What is sustainable fashion?

Abstract

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine what the term sustainable fashion means from the perspective of micro-organisations, experts, and consumers.

Design/methodology/approach
This research is qualitative in nature, utilising a multi-methods case study approach (semi-structured interviews, semiotics, questionnaires). Grounded analysis was applied to analyse the data.

Findings
Findings indicate that interpretation of sustainable fashion is context and person dependent. A matrix of key criteria provides the opportunity to find common elements.

Research limitations/implications
Due to the nature of this research the sample size is limited and may not be generalised. Data were collected in the UK and are limited to a geographical region.

Practical implications
An important implication is that defining sustainable fashion is vital in order to avoid challenges, such as greenwashing, which were faced in other industries that have a longer history in sustainable practices. Micro-organisations should take advantage of identifying key sustainable fashion criteria, which will enable them to promote their fashion collections more effectively.

Social implications
The criteria identified provide assurance for consumers that sustainable fashion is produced with social aspects in mind (fair wages, good working conditions).

Originality/value
The paper proposes a matrix that allows micro-organisations to clearly identify their collections as sustainable.

Full text

What is sustainable fashion?
Claudia E. Henninger
School of Materials, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK, and
Panayiota J. Alevizou and Caroline J. Oates
Management School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to examine what the term sustainable fashion means from the
perspective of micro-organisations, experts, and consumers.
Design/methodology/approach –This research is qualitative in nature, utilising a multi-methods
case study approach (semi-structured interviews, semiotics, questionnaires). Grounded analysis was
applied to analyse the data.
Findings –Findings indicate that interpretation of sustainable fashion is context and person
dependent. A matrix of key criteria provides the opportunity to find common elements.
Research limitations/implications –Due to the nature of this research the sample size is limited
and may not be generalised. Data were collected in the UK and are limited to a geographical region.
Practical implications –An important implication is that defining sustainable fashion is vital in order
to avoid challenges, such as greenwashing, which were faced in other industries that have a longer
history in sustainable practices. Micro-organisations should take advantage of identifying key
sustainable fashion criteria, which will enable them to promote their fashion collections more effectively.
Social implications –The criteria identified provide assurance for consumers that sustainable
fashion is produced with social aspects in mind (fair wages, good working conditions).
Originality/value –The paper proposes a matrix that allows micro-organisations to clearly identify
their collections as sustainable.
Keywords UK, Sustainability, Fashion, Sustainable fashion, Micro-organisation,
Sustainable fashion criteria
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
The second anniversary of the Rana Plaza factory incident marks an increased interest
in sustainable fashion and ethical practices in the industry (Westervelt, 2015). With
sustainability emerging as a “megatrend”(Mittelstaedt et al., 2014) the fashion
landscape changes dramatically, whereby sustainable fashion becomes increasingly
mainstream (Watson and Yan, 2013; Mora et al., 2014). Extant research predominantly
focussed on sustainable fashion consumption (e.g. Joy et al., 2012; Cao et al., 2014) rather
than on establishing an academic understanding towards sustainable fashion, which is
part of the slow fashion movement ( Jung and Jin, 2014). This paper utilises a social
constructionist approach to address this gap.
Sustainable fashion is part of the slow fashion movement, developed over the past
decades, and used interchangeably with eco-, green-, and ethical-fashion (Carey and
Cervellon, 2014). Sustainable fashion first emerged in the 1960s, when consumers
became aware of the impact clothing manufacturing had on the environment and
demanded the industry change its practices ( Jung and Jin, 2014). Although eco-fashion
was negatively perceived at first this changed with anti-fur campaigns emerging in the
1980s/1990s, followed by an interest in ethical clothing in the late 1990s. Ethical fashion
is associated with fair working conditions, a sustainable business model ( Joergens,
2006), organic and environmentally friendly materials ( Johnston, 2012), certifications,
and traceability (Henninger, 2015).
Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management
Vol. 20 No. 4, 2016
pp. 400-416
© Emerald Group PublishingLimited
1361-2026
DOI 10.1108/JFMM-07-2015-0052
Received 6 July 2015
Revised 26 February 2016
Accepted 9 May 2016
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1361-2026.htm
400
JFMM
20,4

Sustainable fashion as part of the slow fashion movement is often misleadingly
described as the opposite of fast fashion. Slow fashion is based on a philosophical ideal
that centres on sustainability values, such as good working conditions and reducing
environmental destruction (e.g. Bourland, 2011; Pookulangara and Shephard, 2013).
It challenges the fast fashion paradigm by breaking down existing boundaries
between the organisation and its stakeholders, slowing the production process to a
more manageable timeframe, moving away from the self-concept, and focussing on
empowering workers by offering a choice that enables change (Clark, 2008). According
to The True Cost movie (2015) sustainable fashion is more than a simple fad, but rather
considers the social, natural, and economic “price”paid in fashion production. Yet
uncertainty remains around what the term “sustainable fashion”entails and what
might be the guidelines for producing sustainable garments (Watson and Yan, 2013;
The True Cost, 2015).
The slow fashion movement and sustainable fashion are increasing in importance
(Battaglia et al., 2014), yet consumer awareness remains low (Gonzalez, 2015). Past
research on sustainable fashion focussed on consumers’perceptions and attitudes
(Goworek et al., 2013; Shen et al., 2013; McNeill and Moore, 2015), and its impact on
consumer purchasing behaviour (Shen et al., 2013). Although research has investigated
aspects of sustainable fashion, current studies lack an academic understanding of what
sustainable fashion is from a holistic perspective. This paper contributes to literature
by investigating two research questions from a social constructionist point of view:
RQ1. What are the underlying principles of sustainable fashion from the point of
view of micro-organisations, experts, and consumers?
RQ2. How is the concept of sustainable fashion related to aspects of social
constructionism?
Understanding underlying principles of sustainable fashion is vital, in order to avoid
negative connotations such as greenwashing (e.g. Rahman et al., 2015). Theoretical
contributions focus on establishing an understanding of sustainable fashion as
discussed and practiced by slow fashion companies. Future research could extend
these preliminary results and test their applicability on a wider scale.
2. Literature review
2.1 Slow fashion movement and sustainable fashion
The slow fashion movement emerged as a response to fast fashion cycles and
“unsustainable”business growth. It promotes ethical conduct, reduced fashion
production, and purchasing quality over quantity clothing (Fletcher, 2010; Ertekin and
Atik, 2014). Slow fashion and more specifically sustainable fashion seek to empower
workers throughout the supply chain, utilise upcycling, recycling, and traditional
production techniques, and incorporating renewable and organic raw materials
( Johnston, 2012). Thus, slow fashion moves away from current industry practices of
growth-based fashion, which requires a change in system thinking, infrastructure, and
throughput of goods (Fletcher, 2010). Key to the slow fashion movement and sustainable
fashion is a balanced approach to fashion production, which fosters long-term
relationships, builds local production, and focusses on transparency (Ertekin and Atik,
2014). The latter aspect has received increased attention since the Rana Plaza incident,
which called for enhanced supply chain check-ups and transparency throughout the
manufacturing process (e.g. Pookulangara and Shephard, 2013; Jung and Jin, 2014).
401
What is
sustainable
fashion?

