Advancing Toward Sustainability: A Systematic Review of Circular Economy Strategies in the Textile Industry
, Alejandro Padilla-Rivera 2, Diego DomÃnguez-SolÃs 1 and Lorena Elizabeth Campos-Villegas 1
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsOk.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsManuscript ID: recycling-3173149
Title: Advancing Toward Sustainability: A Systematic Review of Circular Economy Strategies in the Textile Industry
I find the paper to be of great value to the literature on textile recycling as it offers perspectives on socio-economic factors that influence the establishment of a circular economy, which is not easily found, at least in the literature I read. But in my view, the most relevant part is section 4 (Discussion).
In my view, sections 2 and 3 add no value. I am always puzzled with descriptions of how and where the literature was collected from, how many were collected in total, how many sorted in and sorted out, and what strategy was employed to decide what was relevant and what was not. I don`t understand why is it not sufficient to simply narrate the findings. It doesn`t matter what database a relevant paper was found, as long the source of the paper is cited. It also does not matter how/why a particular paper was thought to be relevant. If a source turns out to be irrelevant, the review process will identify that. And if something relevant were to be missed, that too would be pointed out.
In section 3, the authors seem to conclude from the number of papers originating from a region, what countries contribute more to the application of circular economy strategies. This I do not agree with. In Figure 3, researchers from Brazil have been shown to have the most number of papers (8), followed by Finland and India (5), USA, China (4), and then others with 3, 2 and 1 papers. On this basis, Finland is stated to be a leader in the field (lines 263-264). But the country produced only one more paper than USA and China. Is a difference of one paper in a span of 10 years sufficient to be declared as leader? This in my view, neglects or omits the magnitude of “necessity driven circular economy practices”, which take place largely in the informal sector in low income countries (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102573).
I found section 4 to be informative and useful, in that it highlights the complex interrelationships at play that need to be recognized in any discussion of establishing circular economies. From the need for establishing collection and sorting centers to the willingness and ability of consumers to deliver their “waste” as well as to accept recycled or pre-used materials. The issue of potential for claims of infringement, was something I had not realized and thus found very interesting. One point of discussion I would suggest the authors to consider (it is not a requirement) is the cost of goods. Will a rise in the cost of goods act to promote circularity, as suggested by the evidence from low income countries?
And additional item I would point is in Lines 68-69: “There is a less explored area that considers the waste generated during each phase of the garment production process.” If the authors mean that pre-consumer (also referred to as post-industrial waste) is not reused or recycled, then that is not true. There is a long history of revalorizing off cuts or production waste, and in the recent past, there has been significant attention on using that material for the production of new fibers (see for e.g., https://www.fibre2fashion.com/industry-article/7267/managing-textile-waste, and also “Renewcell”)
In summary, I find the paper to be of use and recommend publication. As stated above, I am unsure of the necessity of sections 2 and 3 but perhaps this is standard practice in the field of the authors specialization and thus would leave it to the editor to make a decision. In section 3, my suggestion is to rethink the correlation between number of papers and actual efforts on the ground. And in section 4, my suggestion is to think about exploring the influence of product costs.
Author Response
List of changes – Point-by-point responses to reviewers’ comments (Templete review 2)
Reviewer 2:
Thank you for your insightful review.
|
Review 2 |
Response |
|
1. In my view, sections 2 and 3 add no value. I am always puzzled with descriptions of how and where the literature was collected from, how many were collected in total, how many sorted in and sorted out, and what strategy was employed to decide what was relevant and what was not. I don`t understand why is it not sufficient to simply narrate the findings. It doesn`t matter what database a relevant paper was found, as long the source of the paper is cited. It also does not matter how/why a particular paper was thought to be relevant. If a source turns out to be irrelevant, the review process will identify that. And if something relevant were to be missed, that too would be pointed out. |
Thank you for your valuable feedback. We consider your comment as appropriate and have adjusted the wording. Revised Text for Lines 132-138: The search employed the following keywords and Boolean operators: "circular economy" AND "textile industry". Additionally, the search was limited to ten years from 2014 to 2024, yielding 437 potential articles. This timeframe was chosen because the concept of the circular economy has gained significant momentum and widespread recognition in the past decade. Notably, the circular economy began to emerge as a significant focus in sustainability studies and policies around the early 2010s [12,17], making this period highly relevant for our review. Revised Text for Lines 142-151: Second Stage of Selection: The aim of this stage was to ensure that the selected articles addressed the central theme and research question, and that they were case studies rather than reviews. To achieve this, a thorough examination of each article's title, abstract, and conclusions was conducted. This evaluation process reduced the number of articles to 71. Third Stage of Selection: This phase involved a meticulous assessment of the methodology, results, and findings presented in each article to ensure they provided substantial insights into circular economy strategies and innovations applied in circular business models within the textile industry. As a result of this rigorous evaluation, a total of 55 articles (Scopus: n=45; Web of Science: n=10).
