Age and active life of clothing

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to provide data on clothing concerning life span and length of active use period, as very little information is available. The article is based on a study of 620 clothing items that 16 households (35 people) disposed of during six months. A wardrobe study method was used, which included clothing registrations and in-depth interviews based on the selected pieces of clothing. The informants reported on the disposal reason for each item, how much it had been used, and how long they had owned it. The clothes that went out of use had an average total life span of 5.4 years and had been with the current owner for the past four years. This suggests that many of the clothes had been inherited or purchased used. Total life spans ranged from brand new to about 50-year-old garments. Clothes for children and teenagers had shorter average life spans, while adults above the age of 51 disposed of clothing 4.6 years older than the average. Our results indicate that the total life spans were longer than most previous research has estimated. However, many of the items had been used very little: 8% had never been used by anyone, and every fifth garment was either never used or had been used only a couple of times by the current owner. More research is needed, especially concerning the active use period, such as number of use times and differences between various consumer groups.

Full text

PLATE conference
Nottingham Trent University
17-19 June 2015
- 182 -
Age and active life of clothing
Laitala, K.
(a)
and Klepp, I.G.
(a)
a) National institute for consumer research (SIFO), Oslo, Norway
Keywords: Clothing life span; longevity; product lifetime; active use.
Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to provide data on clothing concerning life span and length of
active use period, as very little information is available. The article is based on a study of 620 clothing
items that 16 households (35 people) disposed of during six months. A wardrobe study method was
used, which included clothing registrations and in-depth interviews based on the selected pieces of
clothing. The informants reported on the disposal reason for each item, how much it had been used,
and how long they had owned it.
The clothes that went out of use had an average total life span of 5.4 years and had been with the
current owner for the past four years. This suggests that many of the clothes had been inherited or
purchased used. Total life spans ranged from brand new to about 50-year-old garments. Clothes for
children and teenagers had shorter average life spans, while adults above the age of 51 disposed of
clothing 4.6 years older than the average.
Our results indicate that the total life spans were longer than most previous research has estimated.
However, many of the items had been used very little: 8% had never been used by anyone, and every
fifth garment was either never used or had been used only a couple of times by the current owner.
More research is needed, especially concerning the active use period, such as number of use times
and differences between various consumer groups.
Introduction
Very little information is available of actual life
span and use per unit of clothing. The purpose
of this paper is to provide more realistic data
for clothing LCA studies concerning the
estimated longevity (age) and the period of
active use. To be able to do provide this data,
it is also necessary to discuss the relationship
between life span and use, and to discuss the
methods we have available for uncovering
relevant information on these matters. Based
on an overview of previous studies, the paper
shows the uncertainties inherent in existing
knowledge. This knowledge gap could
potentially be filled through a quantitative
analysis of data on wardrobes and clothing
disposal. The data is valid for a Norwegian
context, but literature on available data from
other countries is also discussed.
Background
Textile and clothing industry combines high
speed and low-cost production with high
volume consumption, which causes significant
environmental impacts (Fletcher, 2008;
Fletcher & Grose, 2012). From an
environmental point of view, prolonging
product life span can have several advantages
(Cooper, 2010). A short life span increases the
need for products to be replaced faster, hence
increasing the environmental impact from the
production, transportation and disposal
phases.
The length of life span and intensity of use of
clothes varies widely. The oldest existing
Norwegian garment is 1700 years old
(Guhnfeldt, 2011), and we have clothing in use
today that is over 100 years old (Lilleby, 2014),
while some clothes are only used once or not
used at all (Laitala & Boks, 2012). A garment
can be used by multiple users who take turns,
for example through sharing or renting, or by
multiple users who own the garment in a
sequential order, for example through
inheritance or so-called second-hand
purchases (Klepp & Laitala, Unpublished).

