the impact of ethical fashion on consumer purchase behavior

The impact of ethical fashion onconsumer purchase behavior

Bin Shen, Yulan Wang, Chris K.Y. Lo and Momoko ShumBusiness Division, Institute of Textiles and Clothing, The Hong Kong

Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between ethical fashion andconsumer purchase behavior (their willingness to pay a premium for ethical fashion), with the focus onconsumers’ concerns and beliefs about, and knowledge of, ethical fashion.Design/methodology/approach – A self-completion questionnaire was administered to 109respondents. Factor analysis and other statistical analyses were applied to test hypotheses.Findings – The findings suggest that consumer beliefs about ethical fashion, which are based on theirperceptions of a company in terms of its reputation in the fashion industry, influence their support forwhat they perceive as socially and environmentally responsible businesses.Research limitations/implications – The sample size, which is relatively small, is a limitation forthis research. The data were collected in Hong Kong, limiting findings to that geographic region.Practical implications – An important implication is that consumer education is essential tomitigate the prevailing throwaway culture and raise consumer awareness of ethical issues facing thefashion industry. Thus, retailers should take initiatives to educate consumers so as to ensure thesuccess of their newly-launched ethical fashion products.Originality/value – The paper proposes an approach to clearly understand the impacts of ethicalfashion on consumer purchase behavior.

Keywords Hong Kong, Consumer behaviour, Ethics, Fashion, Corporate social responsibility,Perception, Ethical fashion, Consumer purchase behaviour, Socially responsible business,Environmentally responsible business

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionConsumers are becoming increasingly aware of the material content of the apparel theybuy. Some are even investigating material suppliers, demanding that the fashionsupply chain be transparent and ethical. Apparel manufacturers are often accused ofdischarging toxic chemicals such as carbon monoxide and volatile organic compoundsinto the environment. Indeed, these chemicals are being discharged at an increasingrate due to the rising demand for the synthetic fibers used in the apparel productionprocess. Furthermore, chemical fertilizers and pesticides applied in planting cottonpollute the ecosystem, which also harms humans. Since the 1980s, increasingconsumer awareness of this situation and criticisms of the sweatshop labor employedby companies such as Nike, Gap and Levi Strauss have led to the emergence of “ethicalfashion.”

Driven by these consumer concerns, corporations are becoming more aware of theneed to be eco-friendly and socially conscious (Brown, 2010). The trend toward ethicalfashion is also stimulating retailers to become involved and take action. For example,shopping bags made of organic cotton or recycled synthetic materials are now

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/1361-2026.htm

Journal of Fashion Marketing andManagementVol. 16 No. 2, 2012pp. 234-245r Emerald Group Publishing Limited1361-2026DOI 10.1108/13612021211222842

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the Institute of Textilesand Clothing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University (Project number: 1-ZV7K).

234

JFMM16,2

commonly available both from small boutiques and large chains. Global fashionchains including H&M and MUJI have launched organic collections and fair tradeproducts. International trading companies such as Li & Fung have establishedcorporate sustainability strategies for their supply chains to responsibly manage theconsumption of the planet’s resources.

Consumers’ concerns and beliefs about, knowledge of, and support for ethical issuescan effectively enhance their reception of ethical fashion and shape their purchasebehavior (Hill, 1981). The aim of this study is to investigate and analyze howthe aforementioned factors might influence consumers’ ethical purchase decisions. Wedivide “ethical business” into the following two categories: socially responsiblebusiness (SRB) and environmentally responsible business (ERB). Specifically, wedefine SRB as business that involves effort put into improving practices related to suchissues as sweatshop labor and fair trade (Dickson, 2000). We define ERB as businessthat involves effort out into improving practices related to environmental issues, whichinclude the production of eco-fashion, pollution prevention and the use of organicfibers, etc. (Cetindamar and Husoy, 2007). The research objectives are to:

(1) examine consumer perspectives on ethical fashion with a special focus on thesocial (sweatshop) and environmental (eco-fashion) aspects;

(2) investigate the impact of consumers’ concerns about and knowledge of ethicalfashion on support for SRB and ERB;

(3) examine consumer purchase behavior in relation to ethical fashion by examininghow customers’ perceptions affect their willingness to pay a premium forethical fashion; and

(4) compare the impacts of ethical fashion on consumer purchase behavior.

