Stage one report NTU FMB by Claudia Golland

Claudia Golland N0735243 Word count - 7684

Ethical declaration - I confirm that this work has gained ethical approval and that I have faithfully observed the terms of the approval in the conduct of this project. Signed: Date:

Conten

1.1 Introduction pg. 8 1.2 Rationale pg. 9 1.3 Aim pg. 10 1.4 Objectives pg. 10-11

Literature Review pg. 12 2.1 Status and society pg. 14 2.1.1 Public vs Private pg. 15 2.1.2 Sustainable brands pg. 15 2.1.3 Peer pressure pg. 15

Literature Review 3.1 The Intention-Behaviour gap pg. 16 3.1.1 Habit by Availability pg.18 3.1.2 Cost making/breaking habit pg. 19

Literature Review 4.1 Hedonism pg. 20 4.1.1 Fast fashion pg. 21 4.1.2 Ethical consumption pg. 21

Literature Review 5.1 Ethical Concern pg. 22 5.1.1 Overestimation of consumers pg. 23

Methodology pg. 24 6.1 Research Sample pg. 26 6.2 Secondary research pg. 27 6.3 Online questionnaire pg. 28 6.4 Diary study pg. 29 6.5 Focus groups pg. 30 6.6 Expert interviews pg. 31 6.7 Store observations pg. 32 6.8 Instagram questionnaire pg. 32 Disscussion: Why are young people purchasing unethically? pg. 34 7.1 Affordability pg. 36 7.2 Convenience and Availability pg. 38 7.3 Social media pg. 40 7.4 Lack of Knowledge pg. 42 7.5 Key Chapter Insights pg. 43 Disscussion: What influences ethical behaviour? pg. 44 8.1 Self-Satisfaction and Status pg. 46 8.2 Social media exposure pg. 48 8.3 Prioritising ethical concern pg. 50 8.4 Ethical Divestment pg. 52 8.5 Key Chapter Insights pg. 53

Conclusions pg. 54 9.1 Critical reflection pg. 56 9.2 SWOT analysis pg. 57 9.3 Recommendations pg. 58

10.1 Appendix pg. 60 10.2 References pg. 90 10.3 Bibliography pg. 94 10.4 Image References pg. 98

Introd 8

1.1

Introduction

This report will investigate consumer habits of 18-25-year-old females and how they buy ethically or from fast fashion, or both. From this, it’s hoped the research carried out will answer the question “Is the ‘Woke’ generation chasing sustainability or style?”. The discussion will include factors such as; cost, availability, status, and how these impact the mindset of consumers when purchasing. The ‘Future Thinking’ report introduced this discussion from the broader research on sustainability and general ethical consumption. The purpose of this report is to refine and develop that initial research and with this information further explore the consumerism of young people using multiple forms of primary research methods, and secondary research including reliable academic articles and reports. This variety of research will strengthen the arguments and discussions, and will further result in a highly reliable conclusion to the question put forward.

1.2

Rationale

“Millennials are becoming more conscientious of the products they buy, as well as the social and environmental implications behind them. However, Millennials with low discretionary incomes have limited choices in today’s marketplace, and it is unclear as to how these consumers perceive lowcost apparel options, including fast fashion” (Sorensen and Johnson-Jorgensen, 2019)

In the changing world, sustainability and ethics have become major factors in the lives of everyone. The exposure of the negative impacts of today’s purchase culture has created hysteria among consumers, especially millennials. However, particularly for the fashion industry, there is a divide in the market between consumers with ethical buying behaviours and those with unfulfilled ethical purchase intentions. This report has been written for the purpose of discovering why consumers seen as part of the most ethical generation are purchasing unethically against their desires. Whether this is because of the cost, availability, style or other alternatives.

Aim 1.3

To investigate 18-25-year-old females and why they are seen as ethical consumers when theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re also the biggest buyers of fast fashion.

1.4

Objectives

To identify how different self motivations can impact consumers purchasing decisions.

To identify how brands are rejecting or contributing to being sustainable, and how their availability and price is influencing consumerism.

To identify why someone may purchase unethically when they have feelings of ethical concern.

To analyse how social media contributes to the sustainability trend and how it may impact young people's interest in it.

To identify how the sustainability trend is affecting the consumerism of different generations.

To use theories and evidence from primary and secondary research to support relevant ideas and statements.

To identify a gap in the market to come up with a business solution compromising both ethical consumption and convenience culture.

These objectives have been put in place as a guide for secondary research and the gap found will work alongside these objectives to shape the primary research. This will involve; the methods of research used, the questions asked and any other possible variables. This is to ensure the research is not without purpose and any data gathered is worthwhile and valid, therefore, filling the gaps in knowledge from the reviewed literature.

Literature 14

2 To ensure the primary research will be effective and valuable, an evaluation of relevant literature is vital to support the research findings and will determine the success of the study. In addition, from reading a broad scope of academic literature, research gaps can be identified, and primary research methods will be shaped around this, so thereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll be a thoroughly investigated piece of writing filling the research gap. Within the literature review, key themes are identified from a breadth of articles and other academic sources. These will be analysed and compared to contribute to the direction of the discussion. The themes found are relating to the research aim, and are therefore associated with motivations for people to purchase either ethically or unethically.

Status and Society 2.1

“Individuals strive to improve their social standing through the conspicuous consumption of consumer products that confer and symbolise status both for the individual and surrounding significant others” (Eastman et al, 1999, pg. 41)

Despite the current knowledge surrounding the negative effects of the fashion industry on the environment, many consumers are not motivated to consume ethically simply because of their environmental concern. Tascioglu et al. (2016), investigates consumers perceptions of status motivations regarding sustainability efforts of retailers. It says; Status is recognised as a significant motivator for certain human behaviours (Ivanic and Nunes, 2009; Anderson et al., 2015), and therefore sustainability is a new way consumers can demonstrate status (Delgado et al., 2015). This is supported by Griskevicius et al.’s (2010) study which states that; “there may be important links between displays of caring, environmental behaviours and competition for status,” (Greskevicius et al., 2010, pg. 392). Traditionally status is associated with consumers owning luxury items however, both studies identify competitive altruism as a way of gaining an impressive reputation. Altruism is the act of benefiting others at the cost of using the giver’s resources needed for survival (Barrett, Dunbar, & Lycett, 2002; Tooby & Cosmides, 1996). “The purchase of green products enables a person to signal that he is both willing and able to buy a product that benefits others at a cost to his personal use” (Greskevicius et al., 2010, pg. 394) This shows why someone may psychologically relate having a good reputation with being green and therefore would choose these green products over luxury, non-green items.

2.1.1 Public vs Private However, these works of literature also identify that the motivation of status may only be relevant when there are people watching the act of purchase. Meaning that if the consumer is interacting with others, such as customers or a sales assistant, they are more likely to buy sustainably. Whereas if the consumer is home online shopping the status motivation has not been activated and is less likely to buy the ethical option if it’s more expensive (Greskevicius et al., 2010, pg. 396).

2.1.2 Sustainable brands Following from this in Davies and Gutsche’s 2015 article, it was deduced that brands have also been motivated by status for their sustainable practices as “a way of improving their reputation, differentiating themselves and meeting economic objectives” (Nicholls, 2002). For consumers that are motivated by status, sustainable brands are a perfect way to show off their purchases. Van der Wal et al. (2016, pg. 217) identified that people shopping at a high-status sustainable store are more likely to internationally demonstrate that they’ve shopped sustainably by not reusing bags, but by buying branded shopping bags boasting about their purchases (Van der Wal et al. 2016, pg. 217). This means that brands are contributing to the consumers need for status. However, it can also be argued that consumers buying ethically regardless of the reason is better than not buying ethically at all.

2.1.2 Peer pressure In Davies and Gutsche’s (2016) study another type of status motivation can be deduced. It shows that peer pressure and social guilt make consumers feel obligated to buy ethically to feel like they have an impressive reputation among their friends. A participant in their study said; “I have to buy fair trade otherwise people would look down on me.'' This proves that consumers are highly influenced by other people's perceptions of them and this affects their purchasing habits. However, something that wasn’t identified in the literature analysed was consumers may be motivated by status in an unethical way. For example, Morgan and Birtwistle (2009) argue that “Young fashion consumers are style hungry” (Watson and Yan, 2013, pg. 142). Therefore status and reputation could be motivating consumers to care about their style more than their sustainable practices, 17 this will be explored further in this study.

The Intention-behavio Gap 3.1

“A sustainable society is a great idea, but how can the world's 5.7 billion people be redirected to adopt sustainable social practices? No one knows” (Fisk, 1998, pg 661)

Although this is a statement made 22 years ago, Fisk’s point is still extremely valid. How can now 7 billion people all be converted to change their consumption habits simply because of an issue new to them? In this section articles studying the difference between a consumer's intention and actual behaviour habits are analysed, as well as, why the habits may or may not be broken. Carrington et al (2012) argue that a consumer can be ethically minded but that doesn’t necessarily mean they purchase accordingly. This is called the intention-behaviour gap where purchasing intentions do not translate to actual buying behaviour (Carrington et al. 2012, pg. 2760). A 2005 study reports that only 30% of UK consumers convert ethical concerns into purchase intentions and only 3% further purchase ethical products (Futerra Sustainability Communications Ltd. 2005). Although this study was 15 years ago, the statistic still shows that consumers have ethical concerns but there are reasons why their purchase intentions do not result in an actual purchase. From this it can be concluded that due to, “89% of UK consumers reporting they have ethical issues of concern” (Lazzarini and de Mello, 2001) but not translating this into purchases, consumers don’t break habits easily.

