Do You Believe That Sustainability Is a True Strategy or Merely Fashionable? Please Explain.

• Research
• Open Admission
• Published: 26 Dec 2016

An empirical exam of the triple bottom line of client-centric sustainability: the case of fast fashion

Fashion and Textiles volume 3, Article number:25 (2016) Cite this article

• 23k Accesses

• 12 Citations

• Metrics details

Abstruse

The aims of this report were (a) to make up one's mind if the triple bottom line (TBL) model can serve equally an accounting framework for consumers' perceived sustainability of fashion brands; (b) to investigate whether TBL sustainability can be linked to make relationships with fast fashion; and (c) to make up one's mind whether the predictive role of the TBL sustainability of fast manner brands differs from that of sustainable way brands. Three enquiry questions were formulated to achieve these goals. To this cease, a series of statistical analyses were conducted on the consumer panel data (N = 732) gathered via a market research business firm. The sample included US consumers who take shopped from either fast way brands or sustainable fashion brands. The results suggest that the TBL model is an effective tool for explaining a consumer'southward perception of a fashion brand's sustainability. The results besides reveal disparate effects of TBL sustainability on make outcomes between fast fashion brands and sustainable fashion brands. Detailed results with theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.

Introduction

An increasing number of studies in the manner clothes sector has pursued multiple topics ranging from the use of environmentally friendly fashion products to the corporate social responsibility (CSR), reflecting an "emerging megatrend" (Lubin and Esty 2010, p. 44) in the current business environment. Notwithstanding, the existing research on sustainability in the fashion clothes manufacture is nonetheless limited in 2 major respects. First, at that place is no clear consensus on what it means to be "sustainable" for way companies or brands and how sustainability, as information technology is perceived by consumers, tin can be measured. Concepts with no clear definitions can indeed result in a methodological upshot because what is understood past study participants may be dissimilar from what is intended to be measured past a researcher. Second, there is a lack of understanding regarding a discrepancy between consumers' perception toward a brand's sustainability and their behavior toward the aforementioned make. This discrepancy tin can exist demonstrated by the fact that fast fashion (or "dispensable" fashion)—encouraging over-consumption and disposability—continues to gain profits and popularity over the terminal decade (Joy et al. 2012). This leads researchers to speculate that the predictive part of a brand's sustainability in forming consumers' positive brand relationships may non apply to fast style brands.

To address these bug, the current study employs triple lesser line (TBL) model that proposes three pillars of sustainability (i.due east., economical, ecology, and social sustainability) (Elkington 1998) in measuring consumers' perceived sustainability of fashion brands. If the TBL serves every bit a primal tool to back up a firm'southward sustainability goals, it should exist an important accounting framework that predicts not only consumers' perception toward the house's sustainability efforts simply also their relationships with the firm through trust and loyalty. In addition, to examine whether a fast manner make's sustainability equally perceived by consumers predicts positive brand relationships, the impact of the TBL sustainability on brand relationships is evaluated for fast fashion brands. Lastly, the predictive role of the TBL sustainability on make relationships is additionally tested for sustainable way brands to further verify the applicability of the TBL model to fashion brands in full general. In sum, the objectives of this study were (a) to determine if the TBL model can serve as an accounting framework for consumers' perceived sustainability of fashion brands past explaining the concept from both conceptual and practical perspectives; (b) to investigate whether TBL sustainability tin can be linked to make relationships with fast mode; and (c) to decide whether the predictive role of the TBL sustainability of fast way brands differs from that of sustainable manner brands.

Literature review and inquiry questions

The following section illustrates how the TBL model explicates the three dimensions of fashion brands' sustainability perceived by consumers, and whether and how the TBL sustainability predicts brand relationships such as brand trust and make loyalty. The illustration of TBL sustainability is approached from a customer-centric sustainability (Sheth et al. 2011) and applied to fast fashion brands every bit the key focus of this written report. Thus, the following literature review depicts fast fashion paradox in relation to its unsustainable nature, followed past TBL of sustainability and its application to fast fashion brands. At the end, three research questions are formulated to achieve report objectives.