|
|
2. In section 3, the authors seem to conclude from the number of papers originating from a region, what countries contribute more to the application of circular economy strategies. This I do not agree with. In Figure 3, researchers from Brazil have been shown to have the most number of papers (8), followed by Finland and India (5), USA, China (4), and then others with 3, 2 and 1 papers. On this basis, Finland is stated to be a leader in the field (lines 263-264). But the country produced only one more paper than USA and China. Is a difference of one paper in a span of 10 years sufficient to be declared as leader? This in my view, neglects or omits the magnitude of “necessity driven circular economy practices”, which take place largely in the informal sector in low income countries
|
Thank you for your insightful feedback. After reviewing your comment, we agree that including the word leader was a writing error due to modifications from past evaluations. Thank you for your observation. Revised Text for Lines 219-225: Figure 3 offers a clear overview of the contribution by country in this field of study, allowing to recognize some of the countries in which the study of the implementation of circular economy practices in the textile industry has focused. Analyzing the case studies of the 55 articles reviewed, Figure 3 was developed, where it was found that most studies related to the application of circular economy strategies in the textile industry were from Brazil.
Revised Text for Lines 247-253:
The variability in the number of studies across these countries may be influenced by economic factors, resource availability, government policies, and levels of social awareness. Korsunova et al. [75] mention that CE in underdeveloped countries is reflected as a need to address a problem, exemplifying it with the case of reuse and repair of a product, with the purpose of prolonging its value, so this statement could reflect those developing countries and the presence of an informal sector, are interested in looking for options to extend the useful life of a product.
|
|
3. I found section 4 to be informative and useful, in that it highlights the complex interrelationships at play that need to be recognized in any discussion of establishing circular economies. From the need for establishing collection and sorting centers to the willingness and ability of consumers to deliver their “waste” as well as to accept recycled or pre-used materials. The issue of potential for claims of infringement, was something I had not realized and thus found very interesting. One point of discussion I would suggest the authors to consider (it is not a requirement) is the cost of goods. Will a rise in the cost of goods act to promote circularity, as suggested by the evidence from low income countries? |
Thank you for your valuable feedback. Revised Text for Lines 472-477: Also, Wang et al. [77] identifies that the main motivations for which people use second-hand clothing are three: economic, recreational and critical. The first is the search for an attractive and fair-priced product. The second refers to the actions of consumer satisfaction in discovering products with low prices and that produce pleasure. And the third refers to a question of morality in which one seeks to fight against the waste caused by consumerism. |
|
4. And additional item I would point is in Lines 68-69: “There is a less explored area that considers the waste generated during each phase of the garment production process.” If the authors mean that pre-consumer (also referred to as post-industrial waste) is not reused or recycled, then that is not true. There is a long history of revalorizing off cuts or production waste, and in the recent past, there has been significant attention on using that material for the production of new fibers |
Revised Text for Lines 68: The challenges associated with the textile industry are not limited to end-of-life waste management. There are still areas to be explored to promote the application of strategies for the use of textile waste. Currently, pre-consumer waste, which includes all pieces of fabric and threads generated during the cutting and making of garments [9], has already begun to be studied for its use in new products such as cleaning cloths or for spinning new materials [10].
|
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors undertook to work on an extremely interesting topic.
The sustainability of the textile industry raises many questions, which the various decision-making levels try to answer with appropriate measures.
Today, more than 15 kg of textile waste is produced per person in Europe every year, the largest part of which comes from clothes and home textiles discarded by consumers (McKinsey & Company 2022). The reason for this is the so-called "fast fashion" approach, which has come to the fore more and more in the last few decades, which means the short-term wearing of clothes made of cheap materials and available at reasonable prices.
Below, I will make some suggestions that can be used to increase the professional quality of the manuscript.
The issue of "fast fashion" is also mentioned in the introduction. At the same time, its conceptual definition is not carried out. Similarly, it would be appropriate to state whether the authors wish to write about the sustainability of the textile industry or the textile industry specificities of the circular economy. It would be worthwhile to define these terms at the beginning of the document (or to address their relationship to each other).
