Influence of Size and Fit on Malaysian Apparel Industry Sustainability: A Scoping Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Summary

 

This manuscript presents a literature review on the Malaysian apparel industry, focusing on how sizing and fit issues impact sustainability.  The authors conclude that Malaysia needs to establish a standardized sizing system to reduce consumer dissatisfaction with fit.  The authors argue that this action will lead to less waste and returns.    

 

General Comments

 

The literature search for relevant articles appears to be appropriately rigorous.  There appears to be support for the conclusion that a lack of a standardized sizing system leads to lower consumer satisfaction. While one can accept that poor fit is associated with returns and waste, the cited literature does not seem to quantify the magnitude of waste. Tables 1 and 2 are unnecessary to include in the manuscript.  A description of the methodology is sufficient. 

 

Tables 3 and 4 present a summary of the key findings from a series of individual studies. These tables are disjointed and difficult to read.  These tables can be eliminated since the key takeaways are summarized in section 4.  Also, the table titles are incorrect (e.g., search rules for WoS and Scopus).  

 

With much of the manuscript focusing on customer dissatisfaction arising from poorly fitting clothing, it reads more like a paper on consumer behavior than on sustainability. Figure 2 draws a link between non-standardized sizing to waste and pollution. However, the manuscript does not address the critical issues: (1) what is the current level of waste, (2) what evidence exists that moving to standardized sizing in Malaysia will lead to a meaningful reduction in waste, and (3) will manufacturers ignore or resist standardized sizing.  The manuscript discusses the general benefits of standardized sizing. However, it does not attempt to quantify the benefits or address any costs of adoption.  Should the country adopt standardized sizing if the reduction in waste is not meaningful?  These points need to be addressed to draw conclusions about sustainability.  

 

The manuscript would benefit from adding information on the apparel industry in Malaysia. Are most apparel products consumed in Malaysia manufactured there, or imported?  If a large share of apparel products are imported, then implementing a standardized sizing system will depend on foreign manufacturers adopting that system. Is this realistic?

 

Section 5 outlines a process for developing a size system.  However, the discussion in this section does not include justifications for the methods.  Why use KMO and PCA? Also, would the government, an industry trade association, or some other body conduct this analysis and develop the sizing system? Who should take on this work? 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We greatly appreciate your thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. Your insights have been invaluable in identifying areas for improvement and have guided us towards enhancing the overall quality and coherence of our work. We have carefully considered each point you raised and have made corresponding revisions to our manuscript, which we believe address your concerns effectively. Changes made in response to your comments have been highlighted in red in the revised manuscript for easy identification.

We acknowledge your observation that the manuscript may appear to focus more on consumer behavior than on sustainability. To address this, we have revised the text to more explicitly draw connections between non-standardized sizing, waste, and pollution, thereby strengthening the manuscript's focus on sustainability. We have also added new sections to quantitatively and qualitatively discuss the current level of waste in the apparel industry, the potential impact of standardized sizing on waste reduction, and the possible responses from manufacturers regarding the adoption of standardized sizing.

To further enrich the manuscript, we have included additional information on the apparel industry in Malaysia, particularly regarding the origin of apparel products consumed in the country and the implications for implementing a standardized sizing system. This addition addresses the practicality and potential challenges of expecting foreign manufacturers to adopt a standardized sizing system tailored to the Malaysian market.

We are confident that these revisions have significantly improved the manuscript, making the arguments clearer and the conclusions more robust. We are grateful for the opportunity to refine our work based on your feedback and look forward to any further suggestions you may have.

Thank you once again for your invaluable contributions to the improvement of our manuscript.

 

Sincerely,

Wang Yiyuan and Norsaadah Zakaria

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The aim of the research must be specified, because it is very broad and does not correspond to the title of the manuscript.

The title of section 3.1 is very broad, but there are very few results, the results are incomplete, they do not correspond to the title of the section.

The analysis of the scientific literature of the article itself is not completely unrelated to the relationship between clothing sizes in Malaysia and sustainability. There are too many historical facts.