Literature reviewEthical fashion is defined as fashion clothing that is produced under fair tradeprinciples in sweatshop-free labor conditions, with efforts made to reduce theenvironmental harmfulness of the process (Joergens, 2006). It is also often described as“fashion with a conscious” as it concerns labor conditions and the environment.Companies often consider the following major dimensions of ethical fashion: choosingenvironmentally sustainable products; and employing sourcing and productionmethods compliant with the regulation of fair trade (Joergens, 2006). Clothing madewith eco-friendly materials such as recycled materials and organic fibers, or madeunder fair-trade conditions, is included in the category of ethical fashion. Such fashionhas become a means by which fashion companies fulfill their social and environmentalresponsibilities and match the increasing consumer desire for sustainability (Hawken,1993). In this era of globalization, when people around the world are fighting forequality and sustainability in many aspects of their lives, ethical fashion is regarded assurpassing its fundamental function of meeting basic human physiological needs byfulfilling consumers’ specifically psychological needs (Paulins and Hillery, 2009).

There is an extensive body of literature related to consumer purchase behavior andethical issues (e.g. Nicholls and Lee, 2006; Carey et al., 2008; Callen-Marchione andOwnbey, 2008). Carrigan and Attalla (2001) study the effects of good and bad ethicalconduct on consumer purchase behavior. Creyer (1997) investigates whetherconsumers care about business ethics and finds that firms should encourage ethical

235

The impact ofethical fashion

behavior because it may benefit them. Unethical behavior, in contrast, may be harmful.Chan et al. (2008) evaluate Chinese consumers’ assessments of recycled shopping bagsand find that they are more likely to rely on ethical judgments if they perceive therecycled shopping bags to be important. In a field experiment on firewood purchases inGuatemala, Kempen et al. (2009) find that even socioeconomically disadvantagedpeople express ethical and environmental concerns.

Dickson (2000) adopts a theoretical framework in which to study concerns aboutand knowledge of ethical fashion, beliefs about the fashion industry and support forSRB. Marcketti and Shelley (2009) use Dickson’s (2000) framework to examine theimpacts of consumers’ concerns about and knowledge of counterfeit apparel products.Our study is closely related to these studies, but we cover ethically responsiblebusinesses including not only SRB but also ERB. Based on Dickson’s (2000) model,we propose the modified theoretical framework shown in Figure 1. The frameworkcovers not only concerns about and knowledge of ethical fashion and beliefs about theethics of the fashion industry, but also support for SRB and ERB.

Consumers are increasingly concerned about the social consequences of theirpurchases, especially in relation to the human rights violations in sweatshops(Dickson, 2001). In addition, sweatshop labor is consumers’ most important ethicalconcern when making apparel purchase decisions (Tomolillo and Shaw, 2004).McFadden (1995) finds that 75 percent of US consumers avoid retailers who sellclothing produced by offshore sweatshops.

H1a

H3H1b

H1c

H5

H2a

H4H2b

H2c

Concernabout

sweatshops

Knowledgeof

sweatshops

Support forSRB

Willingness topay a premium

Beliefs about thefashion industry

Concernabout

eco-fashion

Knowledgeof eco-fashion

Beliefs about thefashion industry

Support forERB

Willingness topay a premium

Higher degree ofwillingness to payfor the products of

SRB

Figure 1.Research model ofconsumer purchasebehavior onethical fashion

236

JFMM16,2

Paulins and Hillery (2009) indicate that knowledge about eco-fashion helps individualsto be responsible and make contributions to society. Consumers’ knowledge aboutproducts and their relative ethical impacts are also major factors that contribute toethical consumerism (Shim, 1995). The more consumers understand the ethicaldimensions of products, the more likely they are to purchase those products (Dickson,2001). In a recent study, Abraham (2011) states that the benefits accruedby collaboration in reverse logistics include increased market knowledge, morepredictable business sales and better profit margins. This indicates that consumerswho have sufficient knowledge about the workings of the fashion industry are morewilling to support and reward ethical business practices through their purchases.Consumers who purchase and use recycled apparel have comparatively higher ethicalattitudes. Every buying decision a consumer makes is a vote indicating support or lackof support for how companies conduct business (Brosdahl, 2007). Therefore, consumerperceptions about the human rights and environmental conditions in the fashionindustry could affect their support for businesses that do (or do not) follow sociallyresponsible manufacturing practices:

H1a. Consumers’ concern about sweatshops has a positive influence on theirsupport for SRB.