It is also not clear why the authors chose to present the 4Rs among the circular economic strategies (is this the only subject in the examined literature? Presumably not).
It would also be worthwhile to briefly refer to international regulators (e.g. as part of the EU's new circular economy action plan, the European Commission presented its strategy for the sustainable and circular textile industry in March 2022 (COM(2022) 141 final), the more durable, repairable, reusable and recyclable One of the main ideas of the strategy is to extend the life of textile products, in which product design for color fastness, high tensile strength, good quality of zippers, etc. is key.
It is also interesting that although the article deals with the analysis of the 4R, only one hypothesis is formulated. I recommend detailing this (definition of the hypothesis covering each study).
It would be advisable to enrich the article with at least a few facts at the beginning of the article when presenting the problem: e.g. According to a survey by the European Environment Agency (EEA), in 2020, the use of textiles in the European Union was the third largest burden on water and land use compared to other consumption categories; and caused the fifth largest amount of raw material use and greenhouse gas emissions.
The methodology is understandable and clear. At the same time, the conclusions are descriptive in nature. Primarily, the viewpoints of certain literary authors are presented, in essence, the authors' own viewpoints and suggestions are not echoed in any part.
Each element of the 4R issue analyzed by the authors has been extensively researched in the literature. Despite this, the presentation of the trends in the literature regarding their definition remains marginal.
The absence of the authors' own point of view, the failure to evaluate trends and practices in the literature raises the issue of the lack of independent (new) scientific results.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsInteresting paper. Please take notice of the review with supportive comments.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have largely improved what I suggested. I support the publication of the manuscript.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSee file
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
See file
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for a timely paper. Finding the main circular strategies applied by the textile industry is interesting since it can guide further advancements towards sustainability by companies in the on line 161. “ … insights into their, and for governance purposes. My main concerns are related to:
- the Research Questions (RQs). RQ 1 is good, but RQ2 and RQ3 has serious issues. RQ2 mainly because it is not motivated for, and geographical issues are not included in the search criteria used. RQ3 mainly because it is not motivated, not in focus in the search criteria, and a bit counterintuitive to look for benefits for the textile industry separately as it relates to the society at large. Consider focusing on RQ1 only, eventually following up on RQ1 with a new RQ2 on How effective the identified CE strategies are in advancing towards sustainability? The paper touches upon this on line 161 and 166 mentioning “effectiveness” and “impact”.
- Using Scopus is fine but a limiting, consider adding Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Please see my detailed comments and suggestions for improvements below.
- Reuse is found to be the primary option to counter environmental impacts and reduce waste. However, since the focus is on the textile industry, consider including how this should be handled by the industry. It seems clear that somehow the industry should change the way they create values, consider including such issues.
Abstract:
- Line 12, 13: First sentence emphasizes “environmental” degradation. Consider adding social and economic aspect to align with sustainability concept and the text further down in the abstract.
- Regarding purpose of study:
- Line 15, 16: “This study conducts a systematic review of circular economy strategies within the textile industry using the PRISMA methodology.”
- Should be harmonized with other similar statements like the ones below and the method part could come later:
- Line 87 onwards: “In this context, the purpose of this study is to provide a comprehensive …
- Line 91 onwards: “Therefore, the main objective of this study is to carry out a systematic review of the literature to identify, …
- Line 18 mention reuse, recycling, repair, and reduction, follow by elaboration of each except “reduction”. Consider adding also an elaboration on reduction.
Introduction:
- Line 39: the reference is to a paper referencing the Bruntland report. It is better to refer to the Brundtland report directly.
- Lines 63 – 67: Good point to include pre-consumer textile waste
- Line 71: Typo?: post-consumer wastes should be pre-consumer …
- Lines 80-81: Unclear, consider rewriting, or delete.
- Line 87 onwards: “In this context, the purpose of this study is to provide a comprehensive and current view …”. Consider deleting “current” since this is a fast-moving field, and a literature review is always looking into previous research.
- Lines 98-99: RQ1: is good but consider deleting “and fashion industry” since the fashion industry as an industry is not in focus in the title or elsewhere.
- Line 100: RQ2: This research question should be deleted because: It is not motivated for in the above text, it is not included in the search criteria, and the textile industry is an interconnected global industry which makes this question hard to address in this manner.
- Line 107 – 108: Figure1 is good, but it is not well aligned with “identify”, “synthesize”, and “critically evaluate” on lines 91-93. Consider modifying lines 91-93 or Figure 1.