3.1.1 Habits by Availability There are two main identified reasons for the unethical habits, these are cost and availability. Carrington et al. identify that it’s not often possible for consumers to buy ethically due to insufficient market options, meaning that consumers aren’t able to consume according to their ethical concerns (Carrington et al. 2012, pg. 2763). This leads to the consumer being reluctant to sacrifice the habits they’re content with, and subsequently, an intentionbehaviour gap is formed. In contrast, in this literature Carrington et al. also recognises there are consumers that carry out their ethical intentions and sacrifice their usual habits because they prioritise their ethical concerns (Carrington et al. 2012, pg. 2764). David and Gutsche (2016) also support this statement in their article by saying that, ethical consumers actively seek out alternatives to mainstream products because they strongly believe in ethical issues (Bezençon and Blili, 2010). But within their own research, it was found that although consumers were purchasing ethically, it was due to habits formed by local product availability over ethical concerns. An example used is fairtrade products. It was found that many simply brought the products because their most convenient retailer started selling fair trade, but they hadn’t actually ever explored the issues (David and Gutsche, 2016, pg.1335).

3.1.2 Costs making/breaking Habits Another reason ethically minded consumers may not purchase ethically is the cost. Although many have the perception that because ethical products are usually more expensive they are of high quality (Davies and Gutsche, 2016), many participants in Davies and Gutsche’s 2016 study say they would only buy ethically if they had more money (Davies and Gutsche, 2016). In the Griskevicius et al. 2010 study, it can be seen that habit is primarily caused by economic reasons and therefore “an effective way to motivate people to go green is by making green products cheaper, more efficient and providing consumers with financial incentives to buy them” (Griskevicius et al. 2010, pg. 393). This shows that the intention-behaviour gap does have reasoning. Consumers have ethical concerns but are reluctant to buy ethically if they can’t afford it. This can be proven further through the study’s own primary research which resulted in showing that when there are no contributing motivations such as convenience or price, green products are more desired than non-green alternatives (Griskevicius et al. 2010, pg. 399). The research gap that cannot be found in this literature is that there seems to be nothing specific about fashion consumption and how the cheap and convenient options are the same reasons for forming habits or not. Therefore this study will hope to find what makes someone purchase fast or ethical fashion, and how cost, availability and habits might contribute to intentions translating into behaviour.

4 In this section, the literature identifies a third reason that contributes to what consumers purchase. Multiple academics have established that a major motivation for consumers is the pursuit of pleasure, known as Hedonism. Davies and Gutsche (2016) argue that; “the strongest motivational aspect of fair trade consumption appears to be to please self rather than helping others” (Davies and Gutsche, 2016, pg. 1338) this shows consumer motivation is reflected in their purchases to find pleasure.

4.1

Hedonism

4.1.1 Fast fashion Within Watson and Yan’s 2013 study they identify that consumers use this motivation for both consuming ethically and from fast fashion. This is because; “Hedonism goals are the needs to seek pleasure through any domain” (Watson and Yan, 2013, Pg. 150) therefore a consumer buying from the fashion domain that pleasures them most is hedonism, and can, therefore, provide pleasure for both fast and ethical fashion items. Watson and Yan demonstrate that fast fashion consumers can gain pleasure by buying multiple items for a low price as well as, enjoying the shopping and social experiences (Watson and Yan, 2013, Pg. 150).

4.1.2 Ethical consumption Alternatively in the Tascioglu et al. 2016 study, it’s demonstrated that; “luxury consumers who pay more attention to ethics may do so to either feel good about themselves” (Davies et al, 2012). This literature displays a negative connection between consumption and sustainability making consumers appear materialistic. However, in the Davies and Gutsche study participants seem positive about the fact they consume ethically. One participant says; “buying fair trade generally makes me feel happy and feel good about myself” (Participant, Davies and Gutsche 2016 study, pg. 1338). Another says; “I know it’s supposed to be about making other people's lives easier. But to be honest, for me, it is more about making my one life better” (Participant, Davies and Gutsche 2016 study, pg. 1338). This was a common theme among participants however 50 interviews were carried out and limited quotes were shown, so this cannot be a valid representation of the whole group.

To conclude this section, it can be identified that many academics demonstrate ethical consumption as a way of satisfying the consumer, however, only Watson and Yan identify consumers might purchase unethically for the reason of self-satisfaction. It also identifies that it is the only study examining the different decision-making processes of consumers of fast vs slow fashion and therefore within this report, the comparison will be researched further.

Ethical Concern 5.1 24

Finally, in this section, the motivation for the consumption of ethical concern is analysed. This is the most obvious reason for consuming ethically although in the previous sections academics have identified that there are multiple. Bezençon and Blili (2012) identify that; “ethical consumers seek out alternatives to mainstream products because they strongly believe in ethical issues” (Davies and Gutsche, 2016, Pg.1328). This is further supported by De Plasmacker et al. 2005 and Shaw & Shui, 2002 who is referenced by Carrington et al. saying; “Mainstream consumers increasingly express concerns about the ethicality and impact of their consumption choices upon the environment, animals and/ or society” (Carrington et al. 2012, pg. 2759). Some evidence to support these statements is that 89% of Uk consumers claim to be concerned about ethical issues (Lazzarini and de Mello, 2001), therefore it can be deduced that this is a common theme among ethical consumption motivations. In the Arli 2017 study, it’s recognised from their research only a very small percentage of participants were highly ethical, but the majority overall were ethical in some way. However, as the research method used is a survey, it cannot be guaranteed these results are completely valid as people may be biased for self-reputation.

5.1.1 Overestimation of ethical concern However, it’s argued this is an overestimation of the role of altruistic values in current literature (Davies and Gutsche, 2016). Meaning that academics have too much faith in saying ethical values are the main reason for ethical consumption. Carrington et al., (2010, 2012) “found a limited number of deeply held beliefs driving the creation of new ethical consumption habits” (Davies and Gutsche, 2016, pg. 1335) which supports this. In addition, Griskevicius et al. 2010 demonstrated that recent research suggests; “more socially orientated motives may even be more powerful at influencing peoples’ tendencies to conserve” (Griskevicius et al. 2010, pg 393). This can be proven by the Schwartz value theory which identifies ten broad values and the motivations that stimulate each one. Bardi and Schwartz 2003 said that people’s behaviours might reflect their values even when they’re not consciously thinking about their actions. This means consumers do not necessarily purchase ethically even if they have an ethical concern if there’s an unconscious motivation stimulating their actions. This point will be identified further in this study, as to why someone who has ethical concern may not automatically purchase according to these values

Metho How consumers minds work and why they choose to purchase ethically or not is a complex concept to understand. Therefore a broad scope of both quantitative and qualitative methods of primary and secondary research are shown. This is to ensure that there is reliability within the findings and furthermore any gaps in secondary research can be filled through the primary research methods. This also strengthens the validity of the arguments made using this data as evidence. Zarley and Yan identified there have been no found empirical studies that analyse the difference of decision-making processes between consumers of Fast and slow fashion. As this research question is very similar to their study, it has given inspiration for a more in-depth and diverse primary research analysis and methods. By implementing primary and secondary research separately the Concurrent Triangulation design method (see appendix 1) adapted by Creswell and Clark, can be applied to the exploration. This method is where the research is carried out and then further analysed separately so that data can be compared for crossvalidation or combined to see common themes throughout.

This study focuses on females aged 18-25. This covers a refined mixed selection of Generation Z and the Millennial generation. The reason this demographic was chosen is because they are seen as the so-called ‘Woke’ generation, because they are the most ethically and environmentally conscious generation. Additionally, the group is further refined to females only, as the majority of fast fashion stores only cater to women. So this gives a more accurate representation of vast fast fashion buyers, (Zarley and Yan, 2013). As well as this, “younger millennial women age (18-24) felt most strongly about corporate social responsibility” (Su et al. 2019. Pg. 1144) This sample is controversial as there are many different sources claiming the demographic has different priorities within consumption. According to the Ethical Consumer Markets report 2018 “younger people are the most likely age group to avoid buying or using a product or service that has a negative impact on the environment in the last year, with 34% of 18-24-year-olds, reporting it was a reason for them to withhold spending” (Ethical consumer Markets report, 2018). Whereas, Johansson et al. identify that millennials contradict their own sustainability efforts because they are “characterised as impulsive buyers which can be connected to them prioritising the present rather than embracing a long term perspective.” (Viswanathan, V and Jain, V. 2013) In addition to this sample group, Older age groups such as baby boomers will be taken into account within the secondary research and online surveys within the primary research (See appendix 2). This is because it allows comparison in generations so it can be identified if the chosen demographic really is the most ethical.