Fast manner paradox

… while concerned about the environmental and social bear upon of their non-manner purchasing decisions, [consumers] did not apply such principles to their consumption of fashion. They talked in general terms of saving the surroundings, were committed to recycling, and expressed dedication to organic food… Yet, these very aforementioned consumers routinely availed themselves of trend-led fashionable clothing that was cheap: i.e., low toll to them, but loftier cost in environmental and societal terms. (Joy et al. 2012, p. 280).

As described in the finding of Joy et al. (2012), consumers' environmental and social concern do non necessarily reduce their fast style consumption. Why practise many consumers, despite their awareness of sustainability challenges facing in the current society, withal develop a positive attitude toward fast fashion brands? Literature suggests several reasons. First, consumers may perceive that the benefits offered by fast manner brands outweigh the negative aspects in terms of the unsustainable nature of fast mode business organisation (e.thousand., poor quality, resources depletion) (McNeill and Moore 2015; Morgan and Birtwistle 2009). Fast fashion brands offer products that mimic electric current mode trends in an affordable toll nearly every few weeks. Low toll, fresh designs, and quick response times allow for greater efficiency in meeting the demand of style-witting consumers, particularly those who cannot beget high-style products. Consumers' desire for fast mode is coupled with the lack of alternatives offering similar benefits in the market (Kim et al. 2013). 2d, in that location is a general lack of understanding amongst consumers almost the impact of unsustainable production and consumption created by fast fashion products. Although the media roofing the negative aspects of fast fashion brands (e.m., sweatshops, depletion of resources) have increased awareness of sustainability challenges, the highly fragmented and circuitous nature of the apparel supply chain (Kilduff 2005) makes it extremely hard for average consumers to empathize the crusade and effect of fast fashion brands' businesses.

While empirical show of this paradox of fast fashion consumption is still limited, several researchers take explored a discrepancy between consumers' awareness of sustainability and their desire for fast way brand products. For example, McNeill and Moore (2015) debate that even those consumers who limited potent concern almost environmental and social issues admit that they continuously appoint in the consumption of fast manner products due to their want for updated mode. Similarly, Park and Kim (2016) argue that, despite their awareness of the negative aspects of fast way products, consumers may nonetheless enjoy stylish, inexpensive fashion items. The current study builds upon these previous findings and investigates potential linkage between consumers' perception toward a fast way brand'due south TBL sustainability and their brand relationship with the fast fashion production.

Triple lesser line (TBL) of sustainability

The concept of sustainability in its contemporary grade stems from the Brundtland Report, which was published in (1987) by the United Nation's (United nations) World Committee on Environment and Development (WCED). This study proposes long-term strategies for achieving sustainable development by addressing iii key elements: ecological environment, economy, and social equity (Edwards 2005). The ecology dimension of sustainability requires the long-term viability of resource utilize and emphasizes the issue of environmental deposition and resource depletion (Sheth et al. 2011). Economic sustainability refers to a dynamic economy that endures for a long catamenia of time, while also recognizing the importance of providing secure, long-term employment (Edwards 2005). The social dimension of sustainability refers to the well-existence of people and the community and disinterestedness/equality issues (Edwards 2005). Elkington (1998) incorporates these three facets of sustainability into actual business concern operation and argues that businesses should look not only at the traditional measures of economic performance (i.eastward., profits) but also consider the measures of social and environmental performances, reflecting "triple bottom line" (TBL) of sustainability.

Customer-centric sustainability (CCS)

The client-centric sustainability (CCS) stems from the stakeholder perspective wherein firms integrate stakeholder expectations into their business actions and thereby resolve different perspectives on sustainability bug and outcomes (Kozlowski et al. 2012). While a house-centric view of sustainability is oftentimes criticized as having a lack of a long-term perspective and a genuine try for societal and environmental values (Molthan-Hill 2014), a customer-centric view of sustainability puts customers in the foreground and seeks the viability of both consumers and businesses. Based on the norm of business-consumer reciprocity, Sheth et al. (2011) argue that sustainability outcomes must issue from consumer-directed business actions if companies plan to make sustainability an integral function of their business organization strategies and operations. This argument is too in line with several other researchers' consumption-based view of sustainability (e.g., Huang and Rust 2011; Ramirez 2013). In a nutshell, from a CCS perspective, sustainability is viewed every bit "a joint product of marketing deportment and consumer beliefs" (Sheth et al. 2011, p. 24) and it tin can be achieved through the common effort of both companies and consumers. The following section reviews the iii dimensions of CCS in the context of way brands including fast fashion brands.