PLATE conference - Nottingham Trent University, 17/19 June 2015
Laitala K. and Klepp I.G.
Age and active life of clothing.
- 183 -
Clothing’s life span is dependent on both the
technical and social robustness, and the
flexibility of the apparel. The relationship
between the length of life span and number of
use times is complex. Owning a large number
of clothes increases the chance that a given
garment is used rarely, and thus many years
may pass before such items are worn out.
Measuring life alone will therefore not offer
information about resource efficiency unless
the number of uses per item is taken into
account.
Very little information is available on actual life
span and use per item of clothing. For
example, two separate studies estimate life
span of clothing items as varying from ten up
to 104 uses (Birtwistle and Moore 2007;
Collins and Aumônier 2002). Beton et al.
(2014) have estimated that all garments have
a life span of 1-3 years, but they refer only to
their own and others' estimates that are not
documented by research. A large survey
based on respondents’ own estimations found
that the average active use of clothing is 3.3
years (Langley et al., 2013). A Dutch study
estimated that the average lifespan of trousers
was 6.2 years, skirts and dresses 15.2 years,
sweaters 7.1 years, blouses 7.2 years, t-shirts
6.8 years, blazers 11.5 years and jackets 11.6
years (Uitdenbogerd, Brouwer, & Groot-
Marcus, 1998, p. 127). The life span of a skirt
was thus estimated to be twice as long as that
of a pair of trousers. The calculation was
based on the number of garments in 16
households and correlated with how much was
purchased by the household. In her PhD
study, Uitdenbogerd also asked survey
respondents about how long they used two
different garments before they were disposed
of, and the result orf cotton trousers was 2.45
years, for wool sweaters the average was 6.17
years (Uitdenbogerd, 2007, p. 281). The
differences between the results of these
studies are quite substantial. This confirms
how uncertain indirect means of estimating
garment life spans are. As we do not know
enough about what contributes to clothing
longevity, when such figures are used in LCA
studies, the results will hardly be realistic.
Method
In order to obtain more reliable knowledge
about the use phase, we have used a method
that examines families’ wardrobes and enables
a comparison between the quantity of clothing,
their technical condition and social life. The
article is based on studies of clothing that 16
households disposed of during a six month
period. During the project period, the total of
620 garments were taken out of use and
registered. The households consisted of 35
people totally and each participant stopped
using on average 18 garments; however the
figures varied from 0 to 71 items per person. A
so-called wardrobe study method was used,
which includes clothing registrations and in-
depth interviews based on the selected pieces
of clothing.
Households were selected strategically, the
goal being to interview people in different life
situations. They were placed in three main
groups: 1) young adults without children, 2)
parents of small children and 3) retired or soon
to be retired adults.
The informants reported the disposal reason
for each item, how much it had been used and
how long they had owned the item. Clothes
were evaluated afterwards in a textile
laboratory, and their condition was registered
in detail including whether the garment had
holes or rifts, stains, pilling and how worn it
looked. In addition all other available
information was registered, such as colour,
brand, and all data given on the apparel labels.
The goal was to compile comprehensive
information on clothing practices including all
the stages of consumption from acquisition,
use, care, to disposal. This paper presents the
results that are relevant for LCA studies
related to length of life spans and active use.
Results
Information on clothing life spans is given in
Figure 1. The clothes that went out of use had
an average total life of 5.4 years, and had
been with the current owner for the past four
years. This shows that many of the clothes
were inherited or purchased used. The total
life span ranged from brand new to about 50
years.
Clothing that adult men disposed of, had on
average a 1.5 years longer life span than
women’s clothing in the study. However, the
difference was not significant to 95% level
(P=0.059) due to the small sample size for
men’s clothing
Clothes for children and teenagers had the
shortest life spans, while adults above the age
of 51 disposed of 4.6 years older clothing than