Secondary research

Sample

6.2

6.1

To start off the research process extensive secondary research was carried out to gain a broad scope of knowledge in the desired topics. Analysing existing research articles and other academic literature gave a deeper understanding of the subject areas and inspiration for the methods of primary research that may be useful. “Secondary data lets you build on existing research, which leads to better results, and saves time and money” (O. Puniello, 2018). The gap found within the secondary research means a set of objectives valuable for the research project can be created and by doing this it ensures there’s a justifiable structure for the primary research before it is executed. The forms of secondary research explored were academic literature such as articles, studies and reports. As well as, notable fashion and research websites such as; Business of Fashion. Also, TV documentaries, Ted talks, and peer-reviewed books were used to gain a diverse breadth of knowledge surrounding the topic.

Limitations The limitations of secondary research could be being able to ensure the validity of the source it came from. This doesn’t necessarily mean the knowledge of the author, as for academic sources the author’s experience and knowledge are usually easily attainable. However, despite the authors experience there may be an extreme bias in their writing which would be misleading to the reader.

Online Questionnaire 6.3

The purpose of carrying out online questionnaires is so a large set of data can be collected and isn’t subjective to a small group. The aim of this questionnaire was to collect information about the consumption habits of a diverse range of women of different ages. Although this project focuses on young women aged 18-25, it seemed beneficial to compare consumption themes and habits of different generations. To do this two questionnaires were sent out with the same questions, one for 18-25-year-old women and the other for women aged 26-65 (see appendix 2). This makes identifying the differences very simple and easy to analyse statistically. Collecting this information in the form of an online questionnaire is very beneficial because the ease of gathering the data online means that there is more likely to be a large number of respondents and at no cost to the researcher. As well as this being anonymous, participants are more likely to be truthful.

Limitations With the questionnaire simply being shared on social media and sent by respondents to friends to participate, the data may have some level of bias and a lack of diversity. In this questionnaire, a combined amount of 120 people participated, meaning the data is reliable however uneven between the two demographics. To improve this, it may be worthwhile sending to a survey sharing site to improve variation throughout the respondents’ age and location. As well as this, some surveys with closed-ended questions lack validity (DeFranzo, S. 2012) such as multiple-choice, because there isn’t room for the respondent to explain or choose their own answer. To solve this, this survey includes an ‘other’ answer choice on relevant questions as an opportunity to expand on answers.

6.4

Diary Study

The diary study entailed handing out logbooks to six voluntary 18-25-year-old female participants, that for 1-2 months will fill in their consumption of material items answering a few questions about their consumption thought process for each item, (see appendix 3). The purpose of this activity was to discover what the participants thought when purchasing, whether they considered the brand’s ethical values or not, and why. This can be a useful form of research because it allows the analysis of consumer shopping habits over an extended period of time, meaning you can see any common themes for the consumer and identify any anomalies that may occur.

Limitations The limitations of this research method are that due to the fact there are questions about ethical practices some consumers will feel guilty about their unethical actions and lie to make themselves seem honourable. To avoid this, participants were given the option on the consent form for anonymising their quotes if used in the report. As well as this, some participants may forget to fill out the diary for every material purchase and others may not understand the questions. To ensure this doesn’t happen and the results remain valid, a detailed overview was given to the participants before taking part and the diaries will be checked a week into the study clarify the participants understanding.

This method involved a thirty-minute interview with four 20-21-year-old females, questioning them on their habits and understandings surrounding sustainability and ethical consumption, (see appendix 4). The participants discussed why they do and donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t act sustainably covering multiple objectives for this report. To finish the focus group, the participants were shown pictures showing issues surrounding fashion and the environment and were asked how they felt from an emotion scale. This increased the methods validity as it covered both their conscious and unconscious reactions.

Limitations Some limitations to this method could be; if there is a common trend of opinion throughout the group some participants may feel uncomfortable voicing different opinions due to avoiding judgement. In contrast, participants may disagree so much that the discussion deepens and strays from the desired topic (Evalued, 2006). In addition, thereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s validity in numbers, therefore small groupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s may not have enough diversity in opinions to be able to use the information as evidence. To avoid this, information from multiple methods of primary research will be used to support it.

Expert interviews involve sourcing different professionals within the fashion industry and contacting them with questions about what their company does for sustainability and their opinions on the surrounding discussions, (see appendix 5). This gives a professional insight into the topics studied and is beneficial to the report as it provides an opinion from a business perspective.

Limitations This method may have limitations because any questions asked about their business may be biased in order to make their business practices look more positive than they really are. As well as this, many professionals do not have the time to carry out interviews so many be vague and short with responses or even not respond at all.

Expert interviews

Focus Group

6.6

6.5

Store observations 6.7

The shop safaris were carried out to see the different availability of ethical clothing items in comparison to fast fashion items on the high street (see appendix 6). Therefore it can be identified if it is possible for someone to shop ethically on a low budget and if there is availability of fashionable sustainable items. To do this, a trip down the local high street was carried out to see if the shops planned to go in had any ethical alternatives to what was sold.

Limitations The limitations of this form of research is that it is subjective to the local town where the research is carried out, as well as, the shop that is gone in. This is because the store product range can differ from town to town. However, it can be argued that to make a real ethical difference there should be product availability in all variations of shops both in small towns and big cities.

Instagram questionnaire

6.8

The Instagram questionnaire was the final piece of primary research carried out to get some final insights from the consumer demographic and fill in the closing gaps from information discovered from primary research. This entailed sending out a few optional questions on an Instagram story asking girls aged 18-25 to answer (see appendix 7).

Limitations 34

The limitations of this study are that only followers of the account can see the Instagram story and therefore it could be argued that the participants are all of a similar mindset and demographic so will not provide a very diverse set of answers.

Research Chapter 1 36

Within this research paper, the aim was to investigate 18-25-year-old females and why they are seen as ethical consumers when theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re also the biggest buyers of fast fashion. Therefore, from a gathering of multiple methods of primary research and supporting this with an analysis of a collection of literature, this chapter will try and find a conclusion as to why consumers who claim to be concerned about ethics are consuming unethically. In todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s society, there is a general understanding that we need to collectively come together and act ethically in order to save our planet from climate change. However, there are multiple reasons why the attitudebehaviour gap exists. This chapter will highlight reasons such as availability of products, affordability, and other motives contributing this attitudebehaviour gap and consumers not choosing to purchase ethically and instead purchasing fast fashion.

Affordability 7.1

For female consumers aged 18-25 it’s understandable that although they may want to, the income is simply not available for them to be purchasing from expensive sustainable brands and this it makes it difficult due to the concept that, “Millennials want sustainability to be a top priority” (Fisher, 2018). From the questionnaire sent out to the demographic, price was either the first or second most important factor for 80% of the participants that filled in the survey (see appendix 2). Also, the Instagram questionnaire supports this, because 59% of respondents said this would be a reason they might not purchase ethically (see appendix 7). This shows the consumers cannot ignore price as a factor in their purchasing as it is too important to them.

“18-25-year-olds are more fashion curious and experimental, looking for new trends. But this generation cannot afford current sustainable fashion due to university fees and lack of student loan to support them”. - (Alice Taylor, Founder and Director of PointToPoint clothing. 2019 (See appendix 5a)

This quote from sustainable brand director Alice Taylor proves that brands understand that younger people cannot afford to purchase ethically and therefore her brand targets 25-55 year-olds because of this.

However, within the focus group can be identified that although many participants said they couldn’t afford to buy sustainably they would like to… “I can’t afford to buy more expensive items even though I want to.” “Do you wish you were more sustainable?” “Yeah if I had the money” “Fast fashion is easy to get like you can get clothes that are affordable really quickly” “I’d rather have once nice jumper than like a couple of not good quality ones, but for t-shirts and stuff I’m not that bothered and don’t have the money to spend a lot on them” “If it’s a cheap fast fashion outfit I probably won’t care that much if I ruin it because it’s cheap and replaceable.” (Focus group participants, appendix 4)

These quotes show a common theme of the attitude-behaviour gap within the study’s demographic. Although limited income is a justifiable reason for young people to not consume ethically, and it doesn’t mean ethical concern is not present, there are cheaper alternatives for people to buy ethically such as online second-hand stores and charity shops. This is displayed in the diary study part of the research as one participant purchases a reworked top from a speciality second-hand vintage shop proving younger people do partially purchase ethically. However, this was an anomaly in the diary study findings so more exposure of this availability 39 could promote more sustainable purchasing (see appendix 3b).