- Line 123: Search in Scopus database is a bit limiting, consider adding Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases
- Lines 126 – 127: The search criteria do not cover RQ2 and RQ3
- Figure 2: Headline “Identification of new studies via databases and registers” is misleading. It should be e.g, “Identification of studies in the period 2013 to 2023 via Scopus”
- Lines 151-153: The following statement cannot be supported due to the way search criteria is specified and the limit of only searching Scopus. “This involved identifying the productivity of the articles by country, as well as the application of circular economy strategies and their environmental, social, and economic impact.”
- Lines 166 – 168 contains claims that is not covered for or in focus by the RQs
- Lines 170-171: Referring to Table 1: “It details the authors …”: is not correct, the first column categorizes the sources
- Table 1: Consider improving readability with horizontal lines.
- Table 1: Some contributions summarized in Table 1 are blurry and of little value, like e.g., the claimed Social contribution from [8]: “Specific business strategic plan, giving to the environment and society. Consider updating the manner contributions are specified.
- Figure 3 and the associated analysis should be strengthened! The way data is collected does not support such analysis.
- Figure 5 on identified strategies is OK, but it does not include e.g., Reduction mentioned in the abstract. Consider aligning better across Abstract, Findings and Conclusion.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsit's a well written article despite the fact that it's a literature review on the topic.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your review, we have addressed your comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article carries out a systematic review of circular economy strategies in the textile industry, exploring methodologies and research findings over ten years. The main points identified are:
- The study employs the PRISMA protocol, ensuring a robust and reproducible systematic review (which I believe to be not the case)
- It analyses 771 articles and selects only 18 that are most pertinent, pretending to offer a comprehensive overview of circular economy practices applied in the textile sector.
- Also, evaluates circular economy strategies not only from an environmental point of view but also considering the economic and social dimensions.
Major weaknesses include:
- Most of the research analysed comes from countries with advanced infrastructures which may not reflect the global applicability of the strategies.
- Some strategies (e.g., recycling and repair) face significant barriers related to technology, costs and cultural acceptance that are not fully addressed.
- The study highlights the importance of policies and regulations to support the implementation of CE practices an aspect that requires much more further development and detail.
Most important aspects:
- Line 123: Why did the authors use only the Scopus database and not others? Please state the reason.
- Line 126: Ten years? Why, please justify.
- Line 75-81: Please add a quote or your only support.
- Line 75-81: Please add sources to support this paragraph.
- Lines 82-90: Please also provide facts or references for this paragraph.
- Line 131-137: Clearly explain the second and third phases of the selection. The central theme is not provided by the case studies alone. How can anyone believe that simply reading the abstracts and conclusions of 471 articles can lead to that conclusion?
The third phase was even more ill-founded. How could such a conclusion be reached just by reading the abstracts?
In general terms, the study could provide an analysis of CE strategies in the textile industry, revealing both the opportunities and the challenges for the sustainability of the sector, but by now is rather short.
Unfortanetly, it seems that there are serious errors in the application of the PRISMA protocol or that they are not well-founded.
I also don't class this study as an SLR, but rather as something else, since the methodology is not convincing, nor are the main results.
It would also be beneficial to further explore solutions to the obstacles identified and to broaden the geographical scope of the research to include less developed regions.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
interesting work. Please make some minor adjustments to the text and include graphs to better explain the differences in the discussions.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you very much for your review, we have addressed your comments.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAuthors have improved the paper but there are some points to be considered for further evaluation.
The selection of only 18 articles from 771 may have excluded relevant studies. Expand the inclusion criteria to consider a wider range of studies, potentially including those that address innovative or specific aspects of the circular economy.
Exclusive use of the Scopus database, which limits the scope and diversity of sources.
Lack of detail in the description of the stages of study selection. Provide a more detailed description of the screening and selection process, including specific exclusion criteria at each stage, to increase the transparency and replicability of the study.
No assessment of the methodological quality of the included studies. Implement a methodological quality assessment using recognised tools, such as the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) checklist, to guarantee the robustness and validity of the conclusions.
Analysing the data from the selected studies seems superficial. Carry out a more detailed and critical analysis of the selected studies, highlighting methodologies, main findings, limitations and implications of each study.
Limited discussion of the barriers to implementing circular economy strategies. Broaden the discussion on the barriers faced in implementing circular economy strategies, including technological, cultural and economic aspects and suggest possible solutions or policies to overcome them.
