Content uploaded by Annamma Joy
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Annamma Joy on Nov 03, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Camilo Peña
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Camilo Peña on Oct 24, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318237366
Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing Nature and
Traceability
Chapter · May 2017
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-51253-2_3
CITATIONS
29
READS
25,623
2 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
sensory profiling and the wine industry View project
luxury consumption View project
Annamma Joy
University of British Columbia - Okanagan
68 PUBLICATIONS2,663 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Camilo Peña
University of British Columbia - Okanagan
11 PUBLICATIONS78 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Camilo Peña on 24 October 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
3
Sustainability and the Fashion Industry:
Conceptualizing Nature and Traceability
Annamma Joy and Camilo Peña
3.1 Introduction
Afirst step in discussing sustainability in fashion is to recognize an
inherent truth: Fashion is a polluting and resource-intensive industry,
even as its future success depends on reducing its environmental and
social imprint across the entire life cycle of garment production. That
means reducing the impact associated with cultivating and producing
textile fibres, and establishing a foundation of good practices at all levels.
It also means moving beyond focusing on only a few fibre types—
typically cotton and polyester, or a blend thereof—and creating a
portfolio of alternate fibres with low-resource intensity and potentially
rich cultural traditions.
The manufacture of both cotton and polyester fibres is detrimental
to the environment, albeit in different ways. Cotton has the greatest
negative environmental impact (Butow 2014), given its ubiquity in
A. Joy (*)C. Peña
The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada
e-mail: annamma.joy@ubc.ca; camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
© The Author(s) 2017
C.E. Henninger et al. (eds.), Sustainability in Fashion,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-51253-2_3
31
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
apparel manufacture. According to the World Wildlife Fund (2016):
“Itcantakemorethan20,000litresofwatertoproduce1kgofcotton;
equivalent to a single T-shirt and pair of jeans”.Non-organiccotton
production relies on environmentally harmful pesticides; “2.4% of the
world’s crop land is planted with cotton and yet it accounts for 24%
and 11% of the global sales of insecticide and pesticides respectively”
according to World Wildlife Fund quoted above. But while polyester
production uses significantly less water and no pesticides, it requires
more than three times the energy of cotton production (Cherrett et al.
2005). Worse yet, given the lack of sustainability inherent in the
production of both fibres, worldwide demand for both is increasing
(Carmichael 2015).
Nylon and wool are detrimental to the environment as well; nylon is
derived from petroleum, and wool requires extensive land use, leading to
over-grazing and generating substantial wastewater during the multiple
washes used to clean wool fibres (Defra 2010). Most environmental
impacts, common to all the fibres listed above, occur during the produc-
tion and consumption stage (Chapman 2010).
3.2 The Case for Sustainability
Sustainability, as defined by the Brundtland World Commission on
Environment and Development (United Nations 1987) is development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising those of the
future. The consensus of the scientific community states that if devel-
opment continues with business as usual, earth’s key resources will be
depleted faster than any possible rate of replenishment (Martin and
Schouten 2011), with unsustainable growth setting in motion poten-
tially devastating economic, social, and environmental concerns. We
argue that the concept of producing unlimited goods—a worldview
with roots in the advent of industrial capitalism, with a concomitant
notion that availability of fossil fuel and other non-renewable resources
is limitless—is inherently problematic. Trawick and Hornborg (2015)
suggest that production methods in many developing nations take into
account that resources are limited, which allows for collaborative use of
32 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
such scarce resources as water. To achieve sustainability, industries in
developed nations must take the same approach, which necessitates
embracing decreased consumption. We believe that the time is past
due to revisit the notion of the limited good.
In the management literature, Gladwin et al. (1995) consider the
predominance of a technocentric paradigm in business markets, in
contrast to its ecocentric counterpart. Balancing both perspectives results
in what the authors term a sustaincentric worldview. We use their
framework to evaluate fast and slow fashion and define the primary
elements of a sustaincentric perspective within the fashion industry. In
technocentrism, humans have the right to exploit nature—they are in
essence superior to nature, as viewed through an anthropocentric hier-
archy with humans at the pinnacle. In this view, nature is instrumental
and monetarily quantifiable—a commodity for the asking, with an
implied assumption that economic growth and technological innovation
preclude considerations of future generations and resources. In the
technocentric worldview, as the authors argue, the economy is a closed
system isolated from nature, where exchange value circulates only
between industries and households. Human wants are unlimited; the
corresponding ideal of a good life dominates. Consequently, individuals
act to maximize their own utility, as predicated by the optimal economic
framework of laissez–faire capitalism. In the ethos of ethnocentrism,
more growth is not just good, but is actually the best of all possible
worlds.
Technocentrism is open to criticism, in that it ignores the interde-
pendence of human and natural capital. An emphasis on global effi-
ciency suppresses attention to an appropriate ecological scale and the fair
distribution of resources, property rights, and social constructs such as
fair labour practices. Reliance on the efficient operations of markets
ignores marginalized segments of society including women, children,
and future generations. Technocentrism promotes dualistic thinking in
placing the natural world and human nature in opposition, thus limiting
or even severing the connections between these two realms that are
central to sustainable thinking.
Because technocentrism is anthropocentric, it elevates men over women
(Warren 1994) given that women are, through their potential for creating
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 33
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
life and their perceived role as nurturers, stereotypically associated with
nature, as well as the reverse (i.e. the phrase “mother nature”). In the view
of many (e.g. Gladwin et al. 1995) technocentrism supports a growth
dependent on markets, and thereby perpetuates inequality, privileging a
wealthy minority at the expense of the larger community. To a large
extent, the decline in renewable resources, increased pollution, and
inequality are well-documented as the inevitable results of technocentrism
(Gladwin et al. 1995; Martin and Schouten 2011).