H1b. Consumers’ knowledge of sweatshops has a positive influence on their supportfor SRB.

H1c. Consumers’ beliefs about sweatshops have a positive influence on theirsupport for SRB.

H2a. Consumers’ concern about eco-fashion has a positive influence on theirsupport for ERB.

H2b. Consumers’ knowledge of eco-fashion has a positive influence on their supportfor ERB.

H2c. Consumers’ beliefs about eco-fashion have a positive influence on their supportfor ERB.

Consumers often have to balance being self-centered and society-centered, butunfortunately tend toward self-centered attitudes (Paulins and Hillery, 2009). A numberof studies have demonstrated that apart from the ethical dimensions of products,attributes such as price and availability in the marketplace are also key drivers forcustomers to consider when switching retail brands (Dickson and Littrell, 1996;Joergens, 2006). In a consumer study conducted in 2000, 70 percent of consumers rateda company’s commitment to SBR and EBR as being important. One out of five people iswilling to pay more for products that are socially and environmentally responsible(Wessels, 2001). These studies all show that most consumers have a strong preferenceto purchase products made under SBR and EBR:

H3. Support for SRB has a positive influence on the willingness to pay a premium.

H4. Support for ERB has a positive influence on the willingness to pay a premium.

237


Cooney (2011) states that consumers view human rights as inherently more valuablethan environmental issues. Therefore, it is possible that consumers are willing to paydifferent premiums for SRB and ERB products:

H5. Consumers are more willing to pay a premium for SRB products than for ERBproducts.

MethodThe empirical analysis involved the following three steps: questionnaire design, pilottesting and the sampling and data collection.

Questionnaire designThe questionnaire was composed of Section I, Sweatshops and Section II, Eco-fashion.Respondents were required to answer 43 questions, and were asked to rate the degreeof their agreement. A seven-point Likert-scale was used, in which “1” represented“strongly disagree” and “7” represented “strongly agree.”

Pilot testAfter constructing the questionnaire, 15 participants were involved in a pilot test toguard against obtaining invalid or irrelevant data. A total of 15 sets of data werecollected from the completed questionnaires and analyzed, and the results were highlydesirable. There was no notable ambiguity in the questionnaire. Comments about thestructure, wording and length of the questionnaire were all positive. The pilot test datawere analyzed using reliability tests (Cronbach’s a), correlation analysis and aregression test. All of the internal reliability estimate results were larger than 0.7.Therefore, the pilot test had a high internal reliability and consistency. The process andresults of the pilot testing confirmed the reliability of the research instrument.

Sampling and data collectionA self-administered questionnaire survey using the random sampling approach wasconducted, with 120 respondents. Shoppers were randomly chosen in fashiondepartment stores in Hong Kong. Information was collected with the respondents’knowledge, their expressed willingness and informed consent. After a general reviewof completed questionnaires, 11 were disregarded because they were incomplete or theinformation provided was invalid. As a result 109 usable questionnaires were includedin the data analysis. According to Creyer (1997) and Joergens (2006), this samplesize is sufficient for research on ethics. The respondents’ demographics are shownin Table I.

Data analysisNearly 90 percent of the respondents claimed that either they had never purchased orwere not sure whether they had ever purchased fashion apparel that was produced in asocially responsible or environmentally friendly manner. This result indicates thatethical fashion apparel has not been well promoted (Figure 2).

Similarly, only 10 percent of the respondents could correctly name at least onefashion brand that sells either socially or environmentally responsible apparel.Surprisingly, 90 percent of them were not able to name any brand (Table II).

A significant finding is revealed in the summary of the variables’ descriptivestatistics, as shown in Appendix. With respect to the variables “concern,” “knowledge”

238

JFMM16,2

and “beliefs,” which influence consumer’s support for ethical fashion purchasebehavior, the mean values of items that measure consumer knowledge of sweatshopissues (3.60) and eco-fashion (4.07) are the lowest. This reveals that the respondentsgenerally did not have knowledge of issues surrounding sweatshops and eco-fashion.

