From speed to volume: reframing clothing production and consumption for an environmentally sound apparel sector.

Abstract

The article highlights the limitations of speed as a framework for discussing and tackling the environmental challenges of growing clothing volumes or quantities. This argument builds on a series of wardrobe studies mapping the number of clothing items owned, purchased, and disposed of by 25 people during six months, and the reasons behind purchase and disposal. The results indicate that clothing consumption is rarely driven by replacement and that opportunity plays a main role. These characteristics of clothing consumption explain why it takes more than producing long-lasting garments to reduce clothing demand. Rather than delaying the disposal of garments, a more straight-forward focus on reducing production is needed, that is the contribution of a volume-centric approach.

Full text

3rd PLATE 2019 Conference
Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
- 1 -
From speed to volume: reframing clothing production and
consumption for an environmentally sound apparel sector
Maldini, Irene(a)
a) Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Keywords: Speed, volumes, clothing consumption, wardrobe studies.
Abstract: The article highlights the limitations of speed as a framework for discussing and tackling the
environmental challenges of growing clothing volumes or quantities. This argument builds on a series
of wardrobe studies mapping the number of clothing items owned, purchased, and disposed of by 25
people during six months, and the reasons behind purchase and disposal. The results indicate that
clothing consumption is rarely driven by replacement and that opportunity plays a main role. These
characteristics of clothing consumption explain why it takes more than producing long-lasting garments
to reduce clothing demand. Rather than delaying the disposal of garments, a more straight-forward
focus on reducing production is needed, that is the contribution of a volume-centric approach.
Introduction: a growing clothing
mountain
Accounts of the environmental burden of the
apparel sector have surpassed technical and
scholarly literature and trickled into popular
media. Public attention to this issue may be
explained by the fact that (this being the
“second most polluting industry” or not) the
rapid changes in the sector since the 1980s are
visible to all. The production of garments is now
based on countries with low wages and shipped
all over the world (Schor, 2005), prices have
fallen relative to other consumer goods (EEA,
2014) and the launching of new collections has
speeded up (Tokatli, 2008). As a consequence,
demand has grown (EEA, 2014), as have the
volumes of textiles disposed of. The
international second-hand trade is overflooded
and used textiles are struggling to find an
environmentally-sound destination (Ljungkvist,
Watson, & Elander, 2018). Rising volumes of
virgin materials are needed to fuel this industry
(FAO/ICAC, 2013), as are the resources
necessary for the production and finishing of
products, distribution and retail, and post-
consumer textiles processing (e.g. Roos,
Sandin, Zamani, & Peters, 2015). In short, the
sector has a problem of volumes, with some
estimations reporting growth in the worldwide
volume sold between 2000 and 2015 by 100%
(Euromonitor in Ellen McArthur Foundation,
2017), while global population grew by around
20%.
Nevertheless, most actions taken by industry
and governments for reducing the
environmental impact of the sector are still
focused on impact per product and disregard
the issue of clothing quantity. In the United
Kingdom, for instance, the Waste and
Resources Action Programme (WRAP)
convened an industry-wide commitment
supported by governments to reduce the
environmental burden of the whole clothing
supply chain. An intermediate balance of the
commitment’s results published in 2017
highlights savings in carbon emissions (10.6%),
use of water (13.5%), and waste (0.8%) per ton
of clothing sold since 2012. But given growth in
the total tonnage sold in the same period by
19%, the absolute impact of the sector
increased (WRAP, 2017). These results
illustrate the urgency of developing actions for
reducing clothing production volume, alongside
others focused on impact per product or ton.
Slowing down
One exception to the lack of attention on
clothing volume in the field has been the work
of sustainable fashion academics and
practitioners on speed (e.g. Aakko, 2013; Clark,
2008; Cooper et al., 2013; Fletcher, 2012;
Laitala and Klepp, 2015; Langley et al., 2013;
McLaren et al., 2015). By addressing clothing
longevity and durability, and the value of slow
fashion as opposed to fast fashion products,

