Week 6: Slow Fashion
Fashion Industry’s Environmental Footprint
Over the past four decades, global fiber production has grown exponentially, driven by the increasing use of synthetic fibers (Statista, 2016). This growth has raised environmental concerns, including excessive water and pesticide usage, extended degradation times of synthetic fibers, and chemical use in refinement processes.
The fashion industry, encompassing design, tailoring, distribution, and retail, significantly impacts the environment through energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and waste production (Gardetti & Torres, 2013).
Social issues such as poor working conditions, human rights violations, and health hazards for workers across the global value chain have also been documented, with numerous fatalities reported in factories in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh during 2012/2013 (Geiger & Keller, 2018, p. 1123).
The corridor approach by Leach, Raworth, and Rockström (2013) integrates planetary boundaries and social foundations, such as climate change and poverty eradication, to position sustainable consumption within a framework that ensures a dignified life for all, as reflected in the definition of sustainable consumption behavior by Geiger, Fischer, and Schrader (2017).
Definition of “Slow Fashion" or “Sustainable Fashion”
The concept of sustainable fashion encompasses various practices aimed at prioritizing ecological and socio-economic considerations throughout the clothing consumption process (Geiger, Fischer & Schrader, 2017, p. 3). This includes environmentally conscious purchasing behaviors such as opting for chemical-free production and organically grown materials (Kang, Liu & Kim, 2013), as well as emphasizing social conditions in garment production, including fair wages and ethical labor practices.
Slow fashion, as a component of sustainable fashion, seeks to counter the rapid pace of the fashion industry by limiting production to a maximum of four fashion lines annually, prioritizing quality over quantity, and eschewing mass production (Joergens, 2006). Garments classified as sustainable fashion adhere to principles outlined by Fletcher (2008), which include the absence of child labor, environmentally friendly materials, ethical production processes, and fostering long-term relationships across the supply chain.
Slow fashion addresses the environmental concerns of the apparel industry, aiming to reduce resource consumption and waste generation by emphasizing quality craftsmanship and durability (Ozdamar-Ertekin & Atik, 2015). This movement is gaining increasing support as consumers demand higher standards in sustainability and corporate ethics (Pookulangara & Shephard, 2013), leading to a shift in consumers’ value perceptions and purchasing behavior towards sustainability and well-being. In essence, the slow fashion movement advocates for a change in the core values of the fashion industry towards sustainability through the production of durable products using traditional techniques and design concepts (Domingos, Vale & Faria, 2022, p. 2).
Consumer Behaviour
A research model is proposed to explore the antecedents and mediator of consumer purchase intention towards slow fashion apparel, incorporating demographic information and responses to various measures (Chi et al., 2021, pp. 109-11).
Findings highlight the critical role of willingness to pay a premium in influencing consumers' intentions to purchase slow fashion products, indicating that the value consumers assign to slow fashion apparel significantly impacts their purchase decisions. Moreover, consumers with greater environmental knowledge tend to exhibit more favorable attitudes towards slow fashion consumption, possibly due to their understanding of its potential contribution to sustainability movements. Notably, demographic variables, except for income level, show no significant effect on consumers' purchase intentions towards slow fashion apparel, with higher-income individuals demonstrating a higher likelihood of purchasing such products. Additionally, female consumers tend to hold more positive attitudes towards slow fashion apparel compared to male consumers. Studies suggest that consumers are motivated to engage in sustainable consumption by seeking unique products that minimize environmental damage, reflecting a desire to enhance self-esteem (Stefko & Steffek, 2018) and social image while avoiding mass consumption (Vigneron & Johnson, 2004).
Furthermore, research indicates that Generation Y and Generation Z, especially females, are increasingly drawn to mature and timeless clothing styles while remaining mindful of sustainability, influenced by eco-conscious cultures (Delong, Bang & Gibson, 2019). This has spurred a shift towards Slow Fashion in the fashion industry, prioritizing quality and participant well-being in the value chain (Jung & Jin, 2014).
Cultural values significantly shape consumer behavior, emphasizing the need for tailored marketing strategies. Studies underscore the importance of factors such as fashion employee welfare and Slow Fashion attributes in shaping consumer perceptions, with a growing preference for socially responsible brands (Reimers, Magnuson & Chao, 2016). Additionally, consumer perception of ethical clothing is influenced by factors like product durability and material quality (Jung & Jin, 2016).
Transparency in brand communication and support for local communities are prioritized by consumers adopting sustainable consumption habits (Pencarelli et al., 2020). Perceived values like authenticity and functionality positively impact the intention to purchase Slow Fashion products and the willingness to pay higher prices. However, further market studies are needed to inform strategic decisions regarding the acceptance and effective communication of Slow Fashion demands. As sustainability-conscious consumers, especially among the younger demographic, continue to grow, companies face the challenge of promptly responding to these evolving demands.
Case Study: Big Sister Swap
Big Sister Swap, an influential player in the slow fashion movement, utilizes its TikTok channel to advance its mission of advocating for sustainability and inclusivity within the fashion industry. Founded by Hudi Charin, the platform facilitates clothes swapping, thereby promoting a circular economy model that mitigates the environmental repercussions of fast fashion.