PLATE conference - Nottingham Trent University, 17/19 June 2015
Laitala K. and Klepp I.G.
Age and active life of clothing.
- 184 -
the average. In Klepp’s study, the mean
lifespan of the clothes of 40-year-old women
was 7 years (Klepp, 2001). In our data
material, clothing for this group was used
slightly shorter, namely 5.2 years. This may be
due to a growth in prosperity in the time-span
between the two studies, but can also be due
to differences in the sample, or other
methodological aspects.
Figure 1. Average length of clothing life spans. N indicates the number of clothing items.
The life span of the clothes was almost
identical regardless of whether the plan was to
give or sell the garments for reuse, or to throw
away the apparel. However, there was a
difference in use time for the current owner
related to disposal plan. The use time was 1.6
years shorter for the clothes that were to be
given with an aim pf prolonged use, than for
those that were to be discarded. Therefore,
these clothes had a potential for new use
periods with new owners and thus longer total
life span. The degree of wear was an
important criterion for what the owner planned
to do with the clothing.
The clothes that owners reported were
disposed of wholly or partially due to fashion
changes, were on average 3 years older than
average of all the disposed clothes. Clothing
disposed of due to situational reasons were
1.6 years older than average. Clothing with
functional defects, however, had been used for
half a year shorter than average. Clothing with
various changes in the material had an
average life span, which is understandable
0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0
Bought self as new (N=205)
Inherited/gift, used (N=65)
Gift, new (N=42)
Gift from organisation (N=37)
Woven (N=151)
Knitted (N=368)
Size and fit issues (N=206)
Changes in garments (N=276)
Taste related unsuitability (N=101)
Fashion or style changes (N=42)
Situational reasons (N=62)
Functional shortcomings (N=51)
Children, age below 12 (N=127)
Teenagers, age 13-19 (N=32)
Adults, age 20-34 (N=204)
Adults, age 35-50 (N=132)
Adults, age over 51 (N=41)
Female, adults (N=299)
Male, adults (N=76)
Acquisition
method
Constr
uction Disposal reason Age group Gender
Average life span, all garments
Total lifespan (years)

PLATE conference - Nottingham Trent University, 17/19 June 2015
Laitala K. and Klepp I.G.
Age and active life of clothing.
- 185 -
based on the large proportion of the clothes in
this category. When comparing the different
degrees of wear and tear, clothes that were
described as worn out had a useful life of 4.2
years (one year below average), while those
described as having a worn look had a life
span of 7.3 years (two years above average).
The clothing that was described as washed out
had a long life span, 10.9 years, which is 5.5
years above average. If the clothes had been
damaged by laundering, the average use time
was reduced. Colour bleeding during washing
reduced use life with 2.5 years, and shrinkage
with 1.6 years. It is not clear how the
informants have drawn a line between
products that they described as having a worn
look, being worn out, or being washed out, but
it is likely that washed out products have been
used and laundered often, and show signs
such as thinning of material and colour fading.
Clothes that were disposed of because of a
change in living circumstances were 3 years
older on average. Uncomfortable clothes were
discarded faster, and their life span was a year
shorter.
In Klepp’s (2001) study the clothes that went
out of use because of fashion, had the same
life span as clothing that was disposed of
because of wear (approximately 8 years), but
the “out of fashion” clothes had been stored
longer between the time of disposal and the
last time they were used. In both the Klepp
study and the present study, these “out of
fashion” clothes remained equally long stored
"at mercy", namely 2.8 years. It is not known if
this storage time affected the degree to which
fashion is used as an argument for disposal. It
is conceivable that the clothes were to a lesser
degree deemed as obsolete when they were
last used, 2 to 3 years earlier, than at the time
the owner described them as too outdated to
be used. Other reasons for not using the
garment might have been more important
then.
As expected, different types of garments have
different life spans. Many of the smaller items
that were often described as “consumables”
such as socks, stockings, and underwear,
have shorter lifespans. This result was also
found in the survey by Langley et al. 2013.
Nightwear and outerwear had above average
life spans. At first sight, the fabric structure
seemed to contribute as well, as woven
materials have slightly longer life spans than
knitted. However, much of the clothing referred
to as consumables (socks, stockings and
underwear) are made of knitted materials, and
these types of garments in general have
shorter lifespans than other types of garments.
When these are excluded, the woven and
knitted items have the same lifespan, 5.9
years.
Never used
Our results indicate that the total life spans
were longer than the aforementioned
estimates indicated in other studies. Many of
the clothes had been used very little. 8% of the
garments were never used, and in total every
fifth garment was either never used or used
only “a couple of times” by the current owner.
This is consistent with findings in Klepp’s
study, where the corresponding figures were 9
and 19% of the clothes (2001). Most of the
unused clothes were gifts or inherited clothing
items from family and friends. In these cases
the receiver had very little control over what
she/he was given. In other cases, rarely used
items consisted of clothing that was not tried
on before purchase, or that was bought on
sale. It is evident that the way clothes are
acquired has an impact on whether they are
likely to be used.
Many clothes had been lying unused in the
wardrobe for years before they were disposed
of. The average time lapse from last use time,
was 1.4 years. It was common that children's
clothing was disposed of sooner when the
apparel no longer fit. On average, they were
used for the last time seven months ago, while
the average for clothing for adults, was 1.7
years. We have not taken into account that the
clothes can have been stored a few months
before our visit and registration. On the other
hand, it may also be that some clothes were
taken out of use because of the research
project, and thus had shorter waiting time than
average.
Conclusions
Our results indicate that the total length of
clothing life spans were longer than most
previous research has estimated. However,
much of the clothing had been used very little.
8% of the garments were never used, and
totally every fifth garment were either never
used or used only a couple of times by the
current owner. In addition, the active use
period is much shorter than the total life span.