CCS: economical dimension

While the economic dimension of sustainability is often considered only as the conventional bottom-line of financial profitability (Slaper and Hall 2011), CCS extends this dimension to broad-based improvement in economical well-being and standard of living (Donaldson and Preston 1995). In this regard, Sheth et al. (2011) relate economic sustainability to the "economic well-existence of consumers associated with financial aspects such as debt-brunt, earning pressures, and piece of work-life balance" (p. 24). These researchers likewise contend that improving the well-beingness of consumers does not conflict with maximizing a firm'southward financial benefits because implementing CCS and facilitating sustainable consumption can avoid hidden costs, such as the costs associated with producing excessive amount of merchandise and doing wasteful advertising. These efforts can likewise result in increased marketplace share and more than profits, as consumers advantage firms for these efforts (Cronin et al. 2010).

Central to the effort for firms to facilitate sustainable consumption is offering quality products (Hanss and Bӧhm 2012; McNeill and Moore 2015). Specifically, Gruber et al. (2014) indicate that while the concept of sustainability itself is ambiguous, sustainability in consumers' minds is strongly connected to their perceptions of production quality (e.yard., "if it is a high quality product, information technology should also be sustainable"). Thus, when fashion brands offer quality products, they can not only help their consumers achieve sustainable consumption merely as well communicate their "contribution to the sustainability of a larger economic arrangement rather than focusing on their ain financial success" (Fulton and Lee 2013, p. 355). Thus, this study will focus on the consumer's perception of the extent to which a make offers quality products that assist the consumer achieve sustainable consumption.

Fast way products are oft criticized for beingness made with poor-quality materials and construction (Joy et al. 2012). Cline (2012) argues that apparel quality has been indeed eroded in the era of fast fashion. She maintains that, due to the dispensable nature of fast fashion, low prices and trendy styles instead of craftsmanship and durability have become more than of import decision criteria for purchasing mode products. In other words, consumers may nevertheless shop fast fashion products despite their perception of depression production quality ("If information technology's under $20, honestly I don't mind spending it") (Cline 2012, p. 16). Therefore, the agin impact that the fast style system has had on consumers' perceptions of product quality needs to be considered when examining the economic dimension of CCS of fast fashion brands.

CCS: environmental dimension

Environmental sustainability from a CCS perspective involves making responsible choices that volition reduce the negative impacts of businesses on the ecological environment. With the growing motion toward ethical consumerism, consumers have become aware of the environmental impairment caused by fashion businesses and have expressed their concerns over the negative impacts these businesses have made on the environs. While stiff delivery is still rare (Plieth et al. 2012), in that location has been an increase in the initiative of mode brands to improve environmental sustainability in such areas as use of environmentally friendly materials (e.g., organic cotton fiber) and conducting a life bike analysis on the materials used (Curwen et al. 2012).

Fast fashion brands also have implemented a diversity of sustainability initiatives. For example, H&Thou offers the Conscious Collection made mostly out of recycled polyester and organic cotton fiber and promote the idea of sustainable fashion through its advertising campaign (Dishman 2013). Yet, researchers argue that the sustainability arroyo taken past fast fashion brands is fundamentally different from that taken past sustainable mode brands that operate to a triple bottom line. According to Park and Kim (2016), fast fashion brands' environmental sustainability efforts are largely reactive in that they attempt to merely satisfy a segment of environmentally conscious consumers by marketing their sustainable alternatives offered often in a limited quantity. They further argue that this reactive approach is in contrast to sustainable mode brands' proactive approach toward environmental sustainability to transform the whole manufacture by taking a leadership in sustainable development (e.g., Patagonia's effort to develop a tool to measure out the environmental impacts of apparel businesses).