Variable Frequency (%)

GenderFemale 57 52.3Male 52 47.7Education levelDiploma or associate degree 38 34.9Bachelor degree 68 62.4Master degree or above 3 2.7IncomeBelow $5,000 105 96.3Above $5,000 4 3.7

Table I.Demographics of

respondents (n¼ 109)

80

60

40

Cou

nt

20

01 2 3

Ethical_apparel_purchase

Notes: 1 = yes; 2 = no; 3 = not sure

Figure 2.Bar chart on ethical

fashion purchaseexperiences of

respondents

Name of fashion brands/retailers No. of respondents

MUJI 7H&M 5Marks & Spencer 3Stella McCartney 2Timberland 1UNIQLO 1

Table II.Ethical fashion brandsnamed by respondents

239


Reliability analysisA reliability test was used to evaluate the internal consistency of the items under everyvariable. The results show that the variables are all sufficiently reliable measures. TheCronbach’s a values are listed in Table III.

Hypotheses testingThe results of the hypotheses testing are summarized in Table IV.

Pearson’s correlation and linear regression were employed for hypotheses testing.We aimed to ascertain the relationship between the dependent variable andindependent variables. The independent variables were “concern,” “knowledge” and“beliefs,” and the dependent variable was “support.” The level of significance wasset at 0.05. As shown in Table IV, all of the hypotheses proposed are supported by thedata. Hence, the relationships between “concern,” “knowledge,” “beliefs” and “support”are positively correlated. Table IV also allows us to measure the relative importance ofthree independent variables with respect to their support for responsible businesses.The most influential factor influencing the support for responsible businesses is“concern” in both SRB and ERB. The table also shows that “knowledge” is the leastinfluential factor for both cases.

The three independent variables all support the need to further investigateconsumer willingness to pay a premium for fashion apparel produced by responsiblebusinesses. In our analysis, the value of SRB is 0.514, higher than the 0.487 achieved byERB. It should be noted that these two values are very close. This implies that bothSRB and ERB influence consumer willingness to pay a premium for products producedresponsibly. However, consumers are more willing to pay a higher premium for fashionapparel produced by SRB than by ERB.

DiscussionAccording to H1b and H2b, a lack of knowledge of ethical fashion practices preventsconsumers from translating their concerns into actual purchases. They had limitedknowledge of the global sweatshop situation (M¼ 3.6 for knowledge of sweatshops,which is the lowest value). The findings indicate that beliefs about the fashion industryinfluence consumer support for SRB and ERB. This has an important implicationto retailers. Consumer beliefs about a company’s practices are often based on theirperceptions of the company in terms of goodwill and reputation. Hence, theirconfidence in a company can be enhanced by increasing the transparency of

Variables Cronbach’s a

Concern about sweatshops 0.733Knowledge of sweatshops 0.822Beliefs about fashion industry in respect of sweatshops 0.789Support for SRB 0.867Willingness to pay a premium for apparel from SRB 0.720Concern about eco-fashion 0.725Knowledge of eco-fashion 0.792Beliefs about fashion industry in respect of eco-fashion 0.738Support for environmentally responsible businesses 0.910Willingness to pay a premium for apparel from ERB 0.740

Table III.Reliability test results

240

JFMM16,2

Pea

rson

’sco

rrel

atio

n(r

)R

2F

-sta

tist

ics

p-v

alu

e

Hy

pot

hes

issu

pp

orte

d/

reje

cted

Sta

nd

ard

ized

coef

fici

ent

(b)

H1a

.C

onsu

mer

s’co

nce

rnab

out

swea

tsh

ops

has

ap

osit

ive

infl

uen

ceon

thei

rsu

pp

ort

for

SR

B0.

574

0.33

052

.607

0.00

0S

up

por

ted

0.57

4

H1b.

Con

sum

ers’

kn

owle

dg

eof

swea

tsh

ops

has

ap

osit

ive

infl

uen

ceon

thei

rsu

pp

ort

for

SR

B0.

260

0.06

77.

730

0.00

6S

up

por

ted

0.26

0

H1c.

Con

sum

ers’

bel

iefs

abou

tsw

eats

hop

sh

ave

ap

osit

ive

infl

uen

ceon

thei

rsu

pp

ort

for

SR

B0.

466

0.21

729

.602

0.00

0S

up

por

ted

0.46

6

H2a

.C

onsu

mer

s’co

nce

rnab

out

eco-

fash

ion

has

ap

osit

ive

infl

uen

ceon

thei

rsu

pp

ort

for

ER

B0.