3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
Maldini, Irene
From speed to volume: reframing clothing production and consumption for an
environmentally sound apparel sector
- 2 -
such scholarship implicitly engages with
volume. It considers growing quantities in the
context of production and consumption
acceleration. However, this article highlights the
limitations of speed as a framework for
discussing clothing volume. While
acknowledging the value of speed related
approaches, the study calls for a
straightforward focus on quantities to advance
effective actions.
In the literature, “fast” is often used to imply
“more”, and “slow” or “durable” to refer to “less”
(e.g. Cooper et al., 2013; Greenpeace, 2017;
WRAP, 2012). However, rather than being
synonyms, these notions describe different
qualities of production and consumption. The
conceptual overlap of volume and speed leads
to regarding product lifetimes as if they had
environmental impact, when it is clothing
production that poses environmental
challenges (see e.g. Roos et al., 2015). For
example, the influential 2012 WRAP report
states that “extending the average life of clothes
by just three months of active use per item
would lead to a 5-10% reduction in each of the
carbon, water and waste footprints”; but
delaying disposal per-se does not result in
environmental gains. This percentage is
calculated by assuming delay in the production
of new clothes, as if new garments were
produced in order to replace disposed ones.
However, this study claims that clothing
purchases are rarely based on replacement;
therefore, speed and volumes are not
interchangeable.
Previous research on consumer influence on
product life spans has already pointed out that
purchases are made “without reference to any
evaluation of existing possessions.
Consequently, even when it might appear that
product life spans are being optimized,
environmental impacts may be increasing”
(Evans & Cooper, 2010, p. 344). This study
argues that this is often the case in clothing.
Building on a series of wardrobe studies, the
article highlights the value of a volume-centric
approach for discussing and tackling the
environmental impact of the sector.
Wardrobe studies
In 2017, we carried out 40 wardrobe audits in
the Netherlands in order to answer other related
research questions (Maldini, Stappers,
Gimeno-Martinez, & Daanen, 2019). A
secondary finding of that study was that
clothing consumption is rarely based on
replacement and wardrobes can grow and
decrease over time. Therefore, the
environmental advantages of delaying
disposals are questionable. This article revisits
those wardrobe audits with a focus on 25
respondents that traced the items coming in
and out of their wardrobe during the six months
following our visit. The analysis is based on
quantitative and qualitative data that has not
been previously published.
Respondents
The wardrobes considered in this study belong
to 25 subjects living in different provinces of the
Netherlands. The group is varied in terms of
age (22 to 71 years old), household
composition (living alone, in couples, with
children, or in shared households), house size
(38 to 400 m2), and income (from <€20,000 to
>€80,000 annual gross income per household).
Most of respondents live in cities, but some live
in villages and towns. Lastly, the group includes
20 females and five males. This over-
representation of women is a result of the profile
of respondents sending back the completed
forms after the study.
Method
During the wardrobe audits, respondents
counted the number of garments owned in the
presence of the researcher and according to
previously defined garment types. The concept
of “wardrobe” was considered broadly,
including all garments owned by respondents
regardless of the place where they were stored.
Socks and underwear were excluded for
privacy and practical reasons, but accessories
such as shoes, hats, scarves and gloves were
included. The counting process started at the
hall of the home, continuing at the closet, the
laundry area, and extra storage spaces such as
the attic or spaces underneath the bed (see Fig.
1).