In response to technocentrism, the ecocentric worldview emerged
(Bailey and Wilson 2009). In this view, human capital and natural
capital are complementary: Humans dependent on ecological abundance
(Gladwin et al. 1995, p. 887). Thus, humans co-exist with nature rather
than rule it, and changes in human action have ripple effects on nature,
and the reverse. Holistic rather than dualistic thinking is paramount to
this paradigm, with ethical priority accorded to the whole rather than
the individual. The “good life”therefore calls for voluntary simplicity
and a reduction in the consumption of material goods, with inequality
ameliorated through redistribution. The task of preserving natural capi-
tal is paramount.
Ecocentrism by its nature downplays the intellectual capacity of
humans, in that it does not directly address poverty and human rights,
given its emphasis on ecology over economics and social factors.
Ecocentrism, the above authors note, falls short on offering practical
solutions in a world increasingly ravaged by human activity, and fails to
integrate cultural and natural goals. As a more effective alternative, the
authors argue in favour of sustaincentrism. In common with ecocentrism,
sustaincentrism embraces the interdependence of nature and humans, the
importance of satisfying non-material needs in non-material ways, and
reducing preoccupation with materialism. However, in sustaincentrism,
ecological and social externalities are internalized, with ecology, econom-
ics, and ethics inextricably intertwined. Sustaincentrism focuses on the
interrelatedness of events and actions, and advocates that all human values
depend on a healthy, ecological, economic, and social context, combining
ecocentrism with pragmatic economic and social considerations.
In this view, earth must be preserved through respectful stewardship
in current contexts. While humans are part of the biosphere, human
34 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
intellect is recognized. Ethics, according to the above authors “are
broadly homocentric, grounded in the good of both human and non-
human nature. Sustaincentric ethics actively embrace the full conceptua-
lization of political, civil, social, economic and cultural human rights”
(ibid., p. 891). The temporal frame covers both intra-generational and
inter-generational responsibilities: equity and foresight.
Extraction and use of natural resources must be limited due to the
vulnerability of nature to support such actions; at the very least, such
actions should be below the levels at which the deterioration of natural
systems can occur. Technologies can be developed, but must be used
ethically. Ecology and economy are not in opposition, but safeguards
must be in place such that exploitation will be minimized. Poverty is
eliminated through fair labour practices and expanding social services.
Growth without end, unfolding within a closed system, is deemed
untenable.
While sustainability concerns were not crucial to the fashion industry
in the past, trends are changing, as key players promote more ecologi-
cally forward-thinking fashion production processes and consumption
(Henninger et al. 2016). One movement in particular, formed by many
key stakeholders, is slow fashion.
3.3 Slow Versus Fast Fashion
Slow fashion, in common with slow food, stands in opposition to
industrialization and homogeneity, or “McDonaldization”(Ritzer
2011). In the ideology of slow fashion, artisanship and long-term utility
trump fast fashion’s catering to short-term gratification, with consumers
experiencing constant demand for new products (Barnes and Lea-
Greenwood 2006). An article of fast fashion is the essence of planned
obsolescence, designed to fray after a set number of wearings (often as
few as 10): Fast fashion’s raison d’etre is volume over quality. Producing
clothing quickly and cheaply inevitably devalues human labour and
ecologically responsible production materials and methods. To devotees
of fast fashion, the environmental and social costs embodied by such
clothing, as they are in fast food, are immaterial.
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 35
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
Clark (2008) views slow fashion as “sustainable fashion solutions, based
on the repositioning of strategies of design, production, consumption, use,
and reuse, which are emerging alongside the global fashion system, and are
posing a potential challenge to it. The slow approach offers more sustain-
able and ethical ways of being fashionable that have implications for
design, production, consumption, and use”(ibid., p. 428). Moreover,
an ideology of attentiveness and mindfulness of the various stakeholders
involved in fashion production (Fletcher 2008) encourages identifying
fashion’s underlying values and economic priorities (Fletcher 2010).
The slow fashion movement proposes to retake the values of quality
offering fewer but more durable items. Slow fashion companies offer two
fashion collections per year; in contrast, fast fashion businesses produce as
many as 20 (Henninger et al. 2016). Such rapid turnover encourages
impulse purchases and frequent visits to retail stores to check on an ever-
changing selection, as what was purchased only a few weeks earlier is now
passé. The “fast”in fast fashion refers not only to the speed of production
but also to the speed with which consumers desire continuous novelty.
While seemingly infinite varieties of products are on offer, economies of
scale and industrial production limit what can actually be produced. Thus,
cotton and polyester dominate, even as a sustainable fashion industry
requires greater fibre variety, such as organic cotton, hemp, bamboo,
and lyocell. Polyester is dependent on oil as its source; moving away
from petroleum may be essential in fostering sustainable production.
Fast fashion elicits contradictory consumer behaviours in the context
of sustainability. Consumers who diligently select food products based
on ethical, health, and environmental concerns may have no such
concerns for apparel products (Joy et al. 2012). Why consumers would
be more concerned with the provenance of what they eat versus what
they wear is a conundrum, a display of cognitive dissonance. While
media may downplay awareness of social and environmental issues in
apparel production (Morgan and Birtwistle 2009), it is nonetheless
consumers themselves who lack an interest in questioning and critiquing
apparel supply chains. When it comes to clothing purchases, consumers,
at a visceral level, appear to feel that the less they know about how their
new clothes were manufactured the better.
36 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
For change to occur, as Fletcher (2014, p. XVI) notes, “a more holistic
approach is essential—the cumulative values, discernments, habits of
mind, industrial practices, business models, economic logic, deep societal
forces and aggregated industrial practices that make up the fashion and
textile sector”. Understanding sustainability requires a systems approach
because it depends on production steps working in concert rather than on
any one step viewed in isolation. The overarching framework consists of
materials, processes, people, design, and speed for promoting sustainabil-
ity. As Fletcher (2014, p. XVII) argues, “Sustainability in fashion and
textiles fosters ecological integrity, social quality and human flourishing
through products, action, relationships and practices of use”.
