main topic is the product life cycle of from the point of view of sustainability (extraction of raw materials, production, distribution, use and recycling or final waste), with the main focus being the last stage, which is that of final disposal, but without neglecting the importance of the other stages and specifically the responsibility that is had from the design of the furniture, which would be a previous stage and perhaps the most important in terms of reducing the environmental impacts of a product. However, at the beginning of point 2.4 they introduce the definition of the PLC product life cycle from the point of view of the marketing discipline (introduction, growth, maturity and recession) which has very little relationship (or no relationship) with the concept of the product life cycle that is developed throughout the text. It is suggested to remove that definition, the first 5 lines, and include a definition of the product life cycle in accordance with the sustainability approach that they maintain throughout the text.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