The manuscript must be organized according to the requirements of the journal.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript and for providing insightful feedback that has undoubtedly helped us improve the quality and focus of our work. Your detailed comments have guided us in identifying areas where our manuscript could be further refined and clarified to meet the high standards of the journal.

In response to your feedback, we have made several revisions to our manuscript, which we believe address the concerns you have raised:

Revision of Section 3.1: Upon reviewing section 3.1, we recognized that the title of this section was indeed too broad for the scope of the results presented. To address this, we have revised the title to more accurately reflect the content and findings of this section. Additionally, we have supplemented the section with additional results that fill in the gaps previously noted, ensuring that the section's content now corresponds directly to its title. These revisions have been marked in red in the manuscript.

We believe that these revisions have substantially improved the manuscript, making it more focused, relevant, and in line with the journal's requirements. We are grateful for your constructive feedback, which has been instrumental in guiding these improvements. Should there be any further areas of our manuscript that you feel require attention, please do not hesitate to let us know.

Thank you once again for your invaluable contributions to enhancing the quality of our work.

Sincerely,

Wang Yiyuan and Norsaadah Zakaria

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript addresses a niche aspect of the apparel industry, focusing on Malaysia. It investigates how garment sizing and fit impact sustainability, a topic of growing importance given the global push for more sustainable practices across industries. I cannot recommend publication of this manuscript for following reasons:

 

1. Lack of empirical data: further empirical studies are needed to validate the proposed strategies. Adding empirical evidence through case studies or pilot implementations of proposed strategies would significantly strengthen the paper's impact.

2. Limited scope: While focusing on Malaysia adds novelty, it may also limit the paper's relevance to a wider audience.

3. Technical depth and innovation: Integrating theories related to consumer behavior, sustainability, and technology adoption could provide deeper insights into the challenges and solutions related to sizing and fit in the apparel industry.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your valuable feedback on our manuscript, which focuses on the crucial intersection of garment sizing, fit, and sustainability within the Malaysian apparel industry. We appreciate the time and expertise you have invested in reviewing our work. Your comments have been instrumental in highlighting areas where our paper could be improved to meet the high standards of publication. We have taken your feedback seriously and have made comprehensive revisions to our manuscript, which we hope will address your concerns satisfactorily. These changes have been marked in red in the document for easy identification and review.

As Malaysia is at an early stage in this research direction, We are eager for the opportunity to contribute to the body of knowledge on this important topic and hope that our revised manuscript will meet your approval for publication. Thank you once again for your constructive criticism and guidance, which have been invaluable to our revision process.

Sincerely,

Wang Yiyuan and Norsaadah Zakaria

 

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article titled "Influence of Size and Fit on Malaysian Apparel Industry Sustainability: A Scoping Review" by Wang Yiyuan and Norsaadah Zakaria provides a comprehensive examination of how garment sizing and fit impact the sustainability of the Malaysian apparel industry. Through a detailed literature review, the authors identify the main issues related to sizing and fit within the industry, explore the sustainability challenges these issues pose, and propose strategies to address them for enhancing the industry's sustainability. The study underscores the significance of developing a standardized sizing system tailored to the diverse Malaysian population to reduce consumer dissatisfaction, minimize waste, and improve the environmental footprint of the apparel sector.

 

The scoping review methodology is appropriate for the aims of the study, allowing for a broad overview of existing literature. However, more detail on the criteria for article selection and the process of analyzing the collected data could enhance the transparency and replicability of the review.

 

The article successfully outlines practical implications for the Malaysian apparel industry and suggests areas for future research. A more detailed examination of the potential barriers to implementing the proposed sizing system and strategies for overcoming these challenges would add value.

 

Minor editing for grammar and consistency in terminology could further improve readability.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Quality of English looks ok

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your thoughtful and constructive feedback on our manuscript titled "Influence of Size and Fit on Malaysian Apparel Industry Sustainability: A Scoping Review." We greatly appreciate the time you dedicated to reviewing our work and your insightful comments, which we believe will significantly enhance the quality and impact of our study.

We are pleased to hear that you found our examination of garment sizing and fit within the Malaysian apparel industry, and its implications for sustainability, to be comprehensive and relevant. We agree with your suggestion to provide more detail on our scoping review methodology, specifically regarding the criteria for article selection and the process for analyzing the collected data. In response to your valuable feedback, we will revise our manuscript to include a more detailed description of our methodological approach to ensure transparency and facilitate future replication of our study.