The practical implications of the strategies identified are not sufficiently detailed. Include a more detailed section on the practical implications of circular economy strategies thus providing specific recommendations for industries, policymakers and consumers.
The final conclusions and recommendations could be more comprehensive. Expand the conclusions to more clearly summarise the main findings of the study and provide detailed practical recommendations for the adoption and optimisation of circular economy practices in the textile industry.
Author Response
List of changes – Point-by-point responses to reviewers’ comments (Templete review 3)
Reviewer 3:
Thank you for your insightful review.
|
Review 3 |
Response |
|
1. The selection of only 18 articles from 771 may have excluded relevant studies. Expand the inclusion criteria to consider a wider range of studies, potentially including those that address innovative or specific aspects of the circular economy.
2. Exclusive use of the Scopus database, which limits the scope and diversity of sources.
|
Thank you for your valuable feedback. The number of studies retrieved from Scopus by applying the criteria described in the article was 71, ultimately selecting 45 articles. In the case of Wos, 26 articles were found, from which those identical to Scopus were discarded, leaving a total of 10 articles. Revised Text for Lines 130-138: The primary database used for the literature search was Scopus and webofscience, selected due to its extensive coverage of the most relevant and indexed journals in the field. Studies have shown that Scopus and Webofscience provides comprehensive and high-quality literature suitable for systematic reviews [13-17]. We did not use Google Scholar, as our focus was on peer-reviewed research papers rather than grey literature that may be generated in Google Scholar. The search employed the following keywords and Boolean operators: "circular economy" AND "textile industry". Additionally, the search was limited to ten years from 2014 to 2024, yielding 411 potential articles in Scopus and 26 in Webofscience.
|
|
3. Lack of detail in the description of the stages of study selection. Provide a more detailed description of the screening and selection process, including specific exclusion criteria at each stage, to increase the transparency and replicability of the study. |
Thank you for your insightful feedback. Revised Text for Lines 153-162: Third Stage of Selection: "In this final stage, the abstracts and results sections of the remaining studies were reviewed in detail to identify those specifically involving circular economy strategies and innovation applied in circular businesses. This phase involved a meticulous assessment of the methodology, and findings presented in each article to ensure they provided substantive insights into circular economy practices within the textile industry. This rigorous evaluation led to the in-depth examination of a total of 55 articles (Scopus; n=45 y Webofscience; n=10), which were deemed most relevant and valuable for our systematic review. It should be noted that articles identical to those found in Scopus were discarded in the Webofscience database. |
|
4. No assessment of the methodological quality of the included studies. Implement a methodological quality assessment using recognised tools, such as the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) checklist, to guarantee the robustness and validity of the conclusions. |
Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have added a methodological CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) Revised Text for Lines 164-178: 2.2. Quality appraisal and data extraction To ensure the quality of the studies, the articles were evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP), whose purpose is to elevate the level of analysis in three aspects: quality, reliability, and study design. CASP provides the evaluation of research methodology, sampling, data analysis, and presentation of results. Each of the articles was evaluated based on the parameters described in the CASP criteria: methodological rigor, validity of the results, appropriateness of the statistical methods, and clarity. This analysis allowed the classification of the 55 reviewed articles into three quality groups: low, moderate, and high, as has been done in studies of this type (Yari, A., Mashallahi,). Through this exhaustive evaluation process, the credibility, applicability, and replicability of the included studies were ensured, while also validating the methodology of the present systematic review. References: Yari, A., Mashallahi, A., Aghababaeian, H. et al. Definition and characteristics of climate-adaptive cities: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 24, 1200 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18591-x).
|
|
5. Analysing the data from the selected studies seems superficial. Carry out a more detailed and critical analysis of the selected studies, highlighting methodologies, main findings, limitations and implications of each study. |
Revised Text for Lines 212-226:
Table A1 compiles the 55 articles selected for this review, providing a summary of their contributions to the study of the circular economy in the textile industry. It details the circular economy strategies explored, the research methodology employed, as well as the environmental, social, and economic impacts and considerations addressed in each study. The analysis of the selected bibliometric data is based on a detailed selection in the CAPS checklist, with 3 assessment points to mark the robustness and validity of the most relevant findings produced by the Scopus and webofscience database. The classification of the studies shown in the last column (Table A1) was based on the evaluation of the methodologies and results, strictly following a checklist. The studies classified as moderate quality were since the methodology design met an adequate design, which involved retrieving information from the context and designing a model for data collection. The only reason it is not classified as a high-quality article is that the method description may not be entirely replicable and may serve as a basis for another research. Additionally, high-quality studies present a comparative result focused on validating the presented data.
|
|
6. Limited discussion of the barriers to implementing circular economy strategies. Broaden the discussion on the barriers faced in implementing circular economy strategies, including technological, cultural and economic aspects and suggest possible solutions or policies to overcome them.