The original meaning of slow fashion highlights sustainability values and ethical
conduct, yet media only seem to promote sustainable fashion as garments that
are somehow “less fast”, which is enhanced by the fact that slow fashion companies
usually produce collections only twice a year for Spring/Summer and Autumn/Winter
(Pookulangara and Shephard, 2013). Although changes in the environment have already
occurred, for example, introducing organic materials or promoting sustainable collections
(e.g. H&M conscious line), which should make it easier for organisations to promote
sustainable fashion, the “mobilization of a sustainable fashion system is both complex
and difficult”(Ertekin and Atik, 2014, p. 8). Various barriers to mobilising sustainable
fashion emerge: first, transparency in a globalised supply chain may not always be
feasible. In order to stay competitive manufacturers are pressured into lowering their
prices and at times cut corners. Second, increased production and availability of
garments enhances a “fashion appetite”that strengthens the attitude-behaviour-gap of
consumers who want ideally to purchase sustainable fashion, yet may not always follow
through in their behaviour (e.g. Goworek et al., 2013; McNeill and Moore, 2015). This
could be due to a lack of knowledge and awareness, which may hinder further
development of sustainable fashion (Goworek et al., 2013). Third, in a competitive
environment such as the fashion industry, it is vital to distinguish oneself from others,
which can be achieved through “greenization”(Ahluwalia and Miller, 2014; Du, 2015).
With sustainability emerging as a “megatrend”(Mittelstaedt et al., 2014) organisations
start to use buzzwords, such as eco, organic, environmentally friendly, or green in their
marketing communications (Chen and Chang, 2013). Although communicating aspects of
sustainability in the garment manufacturing process is beneficial, more and more
companies engage in greenwashing, which is defined as misleading advertising of green
credentials (Delmas and Burbano, 2011). This implies that an organisation knowingly has
a poor environmental performance, yet communicates positively about it (Du, 2015).
Consumers mistrust sustainability and green claims, as they cannot verify the credibility
of the organisation’s claims (Chen and Chang, 2013). A consequence of greenwashing is
that any company promoting social or environmental credentials is first and foremost
treated with suspicion. Trusted relationships may emerge later, but take a long time to
establish, foster, and maintain (Rahman et al., 2015). Finally, past research omits to
investigate the concept and scope of slow fashion, as well as a common definition for
sustainable and slow fashion (Prothero and Fitchett, 2000; Watson and Yan, 2013). This
is addressed in this research.
2.2 Social constructionism
Sustainable fashion is investigated through social constructionism, which
distinguishes two types of “reality”(Shotter, 2002): first, “reality”refers to the world
that exists independently without any interactions; and second, “reality”is constructed
through social interactions (Shotter, 2002). The latter suggests that there may be a gap
between meanings of different situations/circumstances and the “reality”(Bañon et al.,
2011). Thus, some people may have a set of associations or beliefs about sustainable
fashion that differs from those of others. Whilst a common ground can be reached,
parties in different “realities”may reject these ideas and interpret sustainable fashion in
a different manner (Bañon et al., 2011). Thus, the assumption is that multiple “realities”
exist on what sustainable fashion entails. It is through these “realities”that the concept
of sustainable fashion is interpreted and understood.
Sustainability is intuitively understood, yet has no coherent definition (Partridge,
2011). Sustainability is context dependent and situational and has different meanings
402
JFMM
20,4

for different people. A question that arises is: can a vague concept such as
sustainability be dismissed “as an empty vessel that can be filled with whatever one
likes”? (Dryzek, 2005, p. 147). Although sustainability has been criticised and contested,
it cannot be dismissed (Dryzek, 2005; Naderi and Strutton, 2015). A challenge that
emerges within sustainability debates is that people may be talking about –
metaphorically –different fruits in a basket, which emphasises the fact that
“sustainability does [not] apply to the physical environment in itself, but rather our
human relationship with the world”(Bañon et al., 2011, p. 180). Yet, the lack of a
coherent definition can lead to new opportunities in a changing environment (Dryzek,
2005). Within this paper sustainability is understood as “meeting the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs”
(WCED, 1987). Although this definition is general and presumptuous, it is still the most
cited definition used to date (Baumgartner, 2009).
Sustainable fashion has often been described as an oxymoron (Clark, 2008), as
fashion assumes something goes in and out of style, which contrasts with the long-term
perspective of sustainability (Walker, 2006). We see fashion as an art form that
complements the long-term perspective of sustainability in that it focusses on
craftsmanship and artisanry and is not bound to seasonality (Norell et al., 1967). A piece
of clothing can be transformed from simply being a wearable item to a unique creation
that suggests creativity and character, as well as expressing a particular identity (Poon
and Fatt, 2001).
In focussing on the scope of sustainable fashion and investigating the underlying
principles from a social constructionist point of view this paper contributes to
knowledge and addresses a gap in the literature.
3. Methodology
This paper is exploratory in nature and uses social constructionist theory to investigate
sustainable fashion. Qualitative research methodologies (e.g. Pookulangara and
Shephard, 2013), such as semi-structured interviews (Is), semiotics (SE), Twitterfeed
(TF), and questionnaires (Qs) form the basis to investigate principles of sustainable
fashion. Thus, findings not only rely on subjective interpretations of the term, but also
investigate how “sustainability”is communicated with the boundaries of the cases
selected (e.g. Eisenhardt, 1989).
A database compiled through keyword searches on social media and fashion events
provided the basis for recruiting micro-organisations. Judgement and convenience
sampling led to four micro-organisations fulfiling three criteria: UK based, local
production, and self-proclaimed sustainable fashion manufacturers. Consumers were
accessed through these micro-organisations. Sustainable fashion experts were carefully
selected following the same sampling approach. Interviewees recruited had different
experiences and knowledge of “sustainable fashion”: micro-organisation members
(owner-managers, employees) shared their experience from the perspective of
sustainable fashion creators. Industry experts including a marketing director of a
leading trend-setting agency, provide a broader overview of the term in association
with fashion movements and industry trends. Consumers were seen to contribute to the
definition from an everyday perspective. SE and TF analysis illustrate how
sustainability is communicated by the selected four micro-organisations. Data in the
micro-organisations were collected over a three month period in 2013-2014, which
allowed us to gain an in-depth understanding of these organisations and access to their
consumer base. Table I provides a data summary.
403
What is
sustainable
fashion?