PLATE conference - Nottingham Trent University, 17/19 June 2015
Laitala K. and Klepp I.G.
Age and active life of clothing.
- 186 -
The average time lapse from last use time was
1.4 years.
Our data material is not large enough to draw
firm final conclusions. However, some
interesting findings were found. The way
clothing is acquired has great influence on the
length of life span. This should be drawn into
future LCA calculations. For example, clothes
that are given as business gifts are seldom
used and have therefore a higher
environmental impact than corresponding
garments acquired by the users themselves.
More research is needed, especially
concerning the active use period such as
number of use times, and differences between
various consumer groups.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Madeline Buck for her
valuable contribution in clothing registrations.
We want also to thank Norwegian Research
Council and Orkla ASA for financial support on
the project ‘From textile waste to material
resources in a grave to cradle perspective’.
References
Beton, A., Dias, D., Farrant, L., Gibon, T., Guern, Y.
L., Desaxce, M., et al. (2014). Environmental
improvement potential of textiles (IMPRO-
Textiles). Sevilla: European Commission JRC –
IPTS, Bio Intelligence Service, and ENSAIT, Ecole
Nationale Supérieure des Arts et Industries
Textiles.
Birtwistle, G., & Moore, C. M. (2007). Fashion
clothing – where does it all end up? International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
35(3), 210-216.
Collins, M., & Aumônier, S. (2002). Streamlined life
cycle assessment of Two Marks & Spencers plc
apparel products. Oxford: Environmental
resources management.
Cooper, T. (Ed.). (2010). Longer lasting products:
Alternatives to the throwaway society. Surrey, UK:
Gower Publishing Limited
Fletcher, K. (2008). Sustainable fashion & textiles:
Design journeys. London: Earthscan.
Fletcher, K., & Grose, L. (2012). Fashion and
sustainability: Design for change. London:
Laurence King.
Guhnfeldt, C. (2011, 9. September). Norges eldste
klesplagg. Aftenposten.
Klepp, I. G. (2001). Hvorfor går klær ut av bruk?
Avhending sett i forhold til kvinners klesvaner
[Why are clothes no longer used? Clothes
disposal in relationship to women’s clothing
habits]. Oslo: SIFO.
Klepp, I. G., & Laitala, K. (Unpublished). Owning,
loaning, inheritance or sharing: Forms of clothing
ownership.
Laitala, K., & Boks, C. (2012). Sustainable clothing
design: Use matters. Journal of design research,
10(1/2), 121-139.
Langley, E., Durkacz, S., & Tanase, S. (2013).
Clothing longevity and measuring active use.
Banbury, Oxon: Wrap.
Lilleby, T. (2014, 03.08.2014). Døpt i 112 år
gammel kjole. ha-halden.no, from http://www.ha-
halden.no/nyheter/article7509104.ece
Uitdenbogerd, D. E. (2007). Energy and households
- The acceptance of energy reduction options in
relation to the performance and organisation of
household activities. Unpublished PhD thesis,
Wageningen University, Wageningen.
Uitdenbogerd, D. E., Brouwer, N. M., & Groot-
Marcus, J. P. (1998). Domestic energy saving
potentials for food and textiles: an empirical study.
Wageningen: Wageningen Agricultural University,
Household and Consumer Studies.