7. The practical implications of the strategies identified are not sufficiently detailed. Include a more detailed section on the practical implications of circular economy strategies thus providing specific recommendations for industries, policymakers and consumers
|
Thank you for your feedback. Revised Text for Lines 430-434:
On the other hand, among the benefits found with this strategy is consumer approval towards the company, in search of products with a lower environmental impact throughout its production, in addition to categorizing the company as socially responsible and expanding its alliances with other companies that at the same time increase occupying new markets [35,37,40,54]. Revised Text for Lines 446-453:
Analyzing recycling alternatives, the challenges or barriers to this strategy were primarily identified as the need for technologies to recover fibers, and the separation of components since most garments are composed of more than one material [33]. Another challenge is collection, as identified by Degenstein et al. [31] in their study in Canada, which recognizes that community participation in facilitating the disposal of their textile waste is due to a lack of access to recycling collection services, and furthermore, few people are aware that clothing has the potential to be recycled, becoming a cultural issue in which the population does not have access to information on the proper disposal of textile products, creating a lack of shared responsibility between the consumer and the producer. [38,69]. Revised Text for Lines 456-470: In addition, some companies do not agree to use recycled materials because, first, they consider that they are of lower quality, second, they can be more expensive since they require their combination with virgin materials, and third, when they agree to apply recycled materials, they seek to maintain price competition by manufacturing abroad [41, 42, 64]. This situation, as well as the lack of partners between companies providing recycling services and producing companies, creates a gap that becomes even larger with the absence of policies, the lack of knowledge about recycling, collection, and final disposal and the low investment in technologies are the main barriers that affect all markets in the textile industry to continue with the linear production model and continue seeking short-term competitiveness [43, 45]. Some of the options that can be a solution are policies and regulations that involve economic incentives or tax subsidies that motivate companies to create transitions in their production [67], while in the case of the consumer, prizes and discounts on products can be awarded, with the aim of getting people to participate in clothing recycling initiatives [46].
Revised Text for Lines 501-503: The most viable option within the options that allow reuse are clothing resale markets, the exchange of clothing for discounts or money, since these options promote the reuse of these items and avoid the purchase of new products [77,53]. Revised Text for Lines 550-557: Repair contributes to the reduction of environmental impact by prolonging the lifespan of clothing. In addition to this repair strategy, improvements could be obtained in production markets since they would focus on design and retail sales, leaving aside the overproductions that lead to obsolete fashion [56]. This in turn reduces the need to produce new garments, which implies less consumption of natural resources, water, and energy, as well as a decrease in carbon emissions associated with textile production. Repair as a strategy promotes a value proposition linked to a service that allows the extended value of garments, in addition to the creation of partners between interested parties [40,65].
|
|
8. The final conclusions and recommendations could be more comprehensive. Expand the conclusions to more clearly summarise the main findings of the study and provide detailed practical recommendations for the adoption and optimisation of circular economy practices in the textile industry. |
Revised Text for Lines 611-631: To establish a circular economy in the textile industry, it is crucial to implement a transition plan that involves changes in production processes and involves measures to return products to the producer and thus seek the strategy that best applies; for this, collaboration between the parties involved is necessary or even collaborations between companies is necessary. This involves adopting design practices that improve the circularity of textile products, using sustainable and easily recyclable materials, through the creation of eco-designs thinking about the future of the garment for its repair or recycling. Additionally, reuse initiatives such as the creation of second-hand markets and clothing exchange programs should be promoted to extend the lifespan of garments and reduce the amount of waste ending up in landfills.
Furthermore, it is essential to foster greater awareness and education about the principles of the circular economy at all levels of the textile value chain, from consumers to manufacturers and designers. This includes raising awareness about the importance of reducing excessive consumption, optimizing resource use, and adopting more sustainable practices in the production and consumption of textile garments. Moreover, closer collaboration between companies, governments, and non-governmental organizations is needed to develop and implement policies and regulations that promote the circular economy and that are specific in the selective separation of materials, and even in requiring the commitment of the textile industry to specify the actual composition of its products. These actions will lead to innovation and the adoption of best practices throughout the value chain.
|
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