491

0.24

234

.077

0.00

0S

up

por

ted

0.49

1

H2b.

Con

sum

ers’

kn

owle

dg

eof

eco-

fash

ion

has

ap

osit

ive

infl

uen

ceon

thei

rsu

pp

ort

for

ER

B0.

286

0.08

29.

523

0.00

3S

up

por

ted

0.28

6

H2c.

Con

sum

ers’

bel

iefs

abou

tec

o-fa

shio

nh

ave

ap

osit

ive

infl

uen

ceon

thei

rsu

pp

ort

for

ER

B0.

299

0.08

910

.480

0.00

2S

up

por

ted

0.29

9

H3

.S

up

por

tfo

rS

RB

has

ap

osit

ive

infl

uen

ceon

thei

rw

illi

ng

nes

sto

pay

ap

rem

ium

0.61

60.

379

65.3

230.

000

Su

pp

orte

d0.

616

H4

.S

up

por

tfo

rE

RB

has

ap

osit

ive

infl

uen

ceon

thei

rw

illi

ng

nes

sto

pay

ap

rem

ium

0.73

40.

539

125.

328

0.00

0S

up

por

ted

0.73

4

H5

.C

onsu

mer

sar

em

ore

wil

lin

gto

pay

ap

rem

ium

for

SR

Bp

rod

uct

sth

anfo

rE

RB

pro

du

cts

V1

0.16

4S

up

por

ted

0.51

40.

141

8.72

90.

000

V2

0.11

7S

up

por

ted

0.48

7

Note

s:

V1,

mea

nv

alu

eof

item

sfo

rsu

pp

ort

for

SR

B;V

2,

mea

nv

alu

eof

item

sfo

rsu

pp

ort

for

ER

B

Table IV.Summary of the

hypotheses testing

241


production and manufacturing processes. Companies such as Esquel and Li & Funghave undertaken initiatives to reveal their business practices to the public. Recentstudies on ethical consumerism imply that consumers are taking ethical productsand business processes further into consideration (Devinney et al., 2006). Such studiessuggest that increasing business transparency to the public could contribute to betterperceptions and beliefs surrounding purchase decisions.

The respondents were asked about their future purchase behavior toward ethicallyresponsible fashion companies and their willingness to pay a premium for apparelproducts produced ethically. Our results show that there is a discrepancy betweenlevels of support for SRB and ERB (M¼ 5.50 for support for SRB; M¼ 5.22 for supportfor ERB,) and between the corresponding willingness to pay a premium (M¼ 4.77 forwillingness to pay a premium for SRB; M¼ 4.71 for willingness to pay a premium forERB). The prediction of a higher willingness to pay for SRB than for ERB is consistentwith reports in the current literature in which people view human rights causesas more important than environmental issues (Dovidio, 1984). Therefore, the averagerespondent regards preventing sweatshop labor as a higher priority than protectingthe environment.

Managerial implicationsIn our study, consumers expressed their willingness to support ethical fashionbusinesses, but they lacked knowledge of them. Consumer education is thus essentialfor raising awareness about ethical fashion. In addition, the study finds that eventhough there is a low level of awareness of ethical fashion brands and few actualpurchase experiences, consumers are willing to pay a premium for ethical fashion. To acertain extent, this reflects the limited effort put into promoting sustainable and ethicalfashion products. Retailers need to take the initiative to ensure the successful launch ofethical fashion products, and their advertisements should include both social andenvironmental messages about ethical fashion. Apparel manufacturing practices havea significant impact on both environmental and human well-being. To tackle the socialand environmental challenges that the industry faces, consumers, designers, retailersand other industry insiders will all need to participate and demonstrate theirresponsibility.

ConclusionEthical consumerism and corporate social and environmental responsibility will playsignificant roles in achieving a sustainable fashion industry. The ethical issues raisedsurrounding the fashion industry have drawn intensive public interest amongconsumers, retailers, designers and manufacturers. The relationship betweenknowledge and support has been proved to be the most important aspect ofdeveloping sustainable businesses. Future research should be conducted to explore theimpacts of ethical fashion supply chains on consumer behavior.

Finally, this study has an important limitation. Given that the data were collected inHong Kong alone, the findings are not generalizable to other regions.

References

Abraham, N. (2011), “The apparel aftermarket in India – a case study focusing on reverselogistics”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 211-27.