Big Sister Swap's purpose aligns with the concept of digital citizenship by fostering responsible and ethical engagement online through advocating for environmental conservation and size inclusivity in fashion, empowering individuals to use digital technologies positively for sustainable fashion practices and societal and environmental well-being (Morgan, 2022). The platform's target audience comprises women of all body sizes, particularly young adults who frequent TikTok, often with limited income but a strong emphasis on sustainability and environmental awareness in their fashion choices.
The channel's content aims to educate and inspire its predominantly female audience about the benefits of second-hand clothing and size-inclusive fashion choices, challenging traditional notions of beauty and body image perpetuated by the fashion industry. Through compelling storytelling and relatable content, the platform effectively communicates its sustainability and inclusivity message, resonating with diverse audiences on TikTok. By providing personalized styling options and ensuring clothing accessibility for individuals of all sizes, Big Sister Swap actively engages with its target demographic, fostering a sense of community and empowerment among its followers. Through its TikTok channel, Big Sister Swap not only promotes sustainable fashion practices but also fosters a supportive and inclusive online community valuing environmental consciousness and self-expression through fashion. Big Sister Swap's videos strike the perfect balance between education and entertainment, offering viewers a delightful blend of insightful content and captivating visuals. Their informative segments cover a wide array of topics, including sustainable fashion principles, details about their services, and practical styling tips aligned with Pinterest trends.
The video features catchy music, dancing, and models showcasing the clothes in a trendy and fashionable manner, adding entertaining elements to the content. Despite their unprofessional production style, lacking flashy lights or high-end cameras, this approach allows for a more authentic portrayal of the products' colors and quality, fostering a stronger connection with the audience. With a commitment to consistency, Big Sister Swap uploads three to four videos a week, ensuring that their audience remains continuously engaged and inspired by the ever-evolving world of fashion.
References
Chi et al., 2021. A study of U.S. consumers’ intention to purchase slow fashion apparel: understanding the key determinants. International Journal of Fashion Design Technology and Education, 14(1), pp. 101-112.
Delong, Bang & Gibson, 2019. Comparison of patterns of dressing for two generations within a local context. Fashion, Style, & Popular Culture, 6(1), pp. 99-117. Domingos, Vale & Faria, 2022. Slow Fashion Consumer Behavior: A Literature Review. Sustainability, 14(5). Fletcher, K., 2008. Sustainable Fashion and Textiles: Design Journeys. 1st ed. London: Earthscan. Gardetti & Torres, 2013. Sustainability in fashion and textiles: Values, esign, production and consumption. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing. Geiger & Keller, 2018. Shopping for Clothes and Sensitivity to the Suffering of Others: The Role of Compassion and Values in Sustainable Fashion Consumption. Environment and Behavior, 50(10), pp. 1119-1144. Geiger, Fischer & Schrader, 2017. Measuring What Matters in Sustainable Consumption: An Integrative Framework for the Selection of Relevant Behaviors. Sustainable Development, 26(1), pp. 18-33. Joergens, C., 2006. Ethical fashion: Myth or future trend?. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management , 10(3), pp. 360-371. Jung & Jin, 2014. A theoretical investigation of slow fashion: sustainable future of the apparel industry. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(5), pp. 510-519. Jung & Jin, 2016. Sustainable Development of Slow Fashion Businesses: Customer Value Approach. Sustainability, 8(6). Kang, Liu & Kim, 2013. Environmentally sustainable textile and apparel consumption: The role of consumer knowledge, perceived consumer effectiveness and perceived personal relevance. International Journal of Consumer Studies, Volume 37, pp. 442-452. Leach, Raworth & Rockstrom, 2013. Between social and planetary boundaries: Navigating pathways in the safe and just space for humanity. In: World Social Science Report 2013: Changing Global Environments. Paris: UNESCO/ISSC, pp. 84-89. Morgan, L., 2022. It's time to get to know Big Sister Swap, AKA the personalised clothes swapping service that everyone is talking about. [Online] Available at: https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/big-sister-swap?utm_source=onsite-share&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=onsite-share&utm_brand=glamour-uk [Accessed 6th February 2024]. Ozdamar-Ertekin & Atik, 2015. Sustainable markets: Motivating factors, barriers, and remedies for mobilization of slow fashion. Journal of Macromarketing, 35(1), pp. 53-69. Pencarelli et al., 2020. Luxury Products and Sustainability Issues from the Perspective of Young Italian Consumers. Sustainability, 12(1), p. 245. Pookulangara & Shephard, 2013. Slow fashion movement: Understanding consumer perceptions—An exploratory study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(2), pp. 200-206. Reimers, Magnuson & Chao, 2016. The academic conceptualisation of ethical clothing: Could it account for the attitude behaviour gap?. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 20(4), pp. 1361-2026. Statista, 2016. Worldwide production volume of chemical and textile fibers from 1975 to 2015 (in 1,000 metric tons), s.l.: Statista Research Department. Stefko & Steffek, 2018. Key Issues in Slow Fashion: Current Challenges and Future Perspectives. Sustainability, 10(7). Vigneron & Johnson, 2004. Measuring perceptions of brand luxury. Journal of Brand Management, Volume 11, pp. 484-506.