Convenience and Availability 7.2

Another factor contributing to the attitudebehaviour gap is the lack of availability for consumers to purchase ethically where it’s convenient, at a reasonable cost and in the right style. Throughout the primary research it is apparent that a lot of consumers feel this way about sustainability. That the ethical concern within them does prevail, however, they struggle to pinpoint a sustainable brand that fulfils their multiple desires. This concept is exhibited within the Instagram questionnaires because; 31% of Instagram respondents refrained from consuming ethically due to limited availability of ethical items (see appendix 7). This statistic is further substantiated by the online questionnaire displaying that convenience of purchasing is the 5th most important consideration when shopping for both the study’s demographic and for older women. However, there is a contrast within the online questionnaires which show that 50% of respondents have bought an ethical item in the last month (see appendix 2), meaning that although it is provided as a reason that they would not buy ethically, enough respondents have enough ethical concern to act otherwise. To get a more in-depth insight about the availability of products affecting the consumer purchasing, an industry professional was interviewed for an insight. She said; “A lot of work is needed to make sustainable fashion more accessible or ‘deemed’ more accessible to the general public… If it’s to be picked up more widely, we need to start making sustainability around fashion more welcoming, accessible and cool for the general shopper, particularly young girls”. - (Kirstie Brittain, Sustainability project coordinator, Hubbub. 2019. See appendix 5b). Brittain proves that even brands are aware about the issue of ethical availability, and therefore how can they expect consumers to comply with the current options available. There is further evidence from the store observations which shows that the only real brand availability for ethical consumers on a budget is the new H&M conscious range, other brands are simply too expensive or aren’t ethical at all (see appendix 6).

This section can also identify that convenience is a reason this consumer demographic may choose to buy fast fashion, not only an explanation for purchasing unethically. It is seen throughout the focus group that the participants are not using fast fashion as a cheap alternative but as a choice.

“One of the reasons I like it is because it gets delivered quickly and is really affordable.” “You don’t have to go to a shop and look through loads of items you can just type in what you want and it comes up, then you can select the colour that you want, it’s just so much easier.” “Yeah, it’s really hard to walk down the street and see something you like that is also ethical.” “Yeah agreed if there’s a particular item I want but it’s not got an exact same sustainable alternative I’ll still buy it because I like it.” (Focus group participants, appendix 4)

Arnold (2009) supports this as the “ethical fashion industry consists mainly of small companies which therefore have low economies of scale, meaning that they struggle to compete with much larger, so-called “fast fashion” retailers.” (Goworek et al., 2012, pg 939)

7.3

Social Media

Social media is argued to be a very positive concept by means to exposing the audience to new ideas, trends, information and motivations. Social media however can also lead to consumers being persuaded in anti-ethical ways. Fast fashion has a strong presence on social media and for consumers who care deeply about how they look and keeping on-trend, social media can have a detrimental effect on their ethical purchase intentions. This is also identified within the interviews with industry professionals. Brittain from Hubbub says; “Fast fashion is so ingrained in social media culture that we are constantly bombarded with a new bikini, a new jumper, all at low price points and promoted by our favourite influencers” (Kirstie Brittain, Sustainability project coordinator, Hubbub. 2019. see appendix 5b). Therefore, it is hard for consumers that are so easily influenced by seeing new fashion to refrain from new trends that they see so prominently on social media. The demographic themselves supported this statement because 76% of Instagram respondents said social media impacts how they view ethical and fast fashion clothing (see appendix 7). Therefore, with social media being highly fast fashion saturated, and for this easily influenced generation being intense social media users, it would be difficult for consumers to stray away from the content that is put in front of them. From the focus group it is identified that the participants not only feel a desire to have new trends but also a pressure that has been put upon them by society and social media. This was displayed when they were asked; “Do you feel like there is a pressure in today’s society to be on-trend and stylish?” (see appendix 4). The participants responded…

“Yeah I feel like I need to follow trends” “Same, I always see new styles I like on Instagram and think I need to get that!” “Yeah maybe subconsciously I am, because I would never ever started wearing neon clothing, and then Love Island came on and everyone was wearing neon bikinis” (Focus group participants, appendix 4) However, despite the pressure they claim to feel from social media, the participants also said social influencers promoting sustainability would probably not influence them (see appendix 4), this shows they are not highly influenced by what they see online, their own desires, rather than the pressures they feel are more of a motive for consumption.

Lack of Knowledge 7.4

The final major reason from primary research that can be identified as a reason young women may not consume ethically is their lack of knowledge surrounding the subject of ethical consumption. Sproles et al., 1978 argued that in order for a consumer to be able to make an efficient decision, they should be fully knowledgeable on the information. Therefore, it is understandable if a consumer does not have the knowledge regarding how they should be consuming ethically, they cannot be expected to do so. This is shown by the diary studies where one participant when asked if there was a reason she didn’t purchase from a sustainable brand, she said; “I don’t think I’m well informed enough to know what is/isn’t sustainable” (see appendix 3b). Proving that the consumer themselves admits they do not purchase ethically because they do not understand the importance of ethical consumption. Within the focus group it can also be identified that the participants do not have much knowledge on the impact of fashion on the environment and why we need to consume ethically. When asked why they think we should consume ethically the only two responses were to not damage the environment and to produce less waste (see appendix 4). Although both are important factors regarding ethical consumption, there is so much more to the negative effects of fashion that a consumer should understand when purchasing. This became apparent to the participants towards the end of the focus group when they were shown images displaying the detrimental effects of fashion on the environment. They were asked to point to their emotion on a scale, these included; anger, surprise, sadness and other negative responses. This shows that there is a serious lack of knowledge in this topic area and therefore the education could be the answer to improving the ethical practices of consumers.

Key Chapter Insights 7.5

The attitude-behaviour gap is not the fault of the consumer. Ethical concern is present for many consumers, however, to carry out their ethical intentions would require a lot of sacrifice, such as buying out of price range or purchasing inconveniently. It is apparent that until brands make buying ethically simpler for the consumer, it would be unusual to see consumers change their purchasing habits. Although social media is an excellent way of informing people on social issues and spreading knowledge quickly and widely, it seems that fast fashion is saturating the major social medias’ massively and therefore influencing consumers astray from their ethical concern Ethical consumption is not something consumers are just ignoring, many consumers simply do not have the knowledge about brands to purchase in a more ethical way. Perhaps it is the responsibility of brands to take ethics into account and educate without the demand from consumers, as this will lead to a more ethically consuming society because consumers will not have to make the decision to change their purchase habits themselves, brands will do this for them.

Research Chapter 2

Following on from the previous chapter which investigates the reasons behind why consumers choose not to buy ethically, this chapter will show contrast and look at the influences behind the ethical behaviour of the research respondents, as well as, from research within previous academic studies. Within this chapter it will be identified that ethical concern is not the only reason a consumer may act ethically, it will highlight that there are multiple motivations as to why someone may have ethical purchase behaviours other than simply their concern.

Status and Self-Satisfaction 8.1

From the literature review, it was clear that hedonism, the pursuit of self-pleasure, was a very prominent reason for consumers to purchase ethically. Buying ethically allowed the consumer to feel like they had done something good, as well as look good in front of others. This is called competitive altruism. These themes have been displayed throughout the primary research of this study. Within the Instagram questionnaire 22% of consumers said a reason they might purchase ethically was because it makes them feel like a good person, in contrast only 4% said because it makes them look good in front of others. Proving that to satisfy oneself is a much bigger motivation than a good reputation (see appendix 7). This does not equate to the literature review which demonstrated that status has a significant impact on people’s consumption habits. Greskicius et al. 2010 said that; “there may be important links between displays of caring, environmental behaviours and competition for status,” (Greskevicius et al., 2010, pg. 392). Therefore, it’s interesting that this theme didn’t show up within the primary research and selfsatisfaction was more of a dominant theme. The motivation of self-pleasure showed up within the focus group when discussing the difference between vintage second-hand clothing and fast fashion. The participants were asked if they would value vintage items more than cheap items. One participant said; “I would, just because it’s more one of a kind, rather than one that everyone has. Because fast fashion tends to mean everyone has the same thing” (Focus group participant, appendix ref 4). This shows that the participant has an emotional connection with the vintage item and it satisfies her more than a fast fashion item would, therefore showing a reason to purchase ethically. A reason consumers may be more motivated by self-pleasure rather than recognition from others is that within Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory the self-fulfilment needs are higher on the scale than the esteem needs which includes the need for respect and reputation (Maslow, 1943, appendix 8). Therefore, this shows that people are aiming more for self-satisfaction rather than to satisfy others within their consumption habits.

“Sustainability and social media may also contribute to the motivation needed for achieving individual behavioural change” (Reilly and Weirup, 2012. Pg 8) Social media is a very impactful medium for informing the viewer on trending or relevant content at that moment in time. Therefore, with ethics and sustainability being one of the biggest social issues currently, social media is performing as an educator for people who are uninformed on the topic. This is even more pertinent for fashion as social media is the foundation for marketing of fashion brands (The Fashion Network, 2019). Throughout the primary research there was mainly positive responses as to how social media can impact the consumer’s ethical purchasing habits, although as identified in the previous chapter there is evidence it can sway consumers in the other direction.