Brosdahl, D.F.C. (2007), “The consumption crisis”, in Hoffman, L. and Earth Pledge, (Eds), FutureFashion – White Papers, Grey Barberco, Lincoln Park, NJ.

242

JFMM16,2

Brown, S. (2010), Eco Fashion, Laurence King, London.

Callen-Marchione, K.S. and Ownbey, S.F. (2008), “Associations of unethical consumer behaviourand social attitudes”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 12 No. 3,pp. 365-83.

Carey, L., Shaw, D. and Shui, E. (2008), “The impact of ethical concerns on family consumerdecision-making”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 553-60.

Carrigan, M. and Attalla, A. (2001), “The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter inpurchase behaviour?”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 560-78.

Cetindamar, D. and Husoy, K. (2007), “Corporate social responsibility practices andenvironmentally responsible behavior: the case of the United Nations Global Compact”,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 76 No. 2, pp. 163-76.

Chan, R., Wong, Y. and Leung, T. (2008), “Applying ethical concepts to the study of ‘green’consumer behavior: an analysis of Chinese consumers’ intentions to bring their ownshopping bags”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 469-81.

Cooney, N. (2011), Change of Heart: What Psychology can Teach us About Creating Social Change,Lantern Books, New York, NY.

Creyer, E.H. (1997), “The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: do consumersreally care about business ethics?”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 6,pp. 421-32.

Devinney, T.M., Auger, P., Eckhardt, G. and Birtchnell, T. (2006), “The other CSR: consumer socialresponsibility”, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 30-7.

Dickson, M.A. (2000), “Personal values, beliefs, knowledge, and attitudes relating to intentions topurchase apparel from socially responsible businesses”, Clothing and Textiles ResearchJournal, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 19-30.

Dickson, M.A. (2001), “Utility of no sweat labels for apparel consumers: profiling labelusers and predicting their purchases”, The Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 35 No. 1,pp. 96-120.

Dickson, M.A. and Littrell, M.A. (1996), “Socially responsible behavior: values and attitudes ofthe alternative trading organization consumer”, Journal of Fashion Marketing andManagement, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 50-69.

Dovidio, J.F. (1984), “Helping behavior and altruism: an empirical and conceptual overview”, inBerkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 17, Academic Press,New York, NY, pp. 361-427.

Hawken, P. (1993), The Ecology of Commerce, Harper Business, New York, NY.

Hill, R.J. (1981), “Attitudes and behavior”, in Rosenberg, M. and Turner, R.H. (Eds), SocialPsychology: Sociological Perspectives, Basic Books, New York, NY, pp. 347-77.

Joergens, C. (2006), “Ethical fashion: myth or future trend?”, Journal of Fashion and Marketingand Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 360-71.

Kempen, L., Muradian, R., Sandoval, C. and Castaneda, J. (2009), “Too poor to be greenconsumers? A field experiment on revealed preferences for firewood in rural Guatemala”,Ecological Economics, Vol. 68 No. 7, pp. 2160-7.

McFadden, S. (1995), Garment Worker Study, Marymount University, Center for EthicalConcerns, IRC Survey Research Group, Arlington, TX.

Marcketti, S.B. and Shelley, M.C. (2009), “Consumer concern, knowledge and attitude towardscounterfeit apparel products”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 33 No. 3,pp. 327-37.

Nicholls, A. and Lee, N. (2006), “Purchase decision-making in fair trade and the ethical purchase‘gap’: ‘is there a fair trade twix?’”, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 369-86.

243


Paulins, V.A. and Hillery, J.L. (2009), Ethics in the Fashion Industry, Fairchild Books, New York,NY.

Shim, S. (1995), “Environmentalism and consumers’ clothing disposal patterns: an exploratorystudy”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 38-48.

Tomolillo, D. and Shaw, D. (2004), “Undressing the ethical issues in fashion: a consumerperspective”, in Bruce, M., Moore, C., and Birtwistle, G. (Eds), International RetailMarketing: A Case Study Approach, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, pp. 141-52.