The fashion industry as a whole must create consumer desire for limited
consumption of high-quality slow fashion as opposed to frequent con-
sumption of low-quality fast fashion. The business model must change,
while recognizing that small-scale fibreproductionmustbeprocessedat
multiple locations near markets, which can increase its footprint. Much as
the lure of certain wines is linked to their specific place of production, so
fashion can stoke interest in place-specificfibres, designs, and dyes.
Traceability and the notion of nature are key to fostering a more respon-
sible and ethical consumption of apparel products. Furthermore, a connec-
tion between apparel products and nature will foster more scrutiny of
environmental issues in apparel production. We believe that by not only
building awareness of fast fashion’s ecological and social harmfulness but also
promoting the benefits of slow fashion and sustainability—in part via trace-
ability initiatives—consumers’fashion and apparel purchase behaviour will
more likely be influenced by ethical considerations, in a sea change from
previous consumer fashion purchase behaviour (Joergens 2006).
3.4 Consumer Awareness and a New Market
for Ethical Products
As with other environmental and social movements, the quest for cleaner
and fairer fashion supply chains needs leaders. Some may come from
marginalized market segments, such as those dissatisfied with current
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 37
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
market offerings and seeking more choice. One trigger for mobilization is
the development of a collective identity (Scaraboto and Fischer 2013). We
argue that by channelling images of nature through transparency in
the supply chain, and connecting those images with the final product
(i.e. fashion apparel), critical consumers can forge a collective identity, a
bloc concerned with sustainability, which can eventually affect the market.
In community-supported agriculture, for example, consumers and entre-
preneurs have created a countervailing market response to the co-optation
of countercultural movements into dominant and mainstream forms
(Thompson and Coskuner-Bali 2007), presenting a planned mobilization
towards market change, in accordance with Scaraboto and Fischer’s(2013)
analysis. Such responses can change a market segment significantly, leading
to the production and promotion of offerings distinct from those provided
by mainstream markets.
Dolbec and Fischer (2015) analyse the impact of consumers engaged
in market dynamics without a specific coordinated plan, in the specific
context of the fashion industry. In such cases, change can be profound,
and also accidental. As a means of inciting change within fashion,
consumers who make their desire for sustainable garments known may
well have the power to push the industry to meet their needs. If the
consumer market is there, the product line will follow.
3.5 The Role of Traceability
Traceability arose in the mid-1980s as a means to reassure consumers
about the safety of food products, as increasing fears of contamination led
consumers to seek information on how their food was grown or raised
(Penton Media 2011). Until the mid-1980s, traceability was used primar-
ily for logistical purposes, providing a means of managing inventory and
production (Bonnin and Ngo 2009). Following a series of crises in the
European food industry, increased transparency regarding the steps
involved along the supply chain from producers to consumers was clearly
needed. The development of traceability programs eventually took hold in
the USA and Canada, between 2003 and 2004, after the mad cow disease
case in Washington state (Pouliot and Sumner 2008). Food producers
38 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
needed traceability to protect the reputation of their brands, and to
guarantee their products’origins (ibid), by tracing products within a
specific facility or along a supply chain (Bellon-Maurel et al. 2014).
Traceability is viewed as a necessity in the food industry, with top
chefs along with other food representatives pioneering the use of trace-
ability (Penton Media 2011). The local farm-to-table food movement
has further pushed traceability to the forefront. Many industries have
incorporated traceability as a key asset in achieving superior quality
(Suber 2012). Organizations that adopt traceability can make their
supply chains more efficient and adaptable (Galliano and Orozco 2013).
3.6 Traceability Equals Transparency
While traceability in the context of food products is primarily a means of
confirming food safety and adherence to health concerns and dietary
restrictions, with an emphasis on animal welfare concerns, in the apparel
industry traceability results in transparency, in that it informs customers
of the environmental impact of clothing and production, and of the
labour conditions involved in production and manufacturing. Tracing
all apparel products and certifying transparency in the supply chain
could be beneficial in both boosting the demand for responsibly made
products, and in making products manufactured under questionable
conditions less appealing.
For consumers with specific ethical concerns in mind, traceability
systems are needed to ensure a product is in line with their values
(Robert-Demontrond 2009). For this market niche, supply chains
must be transparent and open to both certification and third-party
assessments to reduce the practice of “green-washing”(presenting a
product as “green”(sustainable) without any reliable verification). It
can be difficult to verify certain ethical claims from supply chains. For
certain objective and measurable indicators such as energy and water
usage, supply chains might easily report and assess their own perfor-
mances, but for more subjective and difficult-to-measure indicators, such
as working conditions, safety policies, and animal welfare, third-party
monitoring and evaluation are crucial.
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 39
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
For measurable and quantifiable indicators, life cycle assessment
(LCA), a method for evaluating the environmental performance of
products and services, can be implemented along the supply chain.
Such evaluation can be complex, requiring significant time and resources.
LCA dates back to the 1970s, when pollution control, energy efficiency,
and others gained public currency; its public appeal continues to spread
(Guinée et al. 2011).
From an ethical standpoint, corporations at least theoretically have
an obligation to inform consumers about the environmental impact of
their products, following consumers’own concerns for the morality of
their agency (Del Savio and Schmietow 2013). Over time, some
companies have adopted a moral approach, as traceability evolved
from health crisis prevention to an assurance of quality, certified, and
sustainable choices. Current discourses of “natural”,“organic”,and
“local”products have pushed traceability’s implementation into smal-
ler supply chains, with regulated definitions and certifications backing
up such claims.