In closing, we would like to express our gratitude once again for your constructive critique and guidance. Your feedback has provided us with a clear direction for improving our manuscript, and we are excited to enhance our work based on your recommendations. We are confident that these revisions will contribute to a more robust and impactful study.

 

Sincerely,

Wang Yiyuan and Norsaadah Zakaria

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have added useful background information to the manuscript. The table titles have been corrected. 

Some weaknesses of the paper remain.  The manuscript does not address the critical issues: (1) what is the current level of waste, (2) what evidence exists that moving to standardized sizing in Malaysia will lead to a meaningful reduction in waste, and (3) will manufacturers ignore or resist standardized sizing.  The manuscript discusses the general benefits of standardized sizing. However, it does not attempt to quantify the benefits or address any costs of adoption.  

I still feel that Tables 1 and 2 are unnecessary.

Some of the discussion in section 5.2 is written in past tense, which suggests that some empirical work has been done. For example, “The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test and Bartlett's sphericity test were then utilised to assess the dataset's suitability for Principal Component Analysis (PCA).” (317-318) and “Subsequently, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used to simplify the complexity of the data by reducing the number of variables.” (320-321).  If no empirical work has been completed, then the text should be revised to avoid this confusion. 

Author Response

We greatly appreciate your patience and constructive feedback, which is critical to our current research.We have revised and responded to your comments point by point, please refer to the line numbers in brackets for in-text positioning. The last piece of feedback made a response.

1. what is the current level of waste. (modified: 124-139)
2. what evidence exists that moving to standardized sizing in Malaysia will lead to a meaningful reduction in waste, and (modified:306-326)
3. will manufacturers ignore or resist standardized (modified:328-365)
4. Some of the discussion is written in past tense, which suggests that some empirical work has been done. If no empirical work has been completed, then the text should be revised to avoid this confusion.(modified:372-389)
5. I still feel that Tables 1 and 2 are unnecessary.(deleted)
6. it does not attempt to quantify the benefits or address any costs of adoption.  (respond:We recognise that there is currently insufficient empirical evidence to quantify the benefits or address any costs of adoption. The next step will be conducting the research collecting and analysing data to provide empiral data to close this gap. We think that carrying out case studies or trial runs of the suggested strategies would greatly increase the paper's effect, and we intend to use this empirical data in further work.)

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Accept in present form

Author Response

Thank you very much for your recognition and I wish you all the best.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors didn't address any of my comments: Empirical Evidence, Scope and Relevance and Technical Depth. I cannot recommend publication of this manuscript.

Author Response

We greatly appreciate your patience and constructive feedback, which is critical to our current research.Below are my replies to each of your suggestions：

 

1. Lack of empirical data

Respond：We recognise that there is currently insufficient empirical evidence to support the suggested strategies. The next step will be conducting the research collecting and analysing data to provide empiral data to close this gap. We think that carrying out case studies or trial runs of the suggested strategies would greatly increase the paper's effect, and we intend to use this empirical data in further work.

 

2. Limited scope

Respond : Focusing on Malaysia adds a novel dimension to our study, providing insights that are specific to the Malaysian context as our base is in Malaysia.  Using a particular cultural and economic framework, this method enables us to examine in great detail the problems and solutions around fit and size in the clothing business. We may create strategies and recommendations that are relevant to the requirements and conditions of Malaysian market by concentrating on it, and this can then be a useful point of reference and contribution to the scholar work and for comparable situations globally.

 

3. Technical depth and innovation

Respond : We are grateful for your recommendation regarding the technological depth and creativity, and we will do our best to incorporate more theories and insights into our next research iterations. We are sorry that your earlier feedback was not taken into consideration for the present text, and we aim to make sure that these points are covered in-depth in our next effort. We appreciate any further input you may have and are dedicated to enhancing the standard and relevance of our research.

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I note the additional content related to sustainability.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It can be published if we don't treat it as a  typical review paper, but think it as a first-step in the unexplored area.