Within the Instagram questionnaire, there was a very positive response regarding the relationship between sustainability and social media. The participants were asked if social media had an impact on how they viewed ethical and fast fashion clothing, 76% of respondents said ‘yes’ and 92% of people that followed this up by saying it affected them in a more ethical way (see appendix 7). Some of the responses were;

“Makes me want to be more ethical if I see others doing it” “Exposed to the honest raw truth of what fast fashion does to people and the environment”

“Increase awareness about fast fashion and the negative impacts it has” (Instagram questionnaire responses, appendix 7)

These responses prove that the consumers themselves understand that social media has a very positive impact on how they view ethics surrounding fashion. In relation to these findings it can be deduced that due to social media being a major contributor in the expansion of trends, that acting ethically is in fact on-trend. This is identified by Alice Taylor, founder of sustainable clothing brand PointToPoint clothing. She says; “Obviously, Veganism and ethical fashion has become very trendy over the last 5 years, and 18-25-year-olds are more fashion curious and experimental, looking for new trends” (Alice Taylor, PointToPoint clothing. 2019. See appendix 5a). This is further supported by a focus group response. When discussing societal pressures regarding being on-trend, one participant said; “I feel like being sustainable is more on-trend… things like vintage are on-trend, which is more sustainable” (Focus group participant, appendix 4). Therefore, it can be argued that social media and the idea of sustainability being a ‘trend’ influences consumers purchase behaviour in a more ethical way.

8.2

Social media exposure

“Draws attention to the impact of fast fashion and how harmful it is for the planet”

Prioritising ethical concern 8.3

The results show that;

Young women are 26% more likely to purchase from a brand if it’s sustainable, and 63% see it as a bonus. Whereas, older women are only 15% more likely to purchase from a brand if it’s sustainable 50% of young women have bought an ethical item in the last month, only 9% of older women have (Questionnaire results, appendix 2).

Although it would seem that the most influential reason for consumers to consume ethically should be due to their ethical concern, many other motives have been argued throughout this study that seem impactful and influential to a consumer’s purchase behaviour. However, within this section of the chapter, the exploration of consumers that do purchase according to their ethical concern will be analysed. When asking in the Instagram questionnaire if there was any reason other than just being ethical as to why they might consume ethically, 1/3 of respondents said that they purchase simply due to their ethical concern (see appendix 7). This shows that many consumers don’t have an attitude-behaviour gap, and are actively prioritising their ethical concerns when purchasing. In addition, within the diary study one participant significantly stands out as more sustainable from the others. For every item purchased, she said that she would consider spending more money for a sustainable alternative when 75% of her purchases were already from Depop, an online second-hand store which is therefore already sustainable (see appendix 3f). Although this is not a majority among the participants it shows there are young people prioritising their ethical concerns when purchasing. To get a broader and more reliable piece of evidence for the idea that younger people are the more ethically minded generation, the questionnaire compares the results of 18-25-year-old women to women over the age of 25.

This shows that there is a noticeable difference between the generations ethical habits and that the younger generation act on their concern more frequently than their older counterparts. However, for both demographics only 16% of respondents look into the ethical values of a brand ‘most of the time’ before purchasing (see appendix 2). Therefore, proving that both generations have ethical concern intentions, however, only the younger demographic act upon it. Industry professional Alice Taylor validates the questionnaire results by agreeing consumers are more likely to buy from a sustainable brand. “Anyone who reads statistics about the fashion industry's effect on global pollution is shocked and disgusted” (see appendix 5a). To conclude, it has been proven that regardless of the literature review analysis, and the primary research, the younger generation are partially ethical due to their ethical concern rather than alternative motives.

Ethical divestment 8.4 54

“Fast fashion and slow fashion consumers both choose to divest their clothing through donation, resale, pass along and reuse” (Watson and Yan, 2013, pg. 154) Throughout the primary and secondary research there is a common theme that was unexpected before this study was executed. Regardless of any ethical or unethical attitudes and behaviours surrounding the purchase, 100% of consumers analysed would dispose of their items in an ethical way if the item was not damaged. This shows that when no other motives are affecting behaviours, the consumer can act completely in accordance with their ethical intentions. Positive divestment themes shown throughout the focus group, every participant noted that their disposal habits were very ethical regardless of buying ethical or fast fashion.

“I’m quite good actually when it comes to my clothes breaking because I’ll always just stitch them back up and fix them” “I think it changed my recycling habits because I think when you want to get rid of clothes now I always take them somewhere like a charity shop” “My mum always takes all our clothes to a charity shop” “Yeah you don’t really throw stuff away anymore you give it to someone or sell it” “I think I’ve always been inclined to donate to a charity shop or sell so even knowing about it hasn’t really affected me” (Focus group participants, appendix 4)

Key Chapter Insights 8.5

Consumers are more motivated by self-pleasure than for pleasing others. Although in the literature review status is shown as a major motivation for consumers purchasing habits the primary research shows differently. This is justified by Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory. Ethical concern is more apparent throughout the minds of younger people than older generations. This may be because of the exposure to issues on social media. Social media is an excellent platform for exposing viewers to ethical issues and therefore influences consumers attitudes towards purchasing. This could be more exploited by brands to push for a more sustainable future Despite consumers having varied consumption behaviours surrounding ethics, the majority of people are very ethical within their divestment habits. Perhaps this is because there are no other major motives surrounding divestment, so it makes choosing the ethical option much easier.

The questionnaire results further validate that the majority of consumers divest items ethically regardless of how they consume. 0% of the participants for both demographics said they would put old clothes in the bin, with charity shop being the most popular option for both (see appendix 4). Then when it came to damaged clothing 72% of the younger respondents would keep it to wear at home, this only being 9% lower for the older respondents. Very similar results were seen within the diary studies, all participants said if they didn’t want to keep the items, if possible they would sell, donate or recycle their clothes (see appendix 4).

Concl

Critical Reflection 9.1

In conclusion, after in depth analysis of the primary and secondary research, following the literature review which enabled investigative gaps, the report has provided a detailed insight into the different explanations as to why young women are seen as ethical consumers when they’re also the biggest buyers of fast fashion. The report uncovered how the ‘Woke’ generation is capable of being ethically minded, however, due to different motives cannot purchase according to their ethical intentions, explaining the existence of the attitude-behaviour gap. Throughout different themes can be identified as to how the ethical consumer cannot consume ethically and how satisfaction and situational motives have actually persuaded the consumer further towards fast fashion consumption. As well as this, it can be effortlessly identified that there is a strong trend among young people being the most ethical consumers throughout the primary research and within the literature review. Whether this be for, authentic ethical reasons, or for alternative motives, 18-25-year-old women still prove to be very ethically minded. Overall the generation is very split between those who simply have ethical worries, and those who take action on their concerns. From this it can therefore be deduced that, 18-25-year-olds have gained the name deservingly, they are the most ethically concerned generation, however, there should be more opportunity for them to act upon their ethical wishes. Therefore, when moving onto ‘Stage two’ component of this study an idea will be put forward from the following recommendations in an attempt to solve identified issues. This alongside further research and analysis will strengthen the proposal logistics and provide key insights as to how the fashion market can cater to this demographic in the future.

9.2

SWOT

Opportunities

Very ethically minded generation - gives any opportunities more guaranteed success Ethical issues have good social media and news exposure Vintage/second hand clothing is seen as stylish and on trend to many Gen Z/ Millennials (see appendix 4) Sustainable brands are known for quality of items Online secondhand stores such as Depop have proven to be very successful among Gen Z/Millennials Activists such as Greta Thunburg give inspiration to younger people about being more sustainable (PESTLE, see appendix 9) Sustainable development goals creating global exposure to sustainability issues (PESTLE, see appendix 9) Lifestyle changes being made such as; Vegan/vegetarian diets and recycling habits

Online secondhand stores and vintage shops prove consumers are willing to buy second hand Opportunity in the market for an affordable high street ethical brand Online ethical consumption lifestyle blog to be used as an education forum for young consumers Increased social media exposure of ethical issues Social media based ethical brand as an alternative within the fast fashion saturated medium Online affordable ethical brand with the option of next day delivery for the convenience Gen Z/Millennials desire Charity collaboration with fashion brand as a step into being more ethical Use the self-pleasure motivation to make ethical items appear as a treat and luxury for the consumer to increase positive feelings when purchasing Divestment habits proved to be very positive and ethical within the research, therefore there’s an opportunity for some sort of clothes swap service Clothes hiring for consumers that buy fast fashion and dispose of after a few wears Digital wardrobe - virtually putting clothes on for social media to reduce material waste

Weaknesses

Threats

Ethical brands tend to be expensive (see appendix 6) Lack of high street availability for ethical clothing alternatives (see appendix 6) Lack of attainable brands that are changing their practices (see appendix 6) Many more sustainable resources cost more to produce Ethical clothing not always seen as stylish Not keeping on track with new trends Charity shops can be seen as unimpressive

Fast fashion provides cheap, on trend and easily accessible alternatives to ethical clothing Young consumers are style hungry Consuming ethically may require extreme sacrifice of usual purchasing habits that some consumers may not be willing to change Social media is very fast fashion saturated and therefore may sway influenced consumers in that direction Consumers may reject ethical alternatives if they don’t fulfil expectations

Strengths

Recommendations 9.3 60

A SWOT analysis of the Ethical clothing market has been conducted from the insights collated through primary and secondary research. This is so that the strengths and opportunities within the swot analysis can be used to identify and validate the possible recommendations for the future success of mainstream ethical consumption. These will be specifically tailored to help consumers engage with their ethical concerns and therefore reduce the attitude-behaviour gap that exists within consumers.