CCS: social dimension

The social dimension of sustainability adds a sense of community to sustainable development in that it emphasizes cooperation and concern for others, which ultimately contributes to the well-being of a larger community (Edwards 2005). On a micro-level, social sustainability addresses how the product and its production processes affect people'south lives. On a macro-level, it relates to how society as a whole (e.g., man health, traditional culture) is impacted past type of business (Waage et al. 2005). In the way wearing apparel industry, the social attribute of CCS often relates to fair merchandise and ethical sourcing practices during the manufacturing phase because human being right issues such as sweatshops, child labor, and poor working atmospheric condition are particularly pervasive (Fulton and Lee 2013). The increasing manufacturing flexibility that is required in the current manner industry has exacerbated working conditions in garment factories (Gardetti and Torres 2012).

Information technology goes without saying that fast fashion has significantly increased the force per unit area for flexibility. Nether the fast fashion business system, retailers identify small, more frequent orders with a brusk turnaround fourth dimension and lower manufacturing costs (Parker and Dickson 2009). To bargain with this need for low-cost and flexibility, many manufacturers rely on sub-contracting (i.e., outsourcing temporary workers), which has resulted in instability in employment in many of the developing countries and increased their workers' overtime (Gardetti and Torres 2012). The contempo manufacturing plant collapse in Bangladesh that resulted in the death of over 1000 workers demonstrates the urgent need for improved working conditions and improve human being rights that is facing the current manner manufacture. Given this state of affairs, it is apparent that fast fashion brands must contain social sustainability into their standard business practices (Stern 2007).

The impact of customer-centric sustainability on make relationships

The literature provides evidence that sustainability of fashion brands every bit perceived by consumers positively influences their perceptions, attitudes, and behavior toward the brands. Equally early on as in the 1990s, researchers found the trend of apparel consumers to exhibit socially responsible consumption and environmental consumerism (e.grand., Dickson and Littrell 1996; Kim and Damhorst 1998). Since then, researchers accept establish that consumers are increasingly concerned well-nigh the sustainability of wearing apparel firms. Specifically, researchers find that consumer perceptions of wearing apparel firms' business organization transparency positively influence brand trust, make attitude (Kang and Hustvedt 2014) and purchase intention (Bhaduri and Ha-Brookshire 2011), and that consumers accept favorable attitude toward environmentally sustainable fashion brands or products (e.g., organic cotton, cotton grown using sustainable farming practices) (Norum and Ha-Brookshire 2011; Hustvedt and Dickson 1996). Corresponding to these findings, researchers conclude that integrating sustainability into a business organization strategy not simply improves a house'southward brand prototype, merely also elevates the level of product credibility, which leads to a deeper and stronger human relationship with its customers (Molthan-Hill 2014; Schmitt and Renken 2012).

This study examines whether a fashion brand's perceived sustainability positively influences two brand relationships, brand trust and brand loyalty. Of the many brand-related outcomes, brand trust and loyalty were selected because these two constructs are ofttimes found as the outcomes of consumer perceptions of a firm's sustainability (Bhaduri and Ha-Brookshire 2011; Kang and Hustvedt 2014). This written report proposes that the meaning impact of a brand's sustainability on positive brand relationships may non concord for fast manner because consumers may still develop brand trust and loyalty toward fast fashion brands even though they exercise perceive the negative aspects of those brands' sustainable direction. Farther, Park and Kim (2016) recently found that the approach to sustainability taken by fast style brands is fundamentally unlike from that of sustainable fashion brands such that the one-time is reactive in their sustainability initiative while the latter is proactive by taking a sustainability leadership in the entire fashion industry. Thus, recognizing the two dissimilar modes of approaches to sustainability taken by fast fashion brands and sustainably produced fashion brands ("sustainable manner brands" hereafter), information technology is argued that consumers' perceptions of brand sustainability may be more strongly linked to their positive brand relationships for sustainable fashion brands than for fast style brands. While the TBL sustainability model and the touch of sustainability on brand relationships are theoretically established in many research studies (McNeill and Moore 2015; Sheth et al. 2011), there is limited empirical evidence in the literature to support the specific propositions made in this study (i.east., the applicability of the TBL model to fashion brands, and the weak association between the brand's sustainability and brand relationships for fast fashion brands). Therefore, the following three exploratory enquiry questions are formulated:

RQ1: Does the TBL model serve equally an accounting framework for consumers' perceived sustainability of fast way brands also equally sustainable fashion brands?

RQ2: Practise the three dimensions of sustainability (i.e., economic, environmental, social sustainability) of fast fashion brands as perceived by consumers predict brand relationships such every bit brand trust and loyalty?