Tracing apparel items back to their raw materials and manufacturing
processes can be daunting. In some cases, trust becomes central to the
relationship between suppliers and apparel manufacturers, which then
translates to eco-labels that inform consumers about the certified processes
implemented in supply chains (Henninger 2015). However, not all eco-
labels face thorough scrutiny. Both in the literature and in our own
interviews with apparel industry stakeholders, flaws are readily apparent.
If third parties involved in certification receive a percentage from the sales
of certified products, the assessment for certified procedures may relax or
simply not happen at all. Manufacturing entities along the supply chain
whose processes have been deemed acceptable may sub-contract to other,
smaller entities, whose sourcing or manufacturing processes may be
entirely unknown. Such complications and deceptions have led some
consumers and stakeholders to doubt certifying agencies and eco-labels.
The entire supply chain, from fibre production through product creation,
must be transparent for certification to be truly effective.
Traceability and certification often involve higher costs for consu-
mers, if a producer shifts the costs of traceability initiatives to a product’s
final price. Poghosyan et al. (2004) argue that traceability should
40 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
command a price premium when public welfare benefits or competitive
advantages result. Tsakiridou et al. (2011) suggest that traceability is an
added value, and therefore worthy of a price premium. Spanish beef
consumers, as an example, disagree. They see providing food safety as a
minimum responsibility for producers, and are unwilling to pay a
premium for a guarantee of safety (Angulo et al. 2005). Thus, guarantees
can be seen as either an added benefit, or as one that should routinely be
available as a matter of corporate responsibility.
When we track a product to its different processes and actors, we
confront the realities of outsourcing to low-wage countries, and of a
given product’s hidden costs, such as labourers trapped in deplorable
working conditions, and polluted air, water, and soil. These realities,
especially in food and apparel, are heavily connected to the concept of
nature. Since agricultural crops are these products’origins, there is
always a starting point on the land. Nature is the first supplier.
3.7 Nature
Nature can be studied from many perspectives and understood as a
combination of material and discursive elements. Neither an external
objective nor a purely socially constructed entity, nature is a fluid
and contested effect of assembling material and discursive elements
(Canniford and Shankar 2013).
In studies of the subjective and symbolic perspectives of nature, we see
that individuals rely on nature for identity creation purposes as part of a
specific agenda and in opposition to an alternate discourse (Luedicke et al.
2010). Collective meanings and ideals can shape a group’s identity (ibid.).
As Belk (1988) shows, the extension of self can operate at an individual
and a collective level, contributing to consumers’identities. As de Burgh-
Woodman and King (2013)argue,theconceptofthehuman/nature
connection is tied to a symbolically sustainable discourse, which often
does not extend beyond a material/practical statement. This human-
nature connection as a construct in Western cultural discourse can be
traced back to Greek mythology in its turbulent relationship with natural
elements, as represented by each Greek deity. The relationship with nature
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 41
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
and the human/nature connection have evolved over time; today’s related
discourses are necessarily linked to and often driven by the development of
environmentalism.
Along with the writings of the naturalists, activists, and environmen-
tal philosophers Aldo Leopard, John Muir, and Henry David Thoreau,
Rachel Carson’s“Silent Spring”(1962) stands out as one of the most
influential figures in environmentalism (Griswold 2012). Some suggest
her work gave birth to the modern environmental movement (Michaud
2010). Carson opposed the Christian belief that nature existed to serve
man and argued that technological innovations such as pesticides,
through which humans seek to control nature, would disrupt earth’s
natural ecosystem (Carson 1962; Michaud 2010). The notion of accept-
ing our collective societal role as stewards of this fragile ecosystem is
criticized in the environmental ethics literature for having anthropo-
centric, speciesist, and sexist connotations (Welchman 2012).
The environmental movement has spread into different areas from its
original opposition to pesticides in particular and pollution in general to
include opposition to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Vandana
Shiva, an Indian environmental activist, embraces this opposition, stat-
ing that “GMO”stands for “God, Move Over”, although not without
criticism from the media (e.g. Entine 2015; Specter 2014) and academic
writers (e.g. Gilbert 2013; Herring 2006). Shiva argues that pre-colonial
North America, in having unity in feminine and masculine principles,
engendered stronger ecological values than those brought to the New
World by European culture (McGurty 2011). Without feminine values,
Shiva argues, men would separate from women and nature, and ecolo-
gical disaster would occur; the eco-feminist women tree huggers (who
form handholding circles around trees to prevent deforestation) from the
Chipko Movement in northern India embody this necessary feminine
principle required for preventing ecological catastrophe (ibid.).
Perhaps in a reflection of the distrust endemic to many environmental
discourses (as seen, e.g. in corporate green-washing), the term “tree
hugger”is officially identified in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as
“someone who is regarded as foolish or annoying because of being too
concerned about protecting trees, animals, and other parts of the natural
world from pollution and other threats”.
42 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
Moreover, the formerly straightforward environmental model of sus-
tainable agricultural production embodied by organic food has become a
set of standards adapted to the demands of large corporate farming
(Thompson and Coskuner-Balli 2007).
How can environmental discourses align with fashion to offer a
veridic and inspiring call to change? How can they differentiate from
vague green-washing claims that have created more antagonists against
than supporters for sustainability? We propose a return to a simple,
romantic nature, where consumers can detach from everyday life and be
immersed in a separate space.
3.8 Romantic Discourses of Nature
Canniford and Shankar (2013) consider sublime, sacred, and primitive
discourses to be unified into the romantic ideology of an external
nature serving as the quintessential romantic concept, where the pure
self can be freed of the limitations of family, gender, and other social
roles (Illouz 1997). Participation in romantic experiences of nature
gives individuals sources of stability, joy, and ecstasy, and possibly
even provide meaning to life (Belk et al. 1989). Individuals routinely
try to commune with nature when they undergo romantic experiences;
Native Americans are considered to have perfected the dynamics of
living in harmony with nature (Arnould and Price 1993). Many
advertising efforts have built a level of expectation around the sacred
pilgrimage towards parts of the world still untouched by humankind
(Belk et al. 1989).