Clothes swap service From the research it was found that due to divestment involving no external motives in the way purchasing does, consumers were completely willing to dispose of their clothing in an ethical way. Therefore to incorporate this theme within purchasing there is a business idea of a clothes swapping service that would promote the reduction of purchasing from other unethical brands. In the same way a consumer would donate to a charity shop (see appendix 4) the consumer would take their old items to the service and swap them for equivalent items that had been donated by someone else. This idea solves the issue of affordability and promotes the reduction of purchasing from fast fashion alternatives which when becomes damaged subsequently ends up in landfills.

Social media based brand Consumers claim within the research that one of the main reasons they did not purchase ethically was due to the fact they are not well enough educated on ethical issues and because of the convenience of fast fashion (see appendix 3/4). Therefore, there is an opportunity within the market to provide consumers with a social media based ethical brand that will expose the viewer to the negative impacts of the fashion industry through its own blog, as well as, attempt to provide the same convenience such as next day delivery and affordability. This however, requires research into the logistics of convenience to ensure that the brand remains as environmentally friendly as possible.

Clothes rental service The final recommendation is based from the research findings that young women are style hungry with trends forever changing. Therefore, to reduce overconsumption and the disposal of clothes after limited wear, a brand could be created where consumers simply hire clothing from them for a certain amount of time and return it after desired time. This brand would fulfil the need of consumers to have new items without the guilt of purchasing unethically or disposing of after a short period of time.

Younger

Older

Appendix 1

CRESWELL, J. W., & CLARK, PLANO, V., 2011. Concurrent Triangulation Design Method. Designing and conducting mixed methods research., [Online]. .https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/259109828_A_New_Long-Term_Care_Facilities_Model_in_Nova_Scotia_Canada_ Protocol_for_a_Mixed_Methods_Study_of_Care_by_Design/figures?lo=1 [Accessed 1 January 2020].

Appendix 2 - Online questionnaires Younger

62 60

Older

Younger

Older

Younger

Older

Appendix 3 - Diary Study

Participant b

Participant a

Participant c

Participant d

Participant e

Appendix 4 - Focus Group

Participant f

Appendix 5a - Expert interview

Appendix 5b - Expert interview

Appendix 6 - Store observation Store observation write up - 5th December 2019 A Walk through Nottingham with specific plan in mind so it can be observed if the shops that were planned to go in had ethical options or not. Primark Primark did not seem to have any ethical alternatives, the only positive part from an ethical perspective is that it uses paper bags. However, the store is full of extremely cheap items so it is undeniable that the workers ethics are very low and the materials have been made unethically. I went in Primark for new socks and a pair of leggings, these were very cheap and there were no alternatives for ones made out of organic materials etc. Cow Nottingham vintage reworked shop I went into Cow with no specific item in mind but have been told about it before. Cow takes second hand damaged clothing and remakes it on site and by hand into a different item. I purchased a woman’s grey cropper jumper that was re-made from a mens large hoodie. This store is very ethical as it only remakes second hand items. However, it was quite expensive for a vintage shop and it also has very quirky, unusual styles. Therefore, it might not fulfil the everyday consumers needs as it was expensive, unusual styles, and the items were not every day basic pieces, they were more statement pieces of clothing. New look From walking into New look there was nothing to me that indicated whether it was sustainable or not, however due to it being considered a fast fashion brand it can be presumed it is not although the prices were a little more reasonable than the likes of Primark that was very cheap. I originally went in for a pair of high heels but didn’t end up buying any. I did notice that some fabrics did have options of organic cotton, or faux fur and faux leather which is good to have that option, but having real animal fur and leather in store is still highly unethical so it can be argued that these unethical options should be gotten rid of all together. H&M H&M is traditionally a fast fashion brand however has recently brought out its ‘Conscious range’ as an attempt to be more sustainable. This is quite a good initiative as it was quite clear in store that they hope to expand this and the clothes were clearly identified with a green label. These items were not significantly more expensive either and also have a lot of staple items rather than extravagant pieces. This therefore means that although slightly limited, H&M is providing an alternative for their customers if they choose to be sustainable. Lush

Lush is well known for being very sustainable and this was highly reflected when walking into the store. There are signs everywhere talking about the materials used packaging and their ethical values. It was clear that this brand deeply cares about the environment, workers rights, animal welfare and many other issues that are clearly at the heart of the brand. However, although it has a very wide range of cosmetic, beauty and hygiene products available, for someone on a low budget to buy the essential items on a regular basis it would be very expensive. Their products are probably more purchased as gifts or as a treat for themselves.

Appendix 7 - Instagram Questionnaire

Appendix 8 - Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

Appendix 10 - Diary study ethics forms

McLeod, S. A. (2018, May 21). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Simply Psychology. https://www. s i m p l y p s y c h o l o g y. o rg / maslow.html [Accessed 30 October 2019]

Appendix 9 - PESTLE analysis

Appendix 11 - Focus group ethics forms

Appendix 12 - Gantt Chart Anderson, J., Hildreth, J. and Howland, L. (2015), “Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 141 No. 3, pp. 574-601 [Accessed 16 December 2019]. Arli, Denni. (2017). Investigating consumer ethics: a segmentation study. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 34. 00-00. DOI: 10.1108/JCM-08-2016-1908. Available at: https://www.researchgate. net/publication/320258037_Investigating_consumer_ethics_a_segmentation_study (accessed 23 November 2019) Arnold, C. (2009), Ethical Marketing and the New Consumer, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. [online] https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=XgohhaXFMqcC&oi=fnd&pg=PT11&dq=Arnold,+C.+(2009),+Ethical+Marketing+and+the+New+Consumer,+John+Wiley+%26+Sons,+Chichester.&ots=aEgp4-84MR&sig=gIFlKIua8EKFKKMepZQ_VVQCE2o#v=onepage&q&f=false[Accessed 12 Jan 2020] Bardi, A. and Schwartz, S.H. (2003), “Values and behavior: strength and structure of relations”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 29 No. 10, pp. 1207-1220.https://journals.sagepub. com/doi/10.1177/0146167203254602 [Accessed 16 December 2019]. Barrett, L., Dunbar, R., & Lycett, J. (2002). Human evolutionary psychology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Accessed 16 December 2019]. Bezençon, V. and Blili, S. (2010), “Ethical products and consumer involvement: what’s new?”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44 Nos 9/10, pp. 1305-1321. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ abs/10.1002/mar.20407 [Accessed 2 Jan 2020] Cadet, Dayana. 2017. Millennials Going Green Means Retail Must Follow. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.mytotalretail.com/article/millennials-going-green-means-retail-must-follow/. [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Carr, D. Jasun. Gotlieb, Melissa R. Lee, Nam-Jin. Shah, Dhavan V. 2012. Examining Overconsumption, Competitive Consumption, and Conscious Consumption from 1994 to 2004: Disentangling Cohort and Period Effects [Online]. Volume: 644 issue: 1, page(s): 220-233. Available at: https:// journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0002716212449452 [Accessed 22 November 2019]. Carrington, M.J., Neville, B.A. and Whitwell, G.J. (2010), “Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 97 No. 1, pp. 139-158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6 [Accessed 22 November 2019]. Carrington, Michal J. Neville, Benjamin A. Whitwell, Gregory J, C., 2014. Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention–behavior gap. Journal of business research, [Online]. Volume 67, Issue 1, Pages 2759-2767. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/S0148296312002597 [Accessed 22 November 2019].

CRESWELL, J. W., & CLARK, PLANO, V., 2011. Concurrent Triangulation Design Method. Designing and conducting mixed methods research., [Online]. .https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259109828_A_New_Long-Term_Care_Facilities_Model_in_Nova_Scotia_Canada_Protocol_ 93 for_a_Mixed_Methods_Study_of_Care_by_Design/figures?lo=1 [Accessed 1 January 2020].

Anderson, J., Hildreth, J. and Howland, L. (2015), “Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 141 No. 3, pp. 574-601 Davies, I. and Gutsche, S. (2016), “Consumer motivations for mainstream “ethical” consumption”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 No. 7/8, pp. 1326-1347. [ONLINE] Available at: https://doi. org/10.1108/EJM-11-2015-0795 [Accessed 12 November 2019]. Davies, I. A., Lee, Z., & Ahonkhai, I. (2012). Do consumers care about ethical-luxury? Journal of Business Ethics, 106(1), 37-51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1071-y [Accessed 2 Jan 2020] DeFranzo, Susan E. Snap Surveys. 2012. Advantages and Disadvantages of Surveys. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.snapsurveys.com/blog/advantages-disadvantages-surveys/. [Accessed 7 December 2019].

Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 343-355. https:// doi.org/10.1037/a0018589[Accessed 13 December. 2019] Hai-Bin Zhang, Han-Cheng Dai, Hua-Xia Lai, Wen-Tao,, W., 2017. U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: Reasons, impacts, and China’s response. Advances in Climate Change Research, [Online]. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 220-225. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S1674927817301028 [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Howell, D. BBC News. 2016. The 5p plastic bag charge: All you need to know. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34346309. [Accessed 23 January 2020].