RQ3: Does the predictive role of the TBL sustainability of fast fashion brands differ from that of sustainable style brands?

Methods

Instrument development

Because all constructs of this study were make-specific, participants were first provided a listing of fashion brands, from which they were asked to select the one brand they had purchased or used about recently. The make each respondent selected was automatically embedded into the remaining questions pertaining to the brand. Measures of most of research constructs were adopted from existing scales or adapted to fit the specific context of the electric current study. Because measurement items for the three dimensions of fashion brands' TBL sustainability did non exist in the previous studies, a item effort was made to develop or change the existing scale items so as to address apparel-specific sustainability issues (e.one thousand., sustainable fibers, fit, style). For example, a list of attributes for ethical clothes every bit identified by Jägel et al. (2012) were adapted, as their items well reflected a range of apparel sustainability that encompassed economic, environmental, and social sustainability. For environmental and social sustainability, a few other items measuring consumer beliefs about environmental and social aspects of the fashion manufacture (Shen et al. 2012) were modified. See Table ane for concluding measurement items.

Tabular array i Demographic characteristics of respondents

Full size tabular array

One of the enquiry questions involved comparison a predictive role of TBL sustainability in brand relationship outcomes between fast fashion brands and sustainable fashion brands. Thus, it was important to select the two groups of brands that will exist used in the survey questions. To this end, a pool of way brands was generated based on the review of relevant industry reports and academic literature. Beginning, fast fashion brands were selected based on their business model (i.e., offering trendy, inexpensive products quickly to a market). Second, sustainable manner brands were selected based on the two criteria delineated by Park and Kim (2016): (a) committed to sustainable business organisation from the inception of business with a deep-seated delivery, and (b) approaching sustainability with transformative responses, operating to a triple-lesser line. Terminal brands selected were: H&1000, Forever 21, and Zara, for fast fashion brands; and Patagonia, Eileen Fisher and TOMS, for sustainable fashion brands. Independent samples t tests indicated that fast fashion brands had significant lower levels in all three dimensions of sustainability than fast fashion brands: economic (t = eight.77, p < .001) environmental (t = 9.57, p < .001) and social sustainability (t = 8.56, p < .001).

Finally, the measurement scales for brand trust and make loyalty were adopted from previous inquiry. The items for brand trust measure a consumer'due south belief that a certain brand is reliable and worthy of trust. As for brand loyalty, while a variety of measurements for brand loyalty be, this written report used Zeithaml et al.'due south (1996) scales, measuring a consumers' willingness to generate positive word-of-mouth communication.

Sample

Among a total of 732 respondents, 372 selected fast way brands and 360 selected sustainable fashion brands. About 69 % of these participants were female, and slightly more three-quarters of them (75.7 %) were white Americans. The largest number (34.8 %) of participants was aged 31–40, followed by 41–fifty (23.2 %), 51–60 (17.2 %), and 25–30 (thirteen %). The bulk of respondents (82 %) had attended some college or earned Bachelor's or a higher degree of education. While the respondents were distributed fairly evenly throughout all income groups, the largest number of respondents (23.2 %) reported income over $100,000, followed by $50,000–$59,999 (xiii %) and $70,000–$79,999 (x.1 %). An overview of the demographic characteristics of respondents is provided in Table ii.

Table 2 Measurement items and reliability of constructs

Total size table

Data collection

The data for this written report were collected through a large U.S. market place research firm that specializes in consumer online surveys during July in 2014. The business firm launched the online survey and invited their panel members to accept part in the survey via an electronic mail invitation. Respondents were reimbursed for their participation through their account.

Data analysis

To exam if the TBL model can adequately explain consumers' perceived sustainability of manner brands, both exploratory cistron assay (EFA) and confirmatory gene analysis (CFA) were conducted on the TBL model. Later on evaluating the dimensionality of the measurement items for each of the iii sustainability dimensions through EFA, CFA verified the cistron structure of the observed variables. The impact of sustainability dimensions on brand relationships were examined by the analysis of structural equation modeling (SEM).

Results

This section presents the results of data analyses according to the three RQs.

RQ1: Does the TBL model serve every bit an accounting framework for consumers' perceived sustainability of fast fashion brands as well as sustainable way brands?