In communion with nature, we rely on nature (e.g. having an aware-
ness of time based solely on tracking the sun and moon (Arnould and
Price 1993)). This reliance can be seen in other contexts, such as when
nature is an external force that can be neither controlled nor tamed; thus
human activities are left to the mercy of nature, a state that aligns with
the primitive discourse of nature, whose sublime and sacred constructs
oppose the modern, industrial, and stressful way of living (Canniford
and Shankar 2013). Re-enacting past practices that might seem rustic
and countercultural becomes a means of evoking a nostalgic and heroic
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 43
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
time when life was simpler (Belk and Costa 1998); in such contexts,
nature is revered and a “quasireligious naturalism”is evidenced, aligned
with the sacred discourse of nature (ibid. 234).
3.9 Tracing Nature
Having discussed the relevance of traceability to the fashion industry and
the notion of nature as a key element in identity construction, we turn to
assembling a discourse that fosters sustainably produced apparel via
traceability and protects nature (the external environment) from harm.
Afirst step is to embed nature into the fashion discourse through a
holistic view in which each item of apparel cannot be divorced from its
origins in nature and manufacture. Once a garment is experienced both
as one component and as part of nature, perceptions towards this item
change markedly, much as might happen with food; when we build
awareness of the animals and processes involved in creating a hamburger
patty, we see it from a different angle.
The transparency engendered by traceability creates awareness of the
exploitation involved in apparel production—not only of such tragedies
as the 2013 Rana Plaza collapse in Dhaka, Bangladesh, the single dead-
liest clothing factory accident in history but also of the day-to-day
nightmare of low-wage labour (Joy 2013). In response to searing images
from Rana Plaza, consumers, politicians, NGOs, academics, and other
stakeholders scrutinized how such factories are run, aiming their outrage
in particular at apparel brands that sourced from this specific factory,
such as Walmart, Benetton, Joe Fresh, Mango, and Primark, among
others. Such events open consumers’eyes to the costs, borne by others,
of cheaply made clothing, and have pushed companies and their supply
chains to be more transparent.
We cannot stall until a new mass tragedy occurs in another part of the
supply chain to increase awareness, particularly since every step of the
supply chain has the potential for setting in motion lethal events, such as
pollution, whose impact is gradual and does not necessarily generate
headlines (i.e. wearing masks on city streets to protect one’s ability to
breathe incrementally becomes a normalized activity). Once traceability
44 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
of an entire supply chain has been ensured, transparency can be apparent
and processes certified. This information may now be passed on to
brands that can construct a story on how each garment has been
made, whether it is organic and features natural dyes, for example; and
on the value of consumers making choices that support sustainability.
Deepening the story might include discourses on protecting the envir-
onment and communion with nature, allowing an individual to see the
article of clothing, the plant source of fibres, the artisans involved in
manufacture, and nature itself within a holistic view in which each
element is connected to the whole. Once an article of clothing is no
longer experienced in a vacuum, with its environmental and social
impact visible for all to see, consumers become aware of their role in
that impact.
Figure 3.1 summarizes the model presented in this chapter. The
current fashion apparel discourse is disconnected from nature; consu-
mers do not see an article of apparel as part of nature but rather as a
product of industrial processes, unlike in the world of organic food, for
Awareness:
*New market
*Change to
current market
Current Model Proposed Model
Nature
Apparel
piece
Apparel
piece
Consumers
Other
products
(e.g. food)
Nature
Consumers
Traceability
New nature–
fashion/apparel
discourse
Fig. 3.1 Current vs. proposed fashion apparel model
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 45
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
example, where consumers may know the exact origin of specific
produce items, meat, or eggs, for example, and are thus connected to
the sources of their products in nature. The new model we propose ties
the construction of nature (as symbolic capital) with fashion apparel
through a process of traceability. Implementing transparency in the
supply chains will ideally facilitate the creation of new markets, and
will drive deep changes in the current market, by encouraging con-
sumer demand for slow fashion. Thanks to these new dynamics,
ignited by traceability and conveyed through marketing and branding
tools, a new perspective of fashion as an extension of nature will
emerge.
3.10 Discussion
Slow fashion aligns consumption with consumer ideals of protecting the
natural world. Consumers who perceive their identities as incorporating
both an appreciation for of-the-moment fashion and a commitment to
the environment will likely find this symbolic value both meaningful
and indicative of new approaches to consumption. To embrace that
goal, slow fashion must focus on a sustaincentric paradigm; only
through responsible processes can high-quality and ethical products be
produced. Once the fashion industry commits to sustainability, trace-
ability is the sole effective method for certifying the industry’s adherence
to the ideals of slow fashion.
Tracing becomes imperative once certification is accepted commer-
cially as essential. Consumers want reassurance that the labels and
certifications they see on apparel products are genuine, which can only
happen when every raw material, supplier, transportation mode, and
process is tracked from the source. Because any apparel company will
have an innate conflict of interest in marketing the green qualities of a
given garment—describing a garment as sustainable instantly justifies a
higher price—externalizing tracing services can eliminate such conflict
by maintaining transparency. After fashion companies have implemen-
ted tracing processes, certification should be done by third parties
untainted by any possible appearance of professional quid pro quo.