3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
Maldini, Irene
From speed to volume: reframing clothing production and consumption for an
environmentally sound apparel sector
- 3 -
Starting at the date of the visit, respondents
kept track of their wardrobe inflow and outflow
during six months, handing the information to
the researcher after completion (see Table 1).
All relevant items (so no socks or underwear)
coming in and out of the wardrobe were
documented in a provided form, including items
made, bought, received as presents, given
away, thrown away, etc. The form included
details such as date, garment type, and
reasons for acquisition or disposal. Responses
were processed anonymously with no
compensation offered to the subjects.
Next, the reasons for acquisition and disposal
stated by respondents were classified in
categories to enable further analysis (see Table
2). The categories were defined by grouping
similar answers, although some responses
were unclear, unstated or too general/particular
to enable classification. In any case, this
categorization should not be considered as a
comprehensive taxonomy of the reasons
driving wardrobe flow, but simply as a means to
discuss the points introduced above.
Figure 1. Some of the items in the wardrobe of
respondent 19.
Results
Table 1 gives an overview of the number of
items owned by respondents during the audits,
and their wardrobe inflow and outflow during six
months. Only one of the 25 wardrobes
(respondent 16) had equal number of items
coming in and out. All other wardrobes grew or
decreased during that period.
Respondent
number
Initial
wardrobe
volume (items)
Wardrobe
inflow (items)
Wardrobe
outflow (items)
Difference
(items)
1
268
21
32
-11
2
453
12
6
6
3
208
13
29
-16
4
200
6
0
6
5
429
21
48
-27
6
228
11
2
9
7
346
16
3
13
8
70
11
14
-3
9
164
28
32
-4
10
343
11
23
-12
11
353
7
10
-3
12
324
2
36
-34
13
124
12
5
7
14
100
15
14
1
15
259
14
5
9
16
126
23
23
0
17
235
16
11
5
18
167
9
0
9
19
272
11
15
-4
20
132
8
1
7
21
257
11
9
2
22
254
7
13
-6
23
87
7
2
5
24
263
13
3
10
25
390
7
46
-39
Table 1. Respondents’ initial wardrobe volume
and inflow/ outflow during a 6-month period (in
number of items).

3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
Maldini, Irene
From speed to volume: reframing clothing production and consumption for an
environmentally sound apparel sector
- 4 -
Replacement was not a significant driver for
inflow (see Table 2). Only 12 of the 312 clothing
items coming in the wardrobes was purchased
or made with the purpose of replacing a
disposed item. This was the case for
respondents whose “old sneakers had holes”,
“old sweater needed replacement” or “favorite
Levi shirt is too small now”.
Participants bought, received, and made
clothing for other reasons. Opportunity was the
main driver for wardrobe inflow. In 89 of the 312
items, decisions to acquire a new item were
based on reasons such as “sale more than
50%!!”, “I found it while I bought the skirt”, or
“free”. Sixty items were purchased on the basis
of previously considered needs and wants. For
example, items “needed for summer”, “wanted
to wear over tank tops, or “needed for walking
the dog”.
Other items got in respondents’ wardrobes
because of their aesthetic (“It is yellow!”, “I
loved it and it went really well with my new
coat”, “I like the clean lines and the way it
compliments my shot hair”) or functional
qualities (“warm”) or were intended for special
occasions (“event coming up, wanted to look
impressive and new”).
INFLOW
Reasons
Items
Opportunity
89
Need/Want
60
Aesthetic
50
Special occasion
24
Functional
12
Replacement
12
Unclassified
89
Total
312
OUTFLOW
Reasons
Items
Worn out/broken/old
91
Style change
66
Body change
61
Initially unsuitable
39
Have better alternatives
12
Unclassified
113
Total
382
Table 2. Total wardrobe inflow and outflow
classified by the reasons stated by respondents.
Reasons for given away, donated, and thrown
away items included garments broken or worn-
out (“too old to wear”) or initially unsuitable
(“didn't like it in the first place, “too big, it was a
gift”). In other cases, outflow decisions were
based on style (“old fashioned, I am not going
to use it anymore”, “not fun anymore”) or body
changes (“didn't fit anymore”). Lastly, some
items were discarded based on the presence of
better alternatives (“have better ones”, “have so
many”).
In sum, the results of the study point out to a
variety of drivers for wardrobe inflow (clothes
received, made, and purchased) and outflow
(clothes disposed of). Some of these reasons
are connected to other items in the wardrobe
(classified as replacement, need/want, have
better alternatives). The majority of the inflow
decisions, however, are unrelated to the items
already owned (opportunity, aesthetic,
functional, special occasion). They respond to
other motivations such as pleasure in the act of
purchasing or anticipated use.
These results underline the limited connection
between wardrobe inflow and outflow and -
more importantly - between speed and volume.
If wardrobe inflow was exclusively driven by
outflow, extending the lifetime of garments
could have straightforward effects on clothing
demand, but the data discussed above shows
that this is not the case.
Discussion
As we have argued in an earlier study (Maldini
& Stappers, 2019), strategies aiming at
reducing clothing production volumes on the
basis of garments’ emotional and material
durability tend to see the wardrobe as a
collection with permanent volume, driven by
need. As a need-driven collection, the wardrobe
would be subject to “pull” forces solely, and new
garments would be purchased to replace
unsatisfactory pieces.
However, the data points out that clothing
consumption follows other logics. Respondents
incorporated and disposed of garments for a
variety of reasons; new items were bought
without consideration of those already owned,