Wessels, C. (2001), “European consumers want socially responsible products”, The CorporateSocial Responsibility Magazine Europe, Vol. 1, pp. 10-2, available at: www.csreurope.org/data/files/csr_magazine_january_2001.pdf

Appendix

Minimum Maximum Mean SD

Concerns about sweatshops 1.33 7 4.91 1.178I am concerned with sweatshop issues affecting workersin the fashion apparel manufacturing business 1 7 4.66 1.256As a consumer, I should be interested in the laborpractices behind the apparel that I purchase 1 7 4.69 1.192Sweatshop issues should be actively discussed andconfronted in society 2 7 5.37 1.086Knowledge of sweatshops 1 6 3.60 1.394I believe that I am informed about sweatshop issues inthe fashion apparel manufacturing business 1 6 3.75 1.233I am knowledgeable about sweatshop issues in thefashion apparel business 1 6 3.47 1.344I have heard of the anti-sweatshop movement in HongKong supported by Oxfam 1 7 3.59 1.606Beliefs about the fashion industry (sweatshops) 1 7 4.69 1.303Fashion apparel manufacturers generally require theiremployees work no more than 40 hours per week 1 7 4.41 1.241Fashion apparel manufacturers generally provide safeworkplaces for their employees 1 7 4.83 1.167Child labor is generally not used by fashion apparelmanufacturers 1 7 4.83 1.502Support for socially responsible business (SRB) 3.33 7 5.50 1.047I believe in the ideals of apparel SRB 3 7 5.60 1.073In my opinion, it is right to encourage apparel SRB 4 7 5.68 0.999It is a good thing for me to buy clothing from SRB 2 7 5.63 1.033I would like the clothing that has a label assuring it wasmade in safe and fair conditions 2 7 5.48 1.127I would recommend retailers that sell “no sweat” clothesto my friends and family 2 7 5.15 1.129I support apparel SRB because it positively affectssociety 4 7 5.48 0.919Willingness to pay a premium for SRB 2 7 4.77 1.060I am willing to pay a premium for clothing that isproduced in accordance with the Fair Labor StandardsAct 1 7 4.52 1.094

2 7 4.88 1.086

(continued)Table AI.Descriptive statistics

244

JFMM16,2

Corresponding authorYulan Wang can be contacted at: [email protected]

Minimum Maximum Mean SD

It is still worthwhile to support no-sweat productioneven if I have to forgo some clothing optionsI plan to buy apparel from socially responsible fashionretailers in the future 2 7 4.92 1.001Concern about eco-fashion 3 6.3 4.89 1.061I am concerned about eco-fashion positively affecting theenvironment 2 7 4.70 1.059As a consumer, I should be interested in the materialcontent of the apparel that I purchase 2 7 5.04 1.088Eco-fashion should be one of the focuses whendiscussing environmental protection in society 3 7 4.94 1.035Knowledge of eco-fashion 1.67 6 4.07 1.199I believe that I am informed about environmental issuesin the fashion apparel manufacturing business 2 7 4.53 1.119I am knowledgeable about what eco-fashion is 1 6 3.93 1.200I am knowledgeable about retailers that sell eco-fashion 1 7 3.74 1.279Beliefs about the fashion industry (environment) 2.33 6.33 4.30 1.063Fashion apparel manufacturers generally adopt eco-friendly production practices 2 6 4.04 1.062Fashion apparel manufacturers generally state clearlyon garment labels the material used and its origin 2 7 4.57 1.013Toxic chemicals are generally not used in production byfashion apparel manufacturers 2 7 4.28 1.113Support for environmentally responsible business (ERB) 3.67 7 5.22 1.009I believe in the ideals of apparel ERB 2 7 5.30 1.076In my opinion, it is right to encourage apparel ERB 3 7 5.41 1.029It is a good thing for me to buy clothing from ERB 3 7 5.38 1.007I would like clothing to have labels assuring that it wasmade with eco-friendly materials 3 7 5.03 1.049I would recommend the retailer that sells eco-fashion tomy friends and family 3 7 4.95 0.947I support apparel ERB because it positively affectssociety 3 7 5.22 0.946Willingness to pay a premium for ERB 3.33 7 4.71 0.989I am willing to pay a premium for clothing that isproduced in accordance with the sustainable garmentproduction standard 2 7 4.49 1.111It is still worthwhile to support eco-friendly apparel evenif I have to forgo some clothing options 3 7 4.81 0.938I plan to buy apparel from environmentally responsiblefashion retailers in the future 3 7 4.83 0.918 Table AI.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

245


the impact of ethical fashion on consumer purchase behavior

Documents