Paper short abstract:

This study examines the pandemic response of Sri Lanka's wearing apparel industry to COVID-19. A Thematic analysis was done using the NVivo software. Findings underscore the need for targeted interventions to enhance industry resilience and mitigate future crises effectively, while prioritizing gender-sensitive policies and equitable strategies

Paper long abstract:

Context: This abstract presents findings from a thematic qualitative analysis of the pandemic policy response of the wearing apparel industry, to identify the gaps in knowledge, capacity, and technology for an effective gender-inclusive mitigatory response. In addition, procedural adaptations of the industry throughout the progress of the pandemic, policy gaps and implications, and, their impact on the female workers, the majority, in the ready-made garment industry are discussed.

Methodology: Key informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted representing various stakeholders aiming to identify gaps and success stories in the industry's response to the pandemic. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling depending on category of respondents, taking into account different stakeholders involved in the industry response mechanism. A total of 16 KIIs were conducted including 6 workers, 6 factory managers representing small-scale, medium-scale and large-scale garment factories, 2 from employer organizations, and 2 from supportive government agencies. The questions of the KIIs were structured giving the focus on 4 main domains identified namely, Knowledge, Capacity, Policy, and Process. For the knowledge domain the respondents were asked about the availability, accessibility and quality of the knowledge during the pandemic. Capacity domain focused on the availability and access to different resources and services to respond to the pandemic. Policies, guidelines and protocols that was implemented and that were good if exist, as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic were asked under the policy domain. Finally in the process domain, the actual response scenario was asked from the respondents. A thematic analysis was used to analyze the data (Jones-Konneh., 2023), and all transcripts were coded and analyzed using NVivo (14). This approach was employed to identify recurring themes across the interviews (Groot, 2023), focusing on four main domains. These domains provided a framework for organizing and interpreting the qualitative data, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of the industry's response to the pandemic (Kabwama., 2022).

Analysis: The industry's response to the COVID-19 pandemic showcased a mixture of challenges and successes in the “dissemination and gaining of knowledge on responding to the pandemic”. Managers of the factories had to make critical decisions with rapidly changing information, including evolving government regulations in imports, transport restrictions and health guidelines. Amidst the crisis, managers had to simultaneously plan for short-term survival and long-term recovery. For that knowing the changing market conditions, explore new business opportunities, and position the company for future growth was challenging for them while keeping employee morale high during a period of uncertainty and stress. On the other hand, they were successful in disseminating the knowledge on health guidelines, preventive measures to the employees effectively, since they used online platforms like Zoom for awareness programs and distribution of leaflets, showcasing notices within the factory on important guidelines and preventive measures.

Most of the challenges were reported under the “capacity” domain. Employers faced difficulties in maintaining wage levels and job security, because of extending the payment time for the orders by the customers. Even though the garment factories who are operating in large-scale were able to pay at least the wages, they also had to cut the bonuses and OTs from the employees. Meanwhile the small-scale and medium-scale garment factories had to pay half of the salary to the employees considering the working days that were reduced due to the roster system. Large-scale companies were able to give paid leaves to employees while ensuring their job security, while small and medium scale factories had to pay a half of the salary or give no pay leaves. Challenges occurred in distributing protective gears such as masks and sanitizers and implementing vaccination efforts, due to the difficulty to find a new source of supply chain for all these bulks and the additional cost incurred. Unions played a pivotal role in requesting the factories to provide masks and hand sanitizers to the workers. As success stories some factories sewed masks for their employees, and some had the capacity to provide steaming machines to ensure worker safety. Such safety measures demonstrated efforts to ensure worker well-being, although social impacts such as stigma and community resistance compounded challenges faced by the industry resulting in increased absenteeism among workers.

An examination of “policy implications of industry policies” revealed critical gaps and successes in addressing the socio-economic ramifications of the pandemic. Identified gaps included the absence of gender-sensitive policies, delays in information dissemination, inconsistent implementation of health protocols within the factory, restricting union formations, lack of Standardized and factory-scale specific Protocols and inadequate compensation for workers. Success stories emerged in grouping workers to continue the production process, concerns on sick workers’ mental health, interventions by unions, having a health committee inside the factories even before the pandemic and efforts to provide financial support to workers. These findings underscore the importance of addressing industry policy gaps and replicating successful interventions to navigate future crises effectively.

Diverse responses from stakeholders highlighted both successes and shortcomings in “actual pandemic response”. Despite challenges such as supply chain disruptions, measures were implemented to ensure production continuity and protect workers' health. Notable successes include prompt identification of cases within the factories, prompt adaptation of health guidelines and paying to the workers and maintaining their job security. However, coordination issues and barriers such as lack of monitoring whether the guidelines were practiced, unequitable distribution of welfare facilities among workers and barriers to unionization, highlights the need for equitable strategies to address socio-economic disparities and navigate future crises effectively.

Conclusion: The thematic qualitative analysis provides insights into the complexities of pandemic response within Sri Lanka's wearing apparel industry. By identifying gaps and success stories across knowledge, capacity, policy, and process domains, this study offers guidelines for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers seeking to enhance resilience and mitigate future challenges effectively. Addressing these findings through targeted interventions and collaborative efforts such as increasing union participation in decision making bodies, making gender sensitive policies is essential for building a more resilient and sustainable garment sector in the face of ongoing and future crises.

Key words: Thematic Analysis, Apparel Industry Response, Covid-19, Gaps and success stories