Delgado, M.S., Harriger, J.L. and Khanna, N. (2015), “The value of environmental status signaling”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 111, pp. 1-11. [Accessed 18 December 2019].

Ivanic, A. and Nunes, J. (2009), “The intrinsic benefits of status: the effects of evoking rank”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 36, pp. 2-15.[Accessed 13 December. 2019]

De Pelsmacker. P, L. Driesen, G. Rayp. Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39 (2) (2005), pp. 363-385 https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1745-6606.2005.00019.x [Accessed 7 December 2019].

Johansson, Elin, Vanessa Julianose, and Lisa Winroth. 2017. Sustainable Chic: A Cross-Cultural Study on Millennials’ Perception of Sustainability and Intended Buying Behavior in the Fast Fashion Industry. Växjö: Linnaeus University, Kalmar & Växjö http://lnu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/ diva2:1107751/FULLTEXT01.pdf [Accessed 3 December. 2019]

Devinney, T.M., Auger, P. and Eckhardt, G.M. (2010), The Myth of the Ethical Consumer, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA. [Accessed 18 December 2019]. Environmental Investigation agency. 2018. The UK Government’s ban on plastic microbeads has officially come into force. [ONLINE] Available at: https://eia-international.org/news/uk-governments-ban-plastic-microbeads-officially-come-force/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIxpbHttWZ5wIVh7HtCh3CyAvLEAAYASAAEgIwhPD_BwE. [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Ethical Consumer Research Association, 2018. Ethical consumption. Market reports 2018,[Online]. Available at: https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/EC%20Markets%20 Report%202018%20FINAL.pdf [Accessed 29 October 2019].

Lazzarini, S.G. and de Mello, P.C. 2001. Government versus self-regulation of derivative markets Journal of Economics and Business, 53 (2001), pp. 185-207 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148619500000473 [accessed 2 Jan 2020] Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-96.[Accessed 30 October 2019] Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.[Accessed 30 October 2019]

Evalued. 2006. An evaluation toolkit for e-library developments. [ONLINE] Available at: http:// www.evalued.bcu.ac.uk/tutorial/4b.htm. [Accessed 18 December 2019].

Nicholls, A. (2002), “Strategic options in fair trade retailing”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 6-17. https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550210415220[Accessed 13 December. 2019]

Fisk, George (1998) Green Marketing: Multiplier for Appropriate Technology Transfer?, Journal of Marketing Management, 14:6, 657-676, DOI: 10.1362/026725798784867725 [Accessed 18 December 2019].

NPR Staff. 2019. Transcript: Greta Thunberg’s Speech At The U.N. Climate Action Summit. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.npr.org/2019/09/23/763452863/transcript-greta-thunbergs-speech-atthe-u-n-climate-action-summit?t=1579780188354. [Accessed 23 January 2020].

Fisher, D. Ecosphere. 2018. The Millennial Consumer: A Driving Force For Corporate Sustainability. [ONLINE] Available at: https://ecosphere.plus/blog/millennial-consumer-driving-force-corporate-sustainability/. [Accessed 8 January 2020].

Puniell, O. PRSA. 2018. The Importance of Secondary Data in Research. [ONLINE] Available at: https://apps.prsa.org/StrategiesTactics/Articles/view/12180/1154/The_Importance_of_Secondary_Data_in_Research#.Xeu3RpOTLOQ. [Accessed 7 December 2019].

Futerra Sustainability Communications Ltd, 2005 Futerra Sustainability Communications Ltd. The rules of the game: The principals of climate change communication. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK (2005)https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The%20rules%20of%20the%20game%3A%20The%20principals%20of%20climate%20 change%20communication&publication_year=2005&author=Futerra%20Sustainability%20Communications%20Ltd [Accessed 2 Jan 2020]

Reilly, A. and Weirup, A., 2012. Sustainability initiatives, social media activity, and organizational culture: An exploratory study. Journal of sustainability and green business, 1(1), pp.1-15. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Amanda_Weirup/publication/260401304_Sustainability_ initiatives_social_media_activity_and_organizational_culture_An_exploratory_study/links/552f07560cf22d437170d920/Sustainability-initiatives-social-media-activity-and-organizational-culture-An-exploratory-study.pdf [Accessed 10 Jan 2020]

Goworek, H, Fisher, T, Cooper, T, Woodward, S, Hiller, A., 2012. The sustainable clothing market: an evaluation of potential strategies for UK retailers. <em>International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management [Online]. Vol. 40 No. 12, 2012, 935-955. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/add9/3411f46f9f077d24484092b118a7bd7731e7.pdf [Accessed 10 January 2020]

Su, J., Watchravesringkan, K., Zhou, J. and Gil, M. (2019), “Sustainable clothing: perspectives from US and Chinese young Millennials”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 47 No. 11, pp. 1141-1162. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-09-2017-0184 [Accessed 7 December 2019].

Arli, Denni. (2017). Investigating consumer ethics: a segmentation study. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 34. 00-00. DOI: 10.1108/JCM-08-2016-1908. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320258037_Investigating_consumer_ethics_a_segmentation_study (accessed 23 November 2019)

Tascioglu, M., Eastman, J. and Iyer, R. (2017), “The impact of the motivation for status on consumers’ perceptions of retailer sustainability: the moderating impact of collectivism and materialism”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 292-305. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-032015-1351[Accessed 13 December. 2019]

Arnold, C. (2009), Ethical Marketing and the New Consumer, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. [online] https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=XgohhaXFMqcC&oi=fnd&pg=PT11&dq=Arnold,+C.+(2009),+Ethical+Marketing+and+the+New+Consumer,+John+Wiley+%26+Sons,+Chichester.&ots=aEgp4-84MR&sig=gIFlKIua8EKFKKMepZQ_VVQCE2o#v=onepage&q&f=false[Accessed 12 Jan 2020]

The Fashion Network. 2019. Social Media in the Fashion Industry. [ONLINE] Available at: https:// thefashionetwork.com/social-media-in-the-fashion-industry/. [Accessed 10 January 2020]. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1996). Friendship and the banker’s paradox: Other pathways to the evolution of adaptations for altruism. Proceedings of the British Academy, 88, 119–143. [Accessed 13 December. 2019] Viswanathan, V. and Jain, V. (2013). A dual-system approach to understanding “generation Y” decision making. Journal of Consumer Marketing, [online] 30(6), pp.484-492. Available at: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1108/jcm-07-2013-0649 [Accessed 3 December. 2019]. Watson, Maegan Zarley and Yan, Ruoh-Nan., 2013. Journal of fashion marketing and management. An exploratory study of the decision process of fast versus slow fashion consumers, [Online]. Volume: 17, issue: 2, page(s): 141-159. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296312002597 [Accessed 28 November 2019].

Bardi, A. and Schwartz, S.H. (2003), “Values and behavior: strength and structure of relations”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 29 No. 10, pp. 1207-1220.https://journals.sagepub. com/doi/10.1177/0146167203254602 [Accessed 16 December 2019]. Barrett, L., Dunbar, R., & Lycett, J. (2002). Human evolutionary psychology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Accessed 16 December 2019]. Bezençon, V. and Blili, S. (2010), “Ethical products and consumer involvement: what’s new?”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44 Nos 9/10, pp. 1305-1321. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/abs/10.1002/mar.20407 [Accessed 2 Jan 2020] Brett, David. 2018. ‘Gen Xers care more about sustainability than millennials’. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.cityam.com/gen-xers-care-more-about-sustainability-than-millennials/. [Accessed 12 November 2019]. Bruce Margaret and Daly, L., 2006. Buyer behaviour for fast fashion. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, [Online]. Vol. 10 No. 3,, pp. 329-344. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/13612020610679303/full/pdf?title=buyer-behaviour-for-fast-fashion [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Cadet, Dayana. 2017. Millennials Going Green Means Retail Must Follow. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.mytotalretail.com/article/millennials-going-green-means-retail-must-follow/. [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Carrington, M.J., Neville, B.A. and Whitwell, G.J. (2010), “Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 97 No. 1, pp. 139-158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6 [Accessed 22 November 2019].

Carrington, Michal J. Neville, Benjamin A. Whitwell, Gregory J, C., 2012. Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention–behavior gap. Journal of business research, [Online]. Volume 67, Issue 1, Pages 2759-2767. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti97 cle/pii/S0148296312002597 [Accessed 22 November 2019].