3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
Maldini, Irene
From speed to volume: reframing clothing production and consumption for an
environmentally sound apparel sector
- 5 -
and owned items left the wardrobe because
more attractive ones were coming in. The 12
garments disposed of because participants
“had better alternatives” show that “push”
forces drive clothing consumption as much as
“pull” forces.
Moreover, the incorporation of new garments
for opportunity-related reasons confirms that
inflow and outflow are not always associated.
The power of an owned (materially or
emotionally durable) item in preventing a new
purchase driven by “sale more than 50%!!” or “it
is yellow!” is evidently limited. Lastly, the strong
effect of “opportunity” and impulsive purchasing
on overall wardrobe inflow may explain why 39
of the 382 items disposed of were considered
“initially unsuitable” after purchase.
These characteristics of clothing consumption
clarify why it takes more than producing long-
lasting garments to reduce clothing demand.
Rather than delaying the disposal of garments,
a more straight-forward focus on reducing
production is needed, that is the contribution of
a volume-centric approach.
Conclusion: from speed to volume
This study has argued that placing production
volumes at the core of the sustainable fashion
agenda would help tackling the exponential
growth of the sector’s impact. Acknowledging
the conceptual difference between volume and
speed is important because they call for
different actions to address them. Actions
aimed at prolonging product lifetimes may
justify the production of new (materially and
emotionally durable) products. From a volumes
perspective, however, the aim is to diminish the
quantity of new products altogether, leading to
reductions in the absolute environmental
impact of the sector.
Aiming at a reduction in production volumes
has important political and economic
implications that have not been discussed here,
fundamental changes in this respect are surely
needed to overcome the ecological crisis. A
volume-centred framework can be linked to a
variety of perspectives critical to mainstream
politics and economics, while at the same time
ensuring positive and concrete environmental
change.
Lastly, while tackling production volumes is
particularly imperative in the apparel sector, the
discussion above applies also to other product
categories. In building on product volumes or
quantities, the field of fashion can bring relevant
and novel perspectives to the bigger table of
sustainable production and consumption.
Sustainable fashion has borrowed much from
scholarship focused on other products such as
household appliances. The work on emotionally
durable design and attachment in clothing is an
example of that. But such scholarship does not
usually acknowledge practices such as
collecting, accumulating or impulsive
purchasing. In building a volume-centric
framework, sustainable fashion research can
help to expand perspectives in thinking about
products and the environment within the
broader field. This study is a contribution to that
end.
Acknowledgments
This article was made possible by the
participants of the wardrobe studies, who let me
dig into their closets, attics, and storages.
Thank you for that!
References
Aakko, M. (2013). Artisanal and Slow : The case of
Anna Ruohonen. In K. Niinimäki (Ed.),
Sustainable Fashion: New Approaches. (pp.
56–67). Helsinki: Aalto University.
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.
https://doi.org/10.2752/175174108x346922
Cooper, T., Hill, H., Kininmonth, J., Townsend, K., &
Hughes, M. (2013). Design for Longevity.
Guidance on Increasing the Active Life of
Clothing. Banbury, Oxon. Retrieved from
http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Design
for Longevity Report_0.pdf
EEA. (2014). ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATOR
REPORT 2014. ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS OF PRODUCTION-
CONSUMPTION SYSTEMS IN EUROPE.
Copenhagen. Retrieved from
https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/envir
onmental-indicator-report-2014
Ellen McArthur Foundation. (2017). A new textiles
economy: redesigning fashion’s future.
Retrieved from
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/pub