The datasets were carefully analysed utilising Easterby-Smith et al.’s (2008) seven-step
process of: familiarisation, reflection, conceptualisation, cataloguing concepts, re-coding,
linking, and re-evaluation. Multiple researchers dealt with the data, which were coded and
re-coded as many as five times. In order to guarantee continuity, coherence, and clarity
the researchers first analysed the data independently, focussing on phrases and words
most commonly mentioned by interviewees and across the semiotic datasets and the TFs,
and explored within their natural boundaries. The themes, patterns, and categories that
emerged naturally from the data were reviewed and discussed collectively. We developed
20 broader themes, each of which had various sub-categories. Throughout the coding
processes these merged into two dominant patterns with several associated clusters. The
research results were presented to the research participants for validation.
Limitations of this research include, but are not limited to: first, the sample size,
which focusses on a specific niche market within the segment that may be more
familiar with the term sustainable fashion than the general public. This, however,
provides the opportunity to understand what the individual target groups understand
as sustainable fashion and thus, allows for key criteria to emerge. Second, the sample
size is not a “true”representation of the population, but rather was selected
strategically. Although these limitations cannot be neglected, we feel that the findings
bring forward an engaging discussion, which can be followed up with further research.
4. Findings and discussion
4.1 Background information
4.1.1 A non-mainstream phenomenon. In the qualitative questionnaire, consumers
were asked the question “how do you define sustainable fashion?”and predominantly
used the term sustainable as part of their definition: “sustainably sourced clothing, fair
trade”;“sourced from sustainable resources and manufactured in a similar fashion”;or
“produced from sustainable materials/materials which are made from sustainable
resources”. This indicates that participants define sustainable fashion in terms of
sourcing and production processes, whilst seemingly ignoring social aspects, such as
fair wages and working conditions. Consumers state that due to using more
environmentally friendly materials sustainable fashion comes at a considerably higher
price than mainstream fast fashion (Is; Qs). The price premium of these garments is
seen as a hindrance to engaging in sustainable consumption as consumers, even if
willing to purchase sustainable garments, may not be able to follow through
(e.g. McNeill and Moore, 2015). Although this finding is not new, an interesting
Case 1
non-customer
facing
Case 2
non-customer
facing
Case 3
customer
facing
Case 4
customer
facing Experts
Consumers
(follow up
interviews from
questionnaire)
No. of interviews (Is) 5 6 7 5 7 6
Interview duration 13:33-57:22 min 10-60 min 7:51-45:35 min 10:52-34:10 min 25-52 min 23-25 min
Twitterfeed (TF) ||| | n/a
Semiotics (SE) Website; social media; blog; newsletter; e-mail; photographs;
garment tags
n/a
Questionnaires (Qs) (no access to consumers
granted)
300 questionnaires n/a
Table I.
Data summary
404
JFMM
20,4

observation is that the participants who mentioned price had not previously purchased
“sustainable fashion”nor actively searched for it. Thus, the perceived price premium is
an assumption based on their reality, rather than an actual experience.
Sustainable fashion was described as “abitoutthere”(Is), different from mainstream
collections, and produced by designers, who model their “it pieces”on the catwalk (Is).
Sustainable fashion is perceived as a high-end phenomenon linked to aspects of
exclusivity and luxury, which may not be affordable for the everyday consumer.
Similarly, these garments are not necessarily seen to be to everyone’s taste (Is), which
might be why they are described as non-mainstream (Is) and “different from the high
street”(Qs). Thus, within the consumers’socially constructed reality sustainable fashion
is not perceived as a high street alternative, but rather a non-mainstream phenomenon
that can be observed in the fashion world.
Contrarily, the micro-organisations’owner-managers insist: “sustainable fashion can
be affordable, fashion forward, versatile and […] interesting”(Is). In their reality,
sustainable fashion is a high street alternative. However, the “affordability”of
sustainable garments is questionable, with prices ranging from £10 for one pair of socks
to £250 for an upcycled dress and up to £500 for a vintage garment. Whilst some items
may be comparable in price, the majority of garments sold by these micro-organisations
come at a price premium justified by aspects, such as the use of environmentally friendly
and/or organic materials, and their one-off, hand-made design (Is; SE; TF).
Consumers and micro-organisations both acknowledge that environmentally
friendly materials are determining factors for charging higher prices for sustainable
fashion. A challenge is to persuasively communicate the benefit of sustainable fashion
to consumers to increase buy-in within the mainstream fashion landscape. Although
the two realities described show similarities, consumers are not aware that sustainable
fashion can be more affordable than they think. Experts agree, insisting that although
companies such as Burberry, Stella McCartney, and H&M raise the sustainable fashion
profile, this does not necessarily bridge the gap towards a mainstream feel –an aspect
we return to later. Experts state that the understanding of sustainable fashion has no
impact on their actual business, which could suggest a lack in communicating
sustainability values effectively to consumers. Although shoppers are now more
familiar with the term sustainable fashion, they still see it as a high-end phenomenon
that has no applicability in high street retailers (Is). Experts further stated that
sustainable fashion promoted through high street retailers could be misleading as these
brands still produce new lines with an average turnover of 60 days, thereby going
against the “sustainable fashion principles”(Is). This explains consumers referring to
sustainable fashion as “an oxymoron”(Qs) or a “contradictory term”(Qs), as the fashion
industry is based on fast stock turnovers and fashion consumption, which contradicts
aspects of slow fashion (e.g. Joy et al., 2012).
Experts explained that although they ideally want to produce in a sustainable
manner, this is not always possible as “some of the organic stuff is just too expensive”
(Is). Designers insist that they “promise to make environmentally friendly choices,
where possible”(SE), “all the footwear is made in China […] [as producing in the UK]
would have made a completely unsustainable business [financially]”(Is). It could be
argued that this contradicts aspects of sustainability, as overseas production fosters a
larger carbon footprint than producing locally (Clark, 2008). Yet, in its advertising this
micro-organisation stresses that it is a UK brand, due to being UK based and designing
the products in the country (Is; SE). Although designers understand that overseas
405
What is
sustainable
fashion?