To respond the outset RQ, a measurement model with the three dimensions of TBL sustainability (i.e., economic, ecology, social) was assessed. Because the TBL model has not been tested and applied to the context of fashion brands, exploratory factor assay (EFA) was conducted to evaluate the dimensionality of the measurement items (Gerbing and Hamilton 1996). An EFA using principle component analysis with Varimax rotation was performed on the 17 measurement items for the three dimensions of sustainability of fashion brands. Five items were dropped due to their depression factor loadings (less than .fifty) and cross-loadings with other gene items. Although 1 item ("[xyz]'south clothes was produced with a minimum event on the environment (e.g., no gases, low carbon foot print) and animals") that was loaded with environmental sustainability (.677) likewise loaded with social sustainability (.512), we decided to keep this item, given its conceptual significance in measuring the ecology aspect of sustainability. The results of EFA (run into Table 3) indicated that 12 items yielded a articulate iii-factor model, supporting the three dimensions of sustainability theorized in the TBL model.

Table three Rotated component matrix of factor analysis

Total size table

After verifying the iii-factor of TBL sustainability, CFA was conducted. The model fit indices were: χ²(48) = 140.360, χ²/df = 2.924, RMSEA = .05, CFI = .99, NFI = .98, TLI = .98. The construct validity of each construct was evaluated past both convergent and discriminant validity. The convergent validity of the measurement model was confirmed by two findings: (one) factor loadings for all 12 items were significant (p < .001) and exceeded the recommended level of .70; and (2) the average variances extracted (AVEs) for all the latent variables ranged from .62 to .88 (see Table 4), greater than the recommended threshold value of .50 (Fornell and Larcker 1981). Discriminant validity was assessed in 2 means. Beginning, a series of nested models were specified that constrained the covariance between the pairs of constructs. The constrained models (i.east., constraining the correlation between the pairs of constructs to 1) were then compared to the base of operations line model, which immune the parameters to correlate freely. The difference in the Chi square statistics between the constrained and the standard model was significant (Anderson and Gerbing 1998), indicating discriminant validity between all the constructs. 2d, a stricter test of discriminant validity was performed by examining the AVEs and the shared variance between all possible pairs of latent variables. When an AVE exceeds shared variance (i.e., squared correlation coefficients) betwixt all possible pairs of latent variables, and then discriminant validity is supported (Fornell and Larcker 1981). This 2d test revealed that the social and ecology dimensions of sustainability were highly correlated (see Table 4). Although a measurement model did not laissez passer the 2d test for discriminant validity, it was still deemed valid, given the argument that multidimensional constructs by nature are difficult to found for discriminant validity (Mathwick et al. 2001).

Table four Construct validity of the second-club confirmatory model

Total size table

The TBL model validated by both EFA and CFA suggests that the TBL model tin be used as an bookkeeping framework for consumers' perceived sustainability of style brands. Since RQ1 is asking the applicability of TBL model for both fast and sustainable manner brands, individually, the analyses described above were repeated for a carve up sample of fast fashion brands and sustainable fashion brands. Results were mostly like to that of assay for the unabridged sample. However, several measurement items for the environmental and social dimensions of sustainability were not grouped together as theorized. For instance, for fast fashion brands, two items for social sustainability ("[xyz]'south products are fabricated under safe and good for you working atmospheric condition, without child labor or sweatshops," "[xyz] prefers local product of their clothing") were grouped every bit one factor and the remainder of two items for social sustainability and four items for environmental sustainability were grouped as another gene. For sustainable fashion brands, ii items for ecology sustainability ("toxic chemicals are not used in production by [xyz]," "[xyz] adopts environmentally friendly production practices") were grouped on 1 factor and the rest of two items for environmental sustainability and four items for social sustainability were grouped together equally another gene. Yet for both groups of brands, economic sustainability was clearly represented as one single gene.

Despite these differences, nosotros decided to go on the items for each sustainability dimension as originally developed given that (a) EFA does non set whatsoever a priori constraints on the estimation of components and only analyzes the structure of the interrelationships amidst variables and (b) the high correlation between social and environmental sustainability is somewhat expected because the sub-dimensions of sustainability are conceptually intertwined, sharing an underlying theme of overall sustainability. Keeping all measurement items same as that of the entire sample, CFA was conducted on fast fashion sample as well as sustainable fashion sample. The results remained similar (see Tabular array 5 for detailed results).