Cheng, Marguerita. Forbes. 2019. 8 Characteristics Of Millennials That Support Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/margueritacheng/2019/06/19/8-characteristics-of-millennials-that-support-sustainable-development-goals-sdgs/#28f40f5c29b7. [Accessed 12 November 2019]. CRESWELL, J. W., & CLARK, PLANO, V., 2011. Concurrent Triangulation Design Method. Designing and conducting mixed methods research., [Online]. .https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259109828_A_New_Long-Term_Care_Facilities_Model_in_Nova_Scotia_Canada_Protocol_for_a_Mixed_Methods_Study_of_Care_by_Design/figures?lo=1 [Accessed 1 January 2020]. Davies, I. and Gutsche, S. (2016), "Consumer motivations for mainstream “ethical” consumption", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 No. 7/8, pp. 1326-1347. [ONLINE] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-11-2015-0795 [Accessed 12 November 2019]. Davies, I. A., Lee, Z., & Ahonkhai, I. (2012). Do consumers care about ethical-luxury? Journal of Business Ethics, 106(1), 37-51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1071-y [Accessed 2 Jan 2020] DeFranzo, Susan E. Snap Surveys. 2012. Advantages and Disadvantages of Surveys. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.snapsurveys.com/blog/advantages-disadvantages-surveys/. [Accessed 7 December 2019]. Delgado, M.S., Harriger, J.L. and Khanna, N. (2015), “The value of environmental status signaling”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 111, pp. 1-11. [Accessed 18 December 2019]. De Pelsmacker. P, L. Driesen, G. Rayp. Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fairtrade coffee. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39 (2) (2005), pp. 363-385 https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1745-6606.2005.00019.x [Accessed 7 December 2019]. Devinney, T.M., Auger, P. and Eckhardt, G.M. (2010), The Myth of the Ethical Consumer, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA. [Accessed 18 December 2019]. Eckhardt, G.M., Belk, R. and Devinney, T.M. (2010), “Why don’t consumers consume ethically?”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 9 No. 6, pp. 426-436. Elena. 2017. Ethical vs. Sustainable vs. Slow Fashion Explained. [ONLINE] Available at: http:// the-curious-button.com/ethical-sustainable-slow-fashion/. [Accessed 12 November 2019]. Environmental Investigation agency. 2018. The UK Government’s ban on plastic microbeads has officially come into force. [ONLINE] Available at: https://eia-international.org/news/uk-governments-ban-plastic-microbeads-officially-come-force/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIxpbHttWZ5wIVh7HtCh3CyAvLEAAYASAAEgIwhPD_BwE. [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Ethical Consumer Research Association, 2018. Ethical consumption. Market reports 2018, [Online]. Available at: https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/EC%20Markets%20Report%202018%20FINAL.pdf [Accessed 29 October 2019]. Evalued. 2006. An evaluation toolkit for e-library developments. [ONLINE] Available at: http:// www.evalued.bcu.ac.uk/tutorial/4b.htm. [Accessed 18 December 2019]. Fisk, George (1998) Green Marketing: Multiplier for Appropriate Technology Transfer?, Journal of Marketing Management, 14:6, 657-676, DOI: 10.1362/026725798784867725 [Accessed 18 December 2019]. Fisher, D. Ecosphere. 2018. The Millennial Consumer: A Driving Force For Corporate Sustainabil98ity. [ONLINE] Available at: https://ecosphere.plus/blog/millennial-consumer-driving-force-corporate-sustainability/. [Accessed 8 January 2020].

Futerra Sustainability Communications Ltd, 2005 Futerra Sustainability Communications Ltd The rules of the game: The principals of climate change communication Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK (2005)https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The%20rules%20of%20the%20game%3A%20The%20principals%20of%20climate%20change%20communication&publication_year=2005&author=Futerra%20Sustainability%20Communications%20Ltd [Accessed 2 Jan 2020] Goworek, H, Fisher, T, Cooper, T, Woodward, S, Hiller, A., 2012. The sustainable clothing market: an evaluation of potential strategies for UK retailers. <em>International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management [Online]. Vol. 40 No. 12, 2012, 935-955. Available at: https://pdfs. semanticscholar.org/add9/3411f46f9f077d24484092b118a7bd7731e7.pdf [Accessed 10 January 2020] Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 343355. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018589[Accessed 13 December. 2019] Hahn-Petersen , Luna A. BOF. 2018. Op-Ed | Millennials Say They Care About Sustainability. So, Why Don't They Shop This Way?. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.businessoffashion.com/ articles/opinion/op-ed-millennials-say-they-care-about-sustainability-so-why-dont-they-dontshop-this-way. [Accessed 12 November 2019]. Hai-Bin Zhang, Han-Cheng Dai, Hua-Xia Lai, Wen-Tao,, W., 2017. U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: Reasons, impacts, and China's response. Advances in Climate Change Research, [Online]. Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages 220-225. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674927817301028 [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Howell, D. BBC News. 2016. The 5p plastic bag charge: All you need to know. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34346309. [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Ivanic, A. and Nunes, J. (2009), “The intrinsic benefits of status: the effects of evoking rank”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 36, pp. 2-15.[Accessed 13 December. 2019] Johansson, Elin, Vanessa Julianose, and Lisa Winroth. 2017. Sustainable Chic: A Cross-Cultural Study on Millennials’ Perception of Sustainability and Intended Buying Behavior in the Fast Fashion Industry. Växjö: Linnaeus University, Kalmar & Växjö http://lnu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/ diva2:1107751/FULLTEXT01.pdf [Accessed 3 December. 2019] Lazzarini, S.G. and de Mello, P.C. 2001. Government versus self-regulation of derivative markets Journal of Economics and Business, 53 (2001), pp. 185-207 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148619500000473 [accessed 2 Jan 2020] Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-96.[Accessed 30 October 2019] Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.[Accessed 30 October 2019] Mullen, Caitlin. 2018. Millennials drive big growth in sustainable products. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.bizjournals.com/bizwomen/news/latest-news/2018/12/millennials-drive-big-growth-in-sustainable.html?page=all. [Accessed 12 November 2019]. Nicholls, A. (2002), "Strategic options in fair trade retailing", International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 6-17. https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550210415220[Ac99 cessed 13 December. 2019]

NPR Staff. 2019. Transcript: Greta Thunberg's Speech At The U.N. Climate Action Summit. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.npr.org/2019/09/23/763452863/transcript-greta-thunbergsspeech-at-the-u-n-climate-action-summit?t=1579780188354. [Accessed 23 January 2020].

Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1996). Friendship and the banker’s paradox: Other pathways to the evolution of adaptations for altruism. Proceedings of the British Academy, 88, 119–143. [Accessed 13 December. 2019]

Viswanathan, V. and Jain, V. (2013). A dual-system approach to understanding “generation Y” decision making. Journal of Consumer Marketing, [online] 30(6), pp.484-492. Available at: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1108/jcm-07-2013-0649 [Accessed 3 December. 2019].

Reese, Jacy. Ted talks. 2018. Why we should end animal agriculture. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/jacy_reese_why_we_should_end_animal_agriculture_jan_2018. [Accessed 23 January 2020].

Watson, Maegan Zarley and Yan, Ruoh-Nan., 2013. Journal of fashion marketing and management. An exploratory study of the decision process of fast versus slow fashion consumers, [Online]. Volume: 17, issue: 2, page(s): 141-159. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296312002597 [Accessed 28 November 2019].

Yinyin Wang, T., 2010. Consumer Behavior Characteristics in Fast Fashion. Master of Fashion Management, [Online]. ., .. Available at: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1312256/ FULLTEXT01.pdf [Accessed 23 January 2020].

Shaw .D, Shui .E. An assessment of ethical obligation and self-identity in ethical consumer decision-making: A structural equation modeling approach. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26 (4) (2002), pp. 286-293 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.14706431.2002.00255.x [Accessed 15 December. 2019] Sincero, Sarah Mae. (Oct 16, 2012). Online Surveys. Retrieved Dec 05, 2019 from Explorable. com: https://explorable.com/online-surveys [Accessed 7 December 2019]. Singer, Peter. Ted talks. 2013. The why and how of competitive alturism. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/peter_singer_the_why_and_how_of_effective_altruism. [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Sorensen, Katelyn and Johnson Jorgensen, Jennifer. 2019. Millennial Perceptions of Fast Fashion and SecondHand Clothing: An Exploration of Clothing Preferences Using Q Methodology. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335372728_Millennial_Perceptions_of_Fast_Fashion_and_Second-Hand_Clothing_An_Exploration_of_Clothing_Preferences_Using_Q_Methodology. [Accessed 23 January 2020]. Sproles, G.B., Geistfeld, L.V. and Badenhop, S.B., 1978. Informational inputs as influences on efficient consumer decision‐making. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 12(1), pp.88-103. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-6606.1978.tb00635.x [Accessed 10 Jan 2020] Su, J., Watchravesringkan, K., Zhou, J. and Gil, M. (2019), "Sustainable clothing: perspectives from US and Chinese young Millennials", International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 47 No. 11, pp. 1141-1162. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-09-2017-0184 [Accessed 7 December 2019]. Tascioglu, M., Eastman, J. and Iyer, R. (2017), "The impact of the motivation for status on consumers’ perceptions of retailer sustainability: the moderating impact of collectivism and materialism", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 292-305. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JCM-03-2015-1351[Accessed 13 December. 2019] The Fashion Network. 2019. Social Media in the Fashion Industry. [ONLINE] Available at: https:// thefashionetwork.com/social-media-in-the-fashion-industry/. [Accessed 10 January 2020].

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113