production may be a less sustainable choice, trade-offs are accepted to overcome
financial challenges. Such trade-offs must not lead to “cutting corners”, and
maintaining fair payments and good working conditions is essential. Experts point out
that care should be taken if referring to a brand as being “British”when production
processes are overseas, as this could lead to consumers’distrust of “green”or
“sustainable”products, as they imply greenwashing due to being deceptive and
misleading (e.g. Du, 2015).
Commonalities between the different viewpoints identified are price premium and the
use of environmentally friendly alternatives. Barriers to sustainable fashion from the
perspective of experts and micro-organisations are financial capabilities and being able
to produce “affordable”garments. Thus far, a key implication is that sustainable fashion
manufacturers need to better communicate their offerings and clearly highlight what
makes their collections “sustainable”in order to avoid allegations of greenwashing.
4.1.2 Knowledge and awareness. Our analysis found that large organisations,
especially high street retailers, play a key role in disseminating the core message of
sustainability. An owner-manager states: “If I’m 100% ethical and I have 5,000
customers and [large retailer] is like 0.05% ethical and has 5 million customers they’re
actually reaching more, doing more good and making better change, even though what
they do in entirety isn’t great. Big companies need to drive change”(Is). Consumers
concur, explaining that media outlets such as TV and magazines play a role in raising
awareness of issues surrounding sustainable fashion (Is). Newspapers report on
sustainable fashion collections and events (Siegle, 2014), for example the “Green Carpet
Challenge”, which led “sustainable style into the spotlight […] highlighting the issues
of sustainability within the fashion industry”(Eco Age, 2013). However, the experts’
opinions remain twofold: those in favour say: “I think the Green Carpet Challenge is a
really good idea”(Is), whilst sceptics insist: “I think it’s trickling through very
gradually. ‘The carpet’isn’t immediately identifiable for everyday people who may
read ‘heat magazine’, they can’t go and buy these clothes, it’s not immediately
accessible. With media and celebrity it can really influence people, however, it has to be
done in the right way and it has to be accessible, because seeing celebs[sic] makes it
aspirational […] But it makes it difficult to go down to the shop and find something like
that”(Is). Although exploring the full magnitude of media influence on sustainable
fashion and consumer behaviour exceeds the scope of this paper, it suggests a fruitful
direction for further research. However, it is apparent from our research that
communication emerges as a key issue. The realities among experts differ in that they
acknowledge communication is key, yet its execution strategy needs to be carefully
considered to meet consumer expectations. If sustainable fashion is seen as an
alternative to fast fashion, it needs to be communicated as such, rather than creating a
celebrity hype in magazines, which implies these garments are unaffordable.
Consumers’awareness and knowledge of sustainable fashion has increased.
A concern mentioned, however, was that “at some point when you know enough
and even still it doesn’t always mean that you can act on it. But when you know enough
about sourcing patterns or labour cost or how employees are treated […] pro
union, anti-union […] then you can make the choice, and it’s difficult sometimes.
It’s not always something you can do, which is an uncomfortable position to be
in”(Is). Consumers state that in addition to finances, other factors may hinder
the purchase of sustainable fashion, such as style, trend, and availability
(e.g. McNeill and Moore, 2015). Although social sustainability became centre stage after
406
JFMM
20,4

Rana Plaza, concern for how people across the supply chain are treated does not
necessarily result in changed action.
Slow fashion seems to be interpreted on a surface level in that participants were
familiar with the term, but their actions limited to what they feel fits with their
everyday consumption patterns. The reality is predominantly constructed through
media interaction that highlights social and environmental issues as key concerns.
However, the philosophical underpinning of the slow fashion movement that seeks
to break the boundaries of the fast fashion paradigm does not seem to be of concern.
In order to address this aspect, the underpinnings of sustainable fashion
are investigated.
4.2 Attributes of sustainable fashion
4.2.1 Sourcing and production process. Sustainable fashion is predominantly associated
with environmental sustainability, such as the use of renewable and eco-friendly raw
materials, the reduction of the carbon footprint, durability, and longevity (Is; Qs), which
are also featured in extant research (e.g. Joergens, 2006; Shen et al., 2013). Social aspects
were also mentioned, with issues concerning fair wages, safety measures, and labour
rights forming the top three concerns, which aligns with past research (Pookulangara
and Shephard, 2013; McNeill and Moore, 2015). An explanation for social sustainability
taking a backseat could be this research’s setting: the UK and EU have strict labour laws
to which every organisation needs to adhere. However, this aspect may change in the
future with research “exposing”UK garment factories as unethical, due to having
sweatshop-like conditions and failure to pay national minimum wage (Hoskins, 2015).
Environmental issues also play a more prominent role within consumers’everyday
lives –a reality they not only experience, but also have to deal with. A consumer
summarises sustainable fashion as “a combination of things. You have to have a
consciousness about the planet, about what’s happening environmentally, in the factories
around the world where clothes are produced, about the working conditions of the people
who make them […]It’s a lot about awareness and consciousness […]There’sanother
very real aspect of finances […] it always feels like it costs a lot more money”(Is). Only
one participant positively elaborated on the price aspect, explaining: “you know you are
getting quality”(Is), when purchasing sustainable fashion. Thus, slow fashion is
associated with quality rather than quantity, again implying a price premium (Fletcher,
2010). Yet, the “locally made”aspect raised concerns that garments produced in the UK
were perceived to neither achieve the same quality as high street fashion nor be as
fashionable (Is). Although the UK has historically been a fashion hub and led the
industrial revolution, consumers distrust local production.
Yet, the case companies predominantly focus on the local aspect within their
promotional material emphasising that they source materials within the EU and
manufacture in the UK, which endeavours to reduce the carbon footprint for production
to a minimum –this is in comparison to other organisations, which source their
materials from outside the EU. The owner-managers interpret sustainable fashion as
“fashion with a conscience”(Is), which links to good working conditions and a positive
organisational atmosphere. They further insist that any organisation producing
sustainable fashion needs to have a personal relationship with their stakeholders. One
participant explains that she gains feedback daily from her employees, which helps her
to improve the production processes along the supply chain and keeps her workers
407
What is
sustainable
fashion?