Tabular array 5 Cess of measurement model for each make grouping

Full size tabular array

In sum, RQ1 was answered based on the results of EFA and CFA supporting a three-dimensional factor construction and validity of the measurement model. Thus, the TBL model does serve as an accounting framework for consumers' perceived sustainability of fast fashion brands as well equally sustainable fashion brands.

RQ2: Do the 3 dimensions of sustainability (i.e., economic, environmental, social sustainability) of fast fashion brands every bit perceived by consumers predict brand relationships such as brand trust and loyalty?

To answer the second RQ, a structural equation model (SEM) was set up to examine the effect of the three dimensions of sustainability on two dependent variables, brand trust and brand loyalty. SEM was conducted on the fast mode brand group only (n = 372). The fit indices for a structural model were acceptable: χ²(161) = 530.371, χⁱⁱ/df = 3.294, RMSEA = .08, CFI = .95, NFI = .95, TLI = .94. The outcome of this analysis revealed that environmental and social sustainability did not significantly predict brand relationships (although the affect of social sustainability on trust was supported at the p value of .05). However, the impacts of economic sustainability on make trust and loyalty were both meaning (run across Fig. i). Therefore, while the TBL model tin can adequately explain consumers' perceived sustainability of fast way brands (RQ1), its predictive role in brand outcomes such as brand trust and loyalty is rather weak (RQ2). Particularly, the impacts of environmental and social sustainability for fast style brands on make relationship variables were marginal. Further implications of this result are presented in the Discussion department.

Fig. 1

The impact of sustainability perceived past consumers on brand event for fast mode brands

Full size image

RQ3: Does the predictive role of TBL sustainability of fast fashion brands differ from that of sustainable mode brands?

To answer the third RQ, the same SEM model was repeated on sustainable way brand group (n = 370). The model fit indices were: χ²(161) = 425.376, χ²/df = ii.642, RMSEA = .07, CFI = .96, NFI = .93, TLI = .95. The results indicated that both economical and social sustainability significantly affected make trust and loyalty while ecology sustainability did not accept any significant impact on either of brand outcomes (run across Fig. 2). Thus, the predictive role of TBL sustainability of fast mode brands does differ from that of sustainable way brands. Particularly, social sustainability turned out to exist a significant predictor of both brand trust and loyalty for sustainable fashion brands. The pregnant impact of economic sustainability and insignificant touch of environmental sustainability for fast mode brands remained aforementioned for sustainable style brands. Tabular array 6 summarizes the results of SEM analyses for each make group.

Fig. 2

The impact of sustainability perceived by consumers on brand issue for sustainable fashion brands

Full size image

Table half-dozen Standardized path coefficients: comparison between fast manner brands and sustainable style brands

Full size tabular array

Discussion

One of the objectives of this study was to determine if the TBL model can serve as an bookkeeping framework for consumers' perceived sustainability of fashion brands (RQ1). To this end, the three facets of sustainability theorized in the TBL model were practical to consumers' evaluation of fashion brands' sustainability from a CCS perspective. The successful validation of the model of sustainability in terms of its factor structure and construct validity suggests that the TBL model is an effective tool for explaining a consumer'southward perception of a fashion brand'due south sustainability. Every bit ecology, economy, and social equities are becoming ever more interwoven to produce "a seamless internet of causes and effects" (Edwards 2005, p. 18), we need a more comprehensive model of sustainability that can conceive the interaction between the three cadre elements of sustainability. The research model and the measurement proposed in this study offer greater insights into how consumers will perceive a style brand's sustainability and besides what criteria they use for their evaluation of a fashion brand's sustainability.

Further, although previous studies have provided evidence that consumer perceptions of way firms' sustainable management positively influences desired marketing outcomes such equally brand loyalty and brand trust, the inconsistency found in sustainability conceptualization prevents the adequate theoretical evolution of consumers' perceptions of fashion make sustainability and the resultant brand behaviors. Therefore, this research contributes to the current literature by first proposing and then testing a model for fashion brand'south sustainability that constitutes its core elements and furthers our understanding of a consumer'