46 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
In showing the practices used throughout a supply chain and show-
casing nature as the first supplier of all apparel items, the fashion world
can heighten consumers’connection to nature. Once consumers become
more aware of the processes involved in apparel production, this con-
nection with nature may ignite a new perspective on clothing, one that
actively wants sustainably produced fibres and manufacturing processes,
and that sees slow fashion, despite the higher cost, as far more desirable
—indeed, as imperative—in comparison with fast fashion. As the dis-
interest in environmental issues implicit in the production and con-
sumption of fast fashion becomes ever more widely recognized,
consumers will inevitably be faced with whether they are motivated in
their consumption patterns primarily by short-term gratification, or by
their commitment to long-term sustainability values. While these values
are in and of themselves symbolic, their impact on the actual environ-
ment is undeniably both real and immediate.
The slow fashion ideal of quality and longevity will become appealing
once each garment embodies nature from the consumers’perspective.
Once we see more than the piece of apparel—once we see in our mind’s
eye the entire process of producing a garment—the value of longevity
and quality becomes an associated necessity of the newly built relation-
ship between the consumer and the product. This new built image will
necessarily be constructed from a deep understanding of the product
story; consumers interested in the sources of their products have sophis-
ticated questions and demands. Superficial commitments and shallow
slogans were never enough. Once a holistic sense of nature binds con-
sumers to the earth and to each other—once clothing becomes more
than a representation of personal style and self-presentation via move-
ment, texture, design, colour, and the like, and in addition becomes an
expression of personal dedication to sustainability—true, verifiable com-
mitment will be not simply desired but also required.
For companies to have a profit motivation to implement sustainable
practices, traceability, and to connect their products with nature,
demand must exist: new, larger markets must come into being. As a
first approach to engaging such markets, codifying the link between
nature’s discourse and the fashion apparel industry, as argued above, has
the ability to be effective. The new market creation process is, in its
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 47
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
essence, a clash between brand images, as market creation involves social
legitimation, and an innovation that actually discourages frequent con-
sumption may be viewed as contradicting social norms, values, and
institutions (Giesler 2012). For many consumers, frequent shopping is
a pastime that provides pleasure, with each new purchase providing a
temporary sensation of excitement and promise. Why not indulge, when
indulging feels good? Slow fashion, in contrast, encourages a modicum
of self-restraint, of purchasing for long-term gain rather than only short-
term pleasure. What happens when consumers are presented with a
different approach to consumption when doppelgänger brand images
(“a family of disparaging images and stories about a brand ...circulated
in popular culture ...”(Thompson et al. 2006, p. 50)) introduce brand
meanings that might influence consumers’beliefs and behaviours (ibid.)?
Such images already define lower-end apparel companies as connected to
factories featuring dangerous and even lethal working conditions.
3.11 Future Research
Our research presents a clear categorization of the discourses on nature
and traceability applicable to sustainable fashion, and will benefit com-
panies implementing transparent traceability standards. It is by necessity
limited, given the lack of empirical evidence (excluding secondary data
derived from previous empirical research). Future research in the timely
areas of consumer and producer perceptions of nature and traceability,
and their interrelationship with sustainability, will be necessary to
empirically validate our findings.
An interesting avenue for future inquiry concerns the origins of the
cognitive dissonance that enables consumers to follow a sustainable
ideology when purchasing food, or engaging in recycling practices, but
to shelve their ideology when choosing apparel. Food nurtures; if it also
harms, its very definition is at stake, concerns which are less relevant in
apparel products (Joy et al. 2012). Does this fact explain consumers’
contradictory approaches to their purchases? Or is this contradiction
derived from consumer distance from the sources and processes involved
in creating fashion? Moreover, consumers may not trust traceability
48 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
certifications and eco-labels, viewing them with suspicion as advertising
rather than truthful statement.
Price is certainly an issue when facing a choice between sustainably
produced slow fashion and low-cost fast fashion. While organic food has
higher prices than the alternatives, the price differential is nonetheless not
hugely significant; because consumers purchase food repeatedly, the
higher cost is accrued over time. The pricing for eco-conscious clothing,
however, is significant compared to fast fashion, and the high price is far
harder to ignore, unless cost is of no import. Fastfashion garments will
undoubtedly be of lower quality with a shorter life span, but fastfashion
adherents seek gratification in the moment. What processes can effectively
wean consumers from focusing only on short-term gratification? How can
consumers develop such strong emotional need for sustainable clothing
that price is no longer a deterrent? As we argue, connection to the natural
world can ameliorate consumer distance from the natural and human cost
of their clothing, but what marketing campaigns will be most effective in
conveying this connection? How can corporations accustomed to keeping
costs low to encourage higher sales accept a new approach, of accepting
higher production and manufacturing costs for the greater good? Such
questions are worthy of further exploration.
The battle between brand images and ideals in the fashion industry is
increasingly gathering steam, as recognition of global climate change and
human injustice takes centre stage in consumers’awareness. The result-
ing structures and discourses will change markets and relationships
between consumers and producers in ways we can imagine, but not
yet fully foresee. We can safely assume, however, that the implications of
these changes will be far-reaching, deeply affecting how consumers reach
purchase decisions and construct identities of the self within the context
of an imperilled natural world.
References
Angulo, A. M., Gil, J. M., & Tamburo, L. (2005). Food Safety and
Consumers’Willingness to Pay for Labelled Beef in Spain. Journal of Food
Products Marketing,11(3): 89–105.
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 49
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
Arnould, E. J., & Price, L. L. (1993). River Magic: Extraordinary
Experience and the extended Service Encounter. Journal of Consumer
Research,20(1): 24–45.
Bailey, I., & Wilson, G. A. (2009). Theorising Transitional Pathways in
Response to Climate Change: Technocentrism, Ecocentrism, and the
Carbon Economy. Environment and Planning A,41(10): 2324–2341.
Barnes, L., & Lea-Greenwood, G. (2006). Fast Fashioning the Supply Chain:
Shaping the Research Agenda. Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management,10(3): 259–271.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the Extended Self. Journal of Consumer
Research,15(2): 139–168.