3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
Maldini, Irene
From speed to volume: reframing clothing production and consumption for an
environmentally sound apparel sector
- 6 -
lications/a-new-textiles-economy-redesigning-
fashions-future
Evans, S., & Cooper, T. (2010). Consumer
Influences on Product Life-Spans. In T.
Cooper (Ed.), Longer lasting products.
Alternatives to the throw-away society. (pp.
319–350). Farnham: Gower Publishing.
FAO/ICAC. (2013). WORLD APPAREL FIBER
CONSUMPTION SURVEY. Washington.
Fletcher, K. (2012). Durability, Fashion,
Sustainability: the Processes and Practices of
Use. Fashion Practice, 4(2), 221–238.
https://doi.org/10.2752/175693812X13403765
252389
Greenpeace. (2017). FASHION AT THE CROSS
ROADS. A review of initiatives to slow and
close the loop in the fashion industry.
Laitala, K., & Klepp, I. G. (2015). Age and active life
of clothing. In T. Cooper, N. Braithwaite, M.
Moreno, & G. Salvia (Eds.), Product Lifetimes
and the Environment 2015 (pp. 182–186).
Nottingham: Nottingham Trent University:
CADBE. Retrieved from
http://www.plateconference.org/pdf/plate_201
5_proceedings.pdf
Langley, E., Durkacz, S., & Tanase, S. (2013).
Clothing longevity and measuring active use.
Retrieved from
http://www.wrap.org.uk/system/files/priv_dow
nload/Clothing longevity SUMMARY
REPORT.pdf
Ljungkvist, H., Watson, D., & Elander, M. (2018).
Developments in global markets for used
textiles and implications for reuse and
recycling. Retrieved from
http://mistrafuturefashion.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/05/Mistra-Future-
Fashion-2018-4H.-Ljungkvist-D.3.3.4.1.pdf
Maldini, I., & Stappers, P. J. (2019). The wardrobe
as a system: exploring clothing consumption
through design fiction. Journal of Design
Research, Forthcoming.
Maldini, I., Stappers, P. J., Gimeno-Martinez, J. C.,
& Daanen, H. A. M. (2019). Assessing the
impact of design strategies on clothing
lifetimes, usage and volumes: The case of
product personalisation. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 210, 1414–1424.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.056
McLaren, A., Oxborrow, L., Cooper, T., Hill, H., &
Goworek, H. (2015). Clothing longevity
perspectives: exploring consumer
expectations, consumption and use. In T.
Cooper, N. Braithwaite, M. Moreno, & G.
Salvia (Eds.), Product Lifetimes and the
Environment Conference Proceedings (pp.
229–235). Nottingham: Nottingham Trent
University: CADBE.
Roos, S., Sandin, G., Zamani, B., & Peters, G.
(2015). Environmental Assessment of
Swedish Fashion Consumption. Retrieved
from
http://www.mistrafuturefashion.com/en/Publis
hingImages/Single-use
pictures/Environmental assessment of
Swedish fashion consumption - LCA.pdf
Schor, J. B. (2005). Prices and quantities:
Unsustainable consumption and the global
economy. Ecological Economics, 55(3), 309–
320.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.07.03
0
Tokatli, N. (2008). Global Sourcing: Insights from
the Global Clothing Industry-The Case of
Zara, a Fast Fashion Retailer. Journal of
Economic Geography, 8(1), 21–38.
WRAP. (2012). Valuing our clothes. The True Cost
of how we Design, Use and Dispose of
Clothing in the UK. Retrieved from
http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/VoC
FINAL online 2012 07 11.pdf
WRAP. (2017). Valuing Our Clothes: the Cost of UK
Fashion. Retrieved from
http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/valuin
g-our-clothes-the-cost-of-uk-
fashion_WRAP.pdf