happy (Is). Other stakeholders, such as consumers and suppliers also have the
opportunity to engage with these micro-organisations through creating the feel of
“shared ownership”(Is) whereby actions are collaboratively discussed and –if
financially viable –implemented by the owner-manager. This active engagement
fosters stakeholder empowerment and creates trusted relationships that enhance the
slow fashion cause, by promoting sustainable values and ethical conduct (e.g. Fletcher,
2010; Ertekin and Atik, 2014). Choosing to involve stakeholders in the business is an
active choice made by the owner-managers, thus, their description of sustainable
fashion heavily features the product and production processes, and the supply chain,
rather than the design (e.g. versatility) and sustainable production techniques
(e.g. upcycling, recycling). A contradiction that emerged, however, was that although
stakeholders are an integral part of the owner-managers’definition, our data show that
the involvement of employees, suppliers, and other stakeholders is selective and not
explicitly mentioned within any of their communications (SE).
The owner-managers seem to have a personal affiliation with sustainable fashion.
One owner-manager recalls that she had her first experience with sustainable fashion
when she was 16, working for a London-based organisation. The owner-manager
claims that this London-based company pioneered slow fashion, as “nearly all their
products [were produced] in London or Spain”(Is). For her sustainable fashion goes
beyond the local aspect to further incorporate “looking at things in a different way
[…] thinking about things differently and [re]using things”(Is), which is reflected in
her micro-company’s fashion collections: the raw materials are sourced locally,
reclaimed, and upcycled (Is; SE; TF). She highlights that she imposes limitations on
her company, by sourcing materials within a 20-mile radius of the production site
(SE). This aspect is vital for this micro-organisation emphasising that they are “big on
heritage –many of our products are 100% made in [company’s region], right down to
the trimmings”(SE). The owner-manager believes that the 20-mile radius is inclusive
enough to have various suppliers, reduces carbon emission, and fosters the local
aspect. This, however, contradicts observations made during the research: first, the
website highlights that the company is “forward thinking”(SE) and utilises new
techniques to create unique collections (ES). The company produces these items on
machines that have been reclaimed. Whilst this fits within the overarching idea of
sustainability –making use of “waste”resources –these machines do not incorporate
the newest technology and have high-energy usage (SE; TF). It is questionable
whether using out-dated machinery that is not energy and eco-efficient can
necessarily be classified as “forward thinking”(SE). Second, although the material is
reclaimed, recycled, upcycled, and sourced within a 20-mile radius, the owner drives a
“big old banger car, which probably isn’t economic[al]”(Is), uses a lot of petrol and
emits more pollutants than a new car. Two different realities are emerging, first the
“reality”that sees its origins in a philosophical viewpoint where garments are locally
produced with forward thinking, and second, the “reality”in which the owner-
manager is constrained by their own limitations and financial capabilities.
Consumers and micro-organisations alike identify sustainable fashion as being
locally produced, which links to aspects of good working conditions, fair wages, and a
reduced carbon footprint. Although these micro-organisations heavily feature the local
aspect within their promotion, as it is seen as a vital selling point for sustainable
garments, those consumers who doubt the quality standards of local production, do not
necessarily perceive this as beneficial.
408
JFMM
20,4

4.2.2 Transparency and traceability. Transparency emerged as a further theme
throughout the data analysis. Transparency looks at the origins of raw materials, dyes
and chemicals used in the manufacturing process, and the employees and their working
conditions (Is; SE; TF). Participants say that they “strive to achieve a green balance
between economics and environmental consciousness, [they] manufacture all [their]
products in a 100% sweatshop free environment, in the UK”(SE). The owner-managers
believe that being transparent is vital. One owner-manager insists that her consumers
should come visit her manufacturing site to see their process for themselves (Is). She
comments “they should come, see it. I don’t have anything to hide. It’s who we are and
what we are. We only had one chap coming in before unannounced […]it’s been great,
showed him around and got talking. Got a really nice review after, too”(Is). The owner-
manager prides herself in sourcing environmentally friendly fabrics within the EU for
her products, which are either made out of polyester (outside) and cotton (inside) or
leather (outside) and cotton (inside). All raw materials have been tested for harmful
substances and are classified as child safe (Is). Although the owner-manager can trace
her raw materials back to the original source, it is noteworthy that the product
description on the website does not explicitly state what raw materials were used in the
production process. The owner-manager repeatedly states that the products are made
from real leather (Is), yet this is omitted from the company’s communications (SE).
Questions could be raised whether these materials are in line with the “green balance”
advocated on the website, as leather is an animal fibre and polyester a strong pollutant
material (Coen, 2011). This paper does not seek to judge materials used in the
manufacturing process, but rather highlights that although materials may be sourced
consciously, they may not always be sustainable. Cotton, for example, is a monoculture
that drains water resources from ground and surface water and even when produced
organically, the pesticides may damage the environment (Parker, 1999; Leech, 2013).
Various participants reuse and upcycle pre-loved garments for their fashion
collections, which keeps textile fabric out of landfill. These micro-organisations claim
they are able to trace their raw materials to their original source, which may be
misleading. Tracing the origin of an upcycled jumper can be impossible, as tags are
removed. Thus, there is no guarantee that these were originally made in good working
conditions and not in a factory such as Rana Plaza. Greater care needs to be taken in
order to avoid aspects of greenwashing in this kind of production. A participant
emphasises that producing sustainably implies a long-term perspective –how
“sustainable”is defined, however, depends on the way the micro-organisation produces
their clothes and thus refer to either certified textiles or reusing pre-loved garments. An
aspect that the majority of participants agree on is that “the product needs to be
sustainable from its core”(Is) which is seen as a philosophical underpinning of the
production process rather than an “add on”strategy.
Experts suggest that consumers make “a lot more considered choices […] one
example is the luxury industry, which saw a rise over the recession, [which] showed
that people […] were making more investment purchases and actually also stems into
what you might call sustainable fashion or sustainable practices”(Is). Moreover,
interviewees suggest that sustainable fashion is about profitability, transparency,
environmental principles, and viability. “A brand has to be completely open […] with
Twitter and everything […] so you cannot hide all this information, it’s out there […]
You literally have to look at the process from A to B and be sustainable from there off
[…] this relates not just to the fabrics that are used, but how the product goes from
409
What is
sustainable
fashion?

manufacturing to the store and how that affects the [carbon] footprint”(Is). This further
emphasises the need to communicate sustainable aspects of slow fashion garments and
clearly indicate how and why they are classified as sustainable. The various realities
presented thus far in the paper see similarities in their notions of the use of raw
materials and transparency, yet the gap between what manufacturers and consumers
believe sustainable fashion to be differs, making it challenging for companies to create
engagement. Different production techniques, such as upcycling further extend the
meaning of sustainable fashion as being “based on sustainable design principles.
So designing for end-of-life management […] using waste as a source material and
diverting it from landfill […] If it wasn’t upcycled it would be thrown into landfill”(Is).
Particularly among experts and the owner-managers, transparency and traceability
were seen as key aspects to distinguish sustainable fashion production. Within this
understanding it is more important to focus on long-term relationships and being able
to show transparency along the supply chain rather than establishing the origins of
raw materials, such as pre-loved garments.
Sustainable fashion –what have we learned?. The paper set out to answer two
research questions: first, to investigate the underlying principles of sustainable fashion;
and second, how the concept of sustainable fashion relates to aspects of social
constructionism. Data suggest that although similarities exist between the various
realities of sustainable fashion, different aspects are not only emphasised, but also
understood differently (e.g. Shotter, 2002).
Underlying principles that emerged include local sourcing and production,
transparency across the supply chain, traceability of work processes and (ideally)
raw materials, environmentally friendly raw materials, and social aspects, such as safe
working conditions and fair wages. An observation that was made is that the
individual principles gain different levels of priority depending on the group discussing
these aspects. Whilst local production and sourcing is a distinguishing factor for micro-
organisations and experts, it is of less prominence for consumers, who see the use of
environmental friendly raw materials as a priority.
Due to sustainable fashion being interpreted from different “realities”experts and
micro-organisations may face challenges and trade-offs when classifying themselves as
“sustainable fashion”producers: first, the choice of raw material can lead to an ethical
dilemma. Utilising leather is negatively perceived by animal rights pressure groups,
which could be a reason why one of the micro-organisations omitted this information.
Whether excluding information about raw materials (intentionally or unintentionally)
is ethical goes beyond the scope of this paper, but could provide the basis for future
research. Although the majority of case companies use reclaimed material, which
extends their initial life-cycle, the origin of the recycled garment may be unknown, thus
claiming that the fabric was locally sourced is misleading, as the original product may
have been manufactured abroad.
Second, these self-imposed limitations may have an impact on the product price:
limiting resources will delay availability of the finished products, which can result in a
market deficit, due to an unaligned supply and demand curve. In order to balance this
deficit, the price-point of these goods is set at a higher level, thereby restricting purchase
to customers who can/are willing to pay the premium. The question that emerges is
whether the increased price is justified. This may be linked to consumers describing
sustainable fashion as an “oxymoron”(Qs). Looking at the overall fashion industry,
organisations are producing fashion lines to satisfy consumer needs to buy new products
410
JFMM
20,4

(e.g. Jung and Jin, 2014). Slow fashion is based on principles of sustainability and ethical
conduct that seeks to challenge the fast fashion cycle. Yet, sustainable fashion collections
are still produced to satisfy consumer needs and are based on the assumption that
garments will be consumed. A vicious circle begins: Kate Fletcher, author of the book
Sustainable Fashion & Textiles,writesthat“we buy many more clothes than we need and
the clothes we buy, ‘exploit workers, fuel resource use, increase environmental impact
and generate waste’” (O’Connell, 2013). This could lead to the conclusion that sustainable
fashion cannot exist, because as soon as fashion garments are produced, consumers are
encouraged to buy these products. Developing this thought further, this could imply that
the demand for these particular garments may increase over time, which leads to
producing larger batch sizes, which over time may result in moving from a slow fashion
to a fast fashion approach. Thus, opponents may argue that sustainable fashion cannot
exist, as the economy is based on consumerism.
Third, can an industry that is based on consumerism ever produce a “sustainable
product”? Utilising environmentally friendly materials, decreasing the use of pesticides,
and promoting recycling and upcycling collections may be a start to encourage more
mindful behaviour. However, the fact that clothes are still being sold and produced seems
to contradict what sustainability stands for: preserving the environment. Similarly, it is
important to ask whether sustainable fashion can be the future. If sustainable fashion
was a lucrative business, why would major players in the fashion industry hesitate to
change their business practices? The experts highlighted that sustainable fashion needs
to be supported throughout the industry (Is). Small organisations can easily adapt to
changes in the market, however it is multinationals that have a larger share in the
industry, and due to their structure cannot adapt to changes quickly. Although the
argument that not all multinationals can spontaneously change their business practices
holds true, collaborations could overcome this challenge.
In summary, sustainable fashion can be interpreted from various different realities
and incorporate several aspects. Data indicate that there is no one way of defining what
sustainable fashion entails. Rather than providing a clear-cut answer more questions
are raised that need answering. The only commonality to emerge is that changing
current practices in the fashion industry is important and attempts should be made to
reduce the current fashion cycle by being more mindful and conscious of raw materials.
Moving forward. Our analysis proposes that understanding the term sustainable
fashion is vital, as it:
•provides a common understanding upon which various groups (organisations,
stakeholders) can act;
•prevents greenwashing; and
•allows organisations to align their strategies and objectives with key criteria
associated with the term.
Although sustainable fashion can be seen as an oxymoron (Qs), this research suggests
that a majority of participants strongly believe that this type of fashion not only exists,
but also is currently produced. At the same time the participant groups stress different
aspects of what makes sustainable fashion, which implies that the term itself is difficult
to define, and even harder to act upon. Taking these challenges into account it becomes
apparent that the term is subjective, in that it can mean different things to different
people (Shotter, 2002).
411
What is
sustainable
fashion?

In order to overcome the challenge of defining sustainable fashion, this paper
proposes a matrix that provides companies with the flexibility to highlight how they
interpret sustainable fashion, what their priorities are, and how they move forward in
the future. Table II provides an example of such a matrix. The individual components
of this matrix are based on principles underpinning sustainable fashion and link to the
different realities highlighted in this paper.
The categories on the left hand side emerged from our analysis, with the ticks
indicating which aspects were important to the participants or emerged from the
literature. The matrix is designed to cater for various realities in that it allows each
micro-organisation to set their own targets, by indicating which elements of sustainable
fashion are “low”,“medium”,or“high”priority. The last column, third party evidence,
can include, but is not limited to eco-labels, partnerships with third parties, and
industry specific awards or prizes the organisation has won or was nominated for.
Stated alternatively, an outsider certifies that the organisation’s claims made about
specific aspects have been independently evaluated and found to hold true.
5. Conclusion and implications
This paper contributes to knowledge by exploring principles underpinning sustainable
fashion from a social constructionist viewpoint. The findings indicate that sustainable
fashion is subjective in nature and we suggest a matrix that allows companies to
indicate their sustainable fashion priorities. This has various implications for
practitioners, as in order to sell fashion items that are classified as “sustainable”they
need to communicate this clearly to their stakeholders. Highlighting their unique ways
Basic
Low
priority
Medium
priority
High
priority
Organisational
evidence
Third
party
evidence
Forward thinking
Innovation
Ethical/sustainable design |
Ethically sourced
Meaningful, interesting
Local production
Production techniques (recycling,
upcycling, traditional techniques)
Versatile
Promoting fair trade, fair wages |
Transparency/traceability
Checks for harmful substances |
Long-term focus
Environmental standards |
Human rights/working conditions |
Community support/integration
Financially viable
Environmentally friendly materials
Renewable sources
Limited transportation
Fashion with conscience
Heritage
Table II.
Sustainable
fashion matrix
412
JFMM
20,4

of creating fashion could lead to a competitive advantage that strengthens their image.
Understanding the various viewpoints is vital for marketers, who can utilise the matrix
and clearly communicate what sustainable fashion means to individual companies,
which helps to prevent greenwashing.
A limitation of this research is the sample size in a specific niche market: the
slow fashion industry. Thus, it is suggested that future research investigates
whether the individual categories highlighted within the matrix hold true for the wider
fashion industry.
References
Ahluwalia, P. and Miller, T. (2014), “Greenwashing social identity”,Social Identities, Vol. 20 No. 1,
pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1080/13504630.2013.878983.
Bañon, G.A.J., Guillén Parra, M., Hoffman, W.M. and Mcnulty, R.E. (2011), “Rethinking the
concept of sustainability”,Business and Society Review, Vol. 116 No. 2, pp. 171-191,
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8594.2011.00381.x.
Battaglia, M., Testa, F., Bianchi, L., Iraldo, F. and Frey, M. (2014), “Corporate social responsibility
and competitiveness within SMEs of the fashion industry: evidence from Italy and France”,
Sustainability, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 872-893, doi: 10.3390/su6020872.
Baumgartner, R.J. (2009), “Organizational culture and leadership: preconditions for the
development of a sustainable corporation”,Sustainable Development, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 102-113, doi: 10.1002/sd.405.
Bourland, J. (2011), “What is slow fashion?”, Slow Fashioned, available at: www.slowfashioned.
com/archives/4909 (accessed 26 January 2014).
Cao, H., Chang, R., Kallal, J., Manalo, G., McCord, J., Shaw, J. and Starner, H. (2014),
“Adaptable apparel: a sustainable design solution for excess apparel consumption
problem”,Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 52-69,
doi: 10.1108/JFMM-08-2012-0046.
Carey, L. and Cervellon, M.-C. (2014), “Ethical fashion dimensions: pictorial and auditory
depictions through three cultural perspectives”,Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 483-506, doi: 10.1108/JFMM-11-2012-0067.
Chen, Y.-S. and Chang, C.-H. (2013), “Greenwash and green trust: the mediation effects of green
consumer confusion and green perceived risk”,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 114 No. 3,
pp. 489-500, doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1360-0.
Clark, H. (2008), “Slow fashion: an oxymoron or a promise for the future…?”,Fashion Theory: The
Journal of Dress, Body & Culture, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 427-446, doi: 10.2752/
175174108X346922.
Coen, A. (2011), “Is synthetic clothing causing ‘microplastic’pollution in our oceans?”,Ecouterre,
available at: www.ecouterre.com/is-synthetic-clothing-causing-microplastic-pollution-in-
oceans-worldwide/ (accessed 14 October 2013).
Delmas, M.A. and Burbano, V.C. (2011), “The drivers of greenwashing”,California Management
Review, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 64-87.
Dryzek, J.S. (2005), The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourse, 2nd ed., Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
Du, X. (2015), “How the market values greenwashing? Evidence from China”,Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 128 No. 3, pp. 547-574, doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2122-y.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Jackson, P. (2008), Management Research, 3rd ed., SAGE
Publications, London.
413
What is
sustainable
fashion?

Eco Age (2013), “Green carpet challenge”, Eco Age, available at: www.eco-age.com/green-carpet-
challenge/ (accessed 22 September 2013).
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”,The Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.
Ertekin, Z.O. and Atik, D. (2014), “Sustainable markets: motivating factors, barriers, and remedies
for mobilization of slow fashion”,Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 53-69,
doi: 10.1177/0276146714535932.
Fletcher, K. (2010), “Slow fashion: an invitation for systems change”,Fashion Practice: The
Journal of Design, Creative Process and the Fashion, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 259-266, doi: 10.2752/
175693810X12774625387594.
Gonzalez, N. (2015), “Why is slow fashion so slow to catch on?”, TriplePundit, 5 January, available
at: www.triplepundit.com/special/slow-fashion-slow-catch/ (accessed 2 April 2015).
Goworek, H., Hiller, Al., Fischer, T., Cooper, T. and Woodward, S. (2013), “Consumers’attitudes towards
sustainable fashion: clothing usage and disposal”, in Gardetti, M.A. and Torres, A.L. (Eds),
Sustainability in Fashion and Textiles, Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield.
Henninger, C.E. (2015), “Traceability the new eco-label in the slow-fashion industry? –Consumer
perceptions and micro-organisations responses”,Sustainability, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 6011-6032,
doi: 10.3390/su7056011.
Hoskins, T. (2015), “Made in Britain: UK textile workers earning £3 per hour”,The Guardian,
27 February, available at: www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/sustainable-fashion-
blog/2015/feb/27/made-in-britain-uk-textile-workers-earning-3-per-hour (accessed 2 April 2015).
Joergens, C. (2006), “Ethical fashion: myth or future trend?”,Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 360-371, doi: 10.1108/13612020610679321.
Johnston, A. (2012), “The first steps towards considerate design incorporating Cradle to
Cradle principles”, London College of Fashion, London, available at: http://
innovatingsustainablefashion.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/cradle-to-cradle_copenhagen_
final_small.pdf (accessed 5 July 2013).
Joy, A., Sherry, J.F., Venkatesh, A., Wand, J. and Chan, R. (2012), “Fast fashion, sustainability, and
the ethical appeal of luxury brands”,Fashion Theory, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 273-296,
doi: 10.2752/175174112X13340749707123.
Jung, S. and Jin, B. (2014), “A theoretical investigation of slow fashion: sustainable future of the
apparel industry”,International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 510-519,
doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12127.
Leech, A. (2013), “Have you cottoned on yet? The organic cotton initiative”, Cottonedon, available
at: www.cottonedon.org/Portals/1/Briefing.pdf (accessed 20 January 2014).
McNeill, L. and Moore, R. (2015), “Sustainable fashion consumption and the fast fashion
conundrum: fashionable consumers and attitudes to sustainability in clothing choice”,
International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 212-222, doi: 10.1111/
ijcs.12169.
Mittelstaedt, J.D., Schultz, C.J. II, Kilbourne, W.E. and Peterson, M. (2014), “Sustainability as
megatrend: two schools of macromarketing thought”,Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 34
No. 3, pp. 253-264, doi: 10.1177/0276146713520551.
Mora, E., Rocamora, A. and Volonté, P. (2014), “On the issue of sustainability in fashion studies”,
International Journal of Fashion Studies, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 139-147, available at: http://dx.doi.
org/10.1386/infs.1.2.139_1
Naderi, I. and Strutton, D. (2015), “I support sustainability but only when doing so reflects
fabulously on me: can green narcissists be cultivated?”,Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 35
No. 1, pp. 70-83, doi: 10.1177/0276146713516796.
414
JFMM
20,4

Norell, N., Nevelson, L., Sharaff, I., Nikolais, A. and Courreges, A. (1967), “Is fashion an art?”,
The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, pp. 129-140.
O’Connell, S. (2013), “Eco chic: can fashion be sustainable?”, available at: www.
daisygreenmagazine.co.uk/blogs/fashion-forward/eco-chic-can-fashion-be-sustainable/
(accessed 21 September 2013).
Parker, E. (1999), “Agriculture problems –cotton: the impact of cotton on freshwater resources
and ecosystems”, WWF, available at: http://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/
impact_long.pdf (accessed 20 January 2014).
Partridge, D.J. (2011), “Activist capitalism and supply chain citizenship: producing ethical
regimes and ready-to-wear clothes”,Current Anthropology, Vol. 52 No. S3, pp. 97-111,
doi: 10.1086/657256.
Prothero, A. and Fitchett, J.A. (2000), “Greening capitalism: opportunities for a green commodity”,
Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 46-55, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.
1177/0276146700201005
Pookulangara, S. and Shephard, A. (2013), “Slow fashion movement: understanding consumer
perceptions –an exploratory study”,Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 20
No. 2, pp. 200-206, doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.
Poon, J. and Fatt, T. (2001), “Encouraging fashion entrepreneurship in Singapore”,Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 72-83, doi: 10.1108/
13555850110764720.
Rahman, I., Park, J. and Chi, C. (2015), “Consequences of ‘greenwashing’”,International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1054-1081, available at: http://dx.
doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2014-0202
Shen, G., Richards, J. and Liu, F. (2013), “Consumers’awareness of sustainable fashion”,
Marketing Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 9, pp. 134-147.
Shotter, J. (2002), Conversational Realities: Constructing Life Through Language,Sage
Publications, London.
Siegle, L. (2014), “Introducing the 2014 observer ethical awards”,The Guardian,availableat:
www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/19/observer-ethical-awards-how-to-nominate
(accessed 29 January 2014).
The True Cost (2015), Video recording, Untold Creative, Sherman Oakes, CA (Directed by Andrew
Morgan).
Walker, S. (2006), Sustainable by Design: Explorations in Theory and Practice, Earthscan, London.
Watson, M.Z. and Yan, R.-N. (2013), “An exploratory study of the decision processes of fast
versus slow fashion consumers”,Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 17
No. 2, pp. 141-159, doi: 10.1108/JFMM-02-2011-0045.
WCED (1987), Our Common Future (The Brundtland Report), World Commission on
Environment and Development, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Westervelt, A. (2015), “Two years after Rana Plaza, have conditions improved in Bangladesh’s
factories?”,The Guardian, 24 April, available at: www.theguardian.com/sustainable-
business/2015/apr/24/bangladesh-factories-building-collapse-garment-dhaka-rana-plaza-
brands-hm-gap-workers-construction (accessed 15 May 2015).
About the authors
Dr Claudia E. Henninger is an early Career Researcher at School of Materials, University of
Manchester, where she teaches aspects of fashion marketing and management. Her research
focusses on sustainability in the fashion industry, corporate identity, micro-organisations, and
value co-creation. Claudia has been involved in a variety of projects in the area of sustainability
415
What is
sustainable
fashion?

marketing and the creative and cultural industries. Her work has been presented at both national
and international conferences and she has published in the area of marketing and management.
Dr Claudia E. Henninger is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: Claudia.
Henninger@manchester.ac.uk
Dr Panayiota J. Alevizou is a Lecturer in Marketing at Management School, University of
Sheffield, where she teaches contemporary marketing management and retail & services
marketing. Her research focusses on sustainability labelling, eco-labelling, and ethical marketing in
the context of FMCGs and apparel. Panayiota joined the school as a Lecturer after several years of
working as a Marketing Consultant. She has presented her work in various national and
international conferences and has published in journals such as Journal of Marketing Management,
Journal of Marketing Communications,andtheInternational Journal of Consumer Studies.
Dr Caroline J. Oates is a Senior Lecturer in Marketing at Management School, University of
Sheffield, where she teaches marketing communications and directs the Postgraduate Research
Programme. Her research focusses on ethical issues and challenges in marketing, particularly
sustainability and marketing to children. She has published widely in both these fields, in journals
such as Psychology & Marketing, Sociology,Journal of Marketing Management, Social Business, and
Young Consumers. She is the co-author/co-editor of two books on advertising to children.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
416
JFMM
20,4