Belk,R.W.,&Costa,J.A.(1998).TheMountainManMyth:AContemporary
Consuming Fantasy. Journal of Consumer Research,25(3): 218–240.
Belk, R. W., Wallendorf, M., & Sherry, Jr., J. F. (1989). The Sacred and the
Profane in Consumer Behavior: Theodicy on the Odyssey. Journal of
Consumer Research,16(1): 1–38.
Bellon-Maurel, V., Short, M. D., Roux, P., Schulz, M., & Peters, G. M. (2014).
Streamlining Life Cycle Inventory Data Generation in Agriculture using
Traceability Data and Information and Communication Technologies—Part
I: Concepts and Technical Basis. Journal of Cleaner Production,69:60–66.
Bonnin, C. A., & Ngo, M.-A. (2009). Enjeux juridiques de la traçabilité
alimentaire. Gestion 2000,26(3): 93–108.
Butow, J. (2014). Sustainability Issues and Strategies in the Outdoor Apparel
Brand Industry. Master of Environmental Studies Capastone Projects,
Department of Earth and Environmental Science (online), retrieved from:
http://repository.upenn.edu/mes_capstones/60, [accessed on 29/08/2016].
Canniford, R., & Shankar, A. (2013). Purifying Practices: How Consumers
Assemble Romantic Experiences of Mature. Journal of Consumer Research,
39(5): 1051–1069.
Carmichael,A.(2015).Man-MadeFibersContinueToGrow.TextileWorld
(online), retrieved from: http://www.textileworld.com/textile-world/fiber-
world/2015/02/man-made-fibers-continue-to-grow/, [accessed on: 23/09/
2016].
Carson, R. (1962). Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin: New York.
Chapman, A. (2010). Mistra Future Fashion—Review of Life Cycle
Assessments of Clothing. MISTRA (online), retrieved from: http://www.
oakdenehollins.co.uk/media/232/2010_mistra_review_of_life_cycle_assess
ments_of_clothing.pdf, [accessed on: 23/09/2016].
50 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
Cherrett, N., Barrett, J., Clemett, A., Chadwick, M., & Chadwick, M. J. (2005).
Ecological Footprint and Water Analysis of Cotton, Hemp and Polyester.
Stockholm Environment Institute (online), retrieved from: https://www.sei-
international.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-Report-
EcologicalFootprintAndWaterAnalysisOfCottonHempAndPolyester-2005.
pdf, [accessed on: 23/09/2016].
Clark, H. (2008). Slow + Fashion —An Oxymoron —or a Promise for the
Future ...?Fashion Theory —Journal of Dress Body and Culture,12(4): 427–446.
De Burgh-Woodman, H., & King, D. (2013). Sustainability and the Human/
Nature Connection: a Critical Discourse Analysis of Being “Symbolically”
Sustainable. Consumption Markets & Culture,16(2): 145–168.
Defra. (2010). The Role and Business Case for Existing and Emerging Fibres in
Sustainable Clothing. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
(online), retrieved from: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu=
Menu&Module=More&Location=None&Completed=2&ProjectID=
16095, [accessed on: 23/09/2016].
Del Savio, L., & Schmietow, B. (2013). Environmental Footprint of
Foods: The Duty to Inform. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental
Ethics,26:787–796.
Dolbec, P.-Y., & Fischer, E. (2015). Refashioning a Field? Connected
Consumers and Institutional Dynamics in Markets. Journal of Consumer
Research,41(6): 1447–1468.
Entine, J. (2015, January). “Eco-Warrior”Vandana Shiva, at $40,000 a Speech,
Rejoins Hawaii Anti-GMO Crusade, But Truth Is the Victim. The Huffington
Post (online), retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-entine/eco
warrior-vandana-shiva-_b_6528032.html, [accessed on 01/08/2016].
Fletcher, K. (2008). Sustainable Fashion & Textiles: Design Journeys. Earthscan:
Oxford.
Fletcher, K. (2010). Slow Fashion: An Invitation for Systems Change. Fashion
Practice,2(2): 259–266.
Fletcher, K. (2014). Sustainable Fashion and Textiles: Design Journeys, 2nd edn.
Routledge: New York.
Galliano, D., & Orozco, L. (2013). New Technologies and Firm Organization:
The Case of Electronic Traceability Systems in French Agribusiness.
Industry & Innovation,20(1): 22–47.
Giesler, M. (2012). How Doppelgänger Brand Images Influence the Market
Creation Process: Longitudinal Insights from the Rise of Botox Cosmetic.
Journal of Marketing,76(6): 55–68.
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 51
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
Gilbert, N. (2013). A Hard Look at GM Crops. Nature,497(7447): 24–26.
Gladwin, T. N., Kennelly, J. J., & Krause, T.-S. (1995). Shifting Paradigms for
Sustainable Development: Implications for Management Theory and
Research. The Academy of Management Review,20(4): 874–907.
Griswold, E. (2012, September). How “Silent Spring”Ignited the
Environmental Movement. The New York Times (online), retrieved from:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/magazine/how-silent-spring-ignited-
the-environmental-movement.html, [accessed on 01/08/2016]
Guinée, J. B., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Zamagni, A., Masoni, P., Buonamici,
R., Ekvall, T., & Rydberg, T. (2011). Life Cycle Assessment: Past, Present,
and Future. Environmental Science & Technology,45(1): 90–96.
Henninger, C. E. (2015). Traceability the New Eco-label in the Slow-fashion
Industry?—Consumer Perceptions and Micro-organisations Responses.
Sustainability,7: 6011–6032.
Henninger, C., Alevizou, P. J., Oates, C. J., & Cheng, R. (2016).
Communicating Sustainability: The Case of Slow-Fashion Micro-organiza-
tions, in A. Genus (ed.) Sustainable Consumption: Design, Innovation and
Practice, Chapter 6: 83–96. Springer International: Cham, Switzerland.
Herring, R. J. (2006). Why did “Operation Cremate Monsanto”Fail?: Science
and Class in India’s Great Terminator-Technology Hoax. Critical Asian
Studies,38(4): 467–493.
Illouz, E. (1997). Consuming the Romantic Utopia: Love and the Cultural
Contradictions of Capitalism. University of California Press: Berkeley, CA.
Joergens, C. (2006). Ethical Fashion: Myth or Future Trend? Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management,10(3): 360–371.
Joy, A. (2013). Fast Fashion, Luxury Brands and Sustainability. www.worldfi
nincialreview.com/p=738 (July 13) (editor’s choice)
Joy, A., Sherry, Jr., J. F., Venkatesh, A., Wang, J., & Chan, R. (2012). Fast
Fashion, Sustainability, and the Ethical Appeal of Luxury Brands. Fashion
Theory: The Journal of Dress, Body & Culture,16(3): 273–296.
Luedicke, M. K., Thompson, C. J., & Giesler, M. (2010). Consumer Identity
Work as Moral Protagonism: How Myth and Ideology Animate a Brand-
Mediated Moral Conflict. Journal of Consumer Research,36(6): 1016–1032.
Martin, D., & Schouten, J. (2011). Sustainable Marketing. Pearson Prentice
Hall: New Jersey, USA.
McGurty, E. M. (2011). Environmentalism and identity-politics, in A. Elliot (ed.)
Routledge Handbook of Identity Studies, Chapter 17: 291–306. Routledge:
New York.
52 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
Michaud, J. (2010, April). Eighty-Five from the Archive: Rachel Carson. The
New Yorker (online), retrieved from: http://www.newyorker.com/books/dou
ble-take/eighty-five-from-the-archive-rachel-carson, [accessed on: 01/08/2016].
Morgan, L. R., & Birtwistle, G. (2009). An Investigation of Young Fashion
Consumers ’Disposal Habits. International Journal of Consumer Studies,
33:190–198.
Penton Media. (2011, November 2). Traceability: Tracking from Farm to
Fork. Natural Foods Merchandiser,8–10.
Poghosyan, A., Gonzalez-Diaz, F., & Bolotova, Y. (2004). Traceability and
Assurance Protocols in the Global Food System. International Food &
Agribusiness Management Review,7(3): 118–126.
Pouliot,S.,&Sumner,D.A.(2008).Traceability,Liability,andIncentives
for Food Safety and Quality. AmericanJournalofAgriculturalEconomics,
90(1): 15–27.
Ritzer, G. (2011). The McDonaldization of Society 6. Pine Forge Press:
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Robert-Demontrond, P. (2009). Le Label Kasher: perspectives sur la dynami-
que commerciale d’un système de traçabilité de produits sain(t)s. Décisions
Marketing, Janvier-Ma,53:19–29.
Scaraboto, D., & Fischer, E. (2013). Frustrated Fatshionistas: An Institutional
Theory Perspective on Consumer Quests for Greater Choice in Mainstream
Markets. Journal of Consumer Research,39(6): 1234–1257.
Specter, M. (2014, August). Seeds of Doubt. The New Yorker (online),
retrieved from: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/25/seeds-
of-doubt, [accessed on: 01/08/2016].
Suber, T. (2012). Using Traceability to Protect Supply Chain Integrity. Dairy
Foods,113(6): 76.
Thompson, C. J., & Coskuner-Balli, G. (2007). Countervailing Market
Responses to Corporate Co-optation and the Ideological Recruitment of
Consumption Communities. Journal of Consumer Research,34(2): 135–152.
Thompson, C. J., Rindfleisch, A., & Arsel, Z. (2006). Emotional Branding and
the Strategic Value of the Doppelgänger Brand Image. Journal of Marketing,
70(1): 50–64.
Trawick, P., & Hornborg, A. (2015). Revisiting the Image of the Limited
Good. Current Anthropology,56(1): 1–27.
Tsakiridou, E., Mattas, K., Tsakiridou, H., & Tsiamparli, E. (2011). Purchasing
Fresh Produce on the Basis of Food Safety, Origin, and Traceability Labels.
Journal of Food Products Marketing,17(2/3): 211–226.
3 Sustainability and the Fashion Industry: Conceptualizing ... 53
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
United Nations. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and
Development: Our Common Future. UN Documents: Oslo, Norway.
Warren, K. J. (Ed.) (1994). Ecological feminism: Environmental philosophies.
Routledge: London, UK.
Welchman, J. (2012). A Defence of Environmental Stewardship.
Environmental Values,21(3): 297–316.
World Wildlife Fund. (2016). Cotton: Awater Wasting Crop. World Wide
Fund For Nature (online), retrieved from: http://wwf.panda.org/about_
our_earth/about_freshwater/freshwater_problems/thirsty_crops/cotton/,
[accessed on: 22/09/2016].
Dr. Annamma Joy is a professor of Marketing, Faculty of Management at the
University of British Columbia, Okanagan campus. Her research interests are
primarily in the area of consumer behaviour and branding with a special focus
on luxury brands, fashion brand experiences, consumer behaviour in the
People’s Republic of China (PRC), sustainability in the fashion and wine
industries, and aesthetic consumption. She has published several articles in
consumer behaviour and marketing journals such as the Journal of Consumer
Research, Journal of Consumer Psychology, International Journal of Research in
Marketing, Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, and Journal of Economic
Psychology, Consumption, Markets and Culture. Dr. Joy has won several awards
for her articles published in journals in addition to videos she helped produce.
Camilo Peña is a PhD student at the Faculty of Management—University of
British Columbia (UBC), Okanagan Campus. His current work and research
focuses on topics of sustainable consumer behaviours in the wine industry.
54 A. Joy and C. Peña
camiloandres.pena@gmail.com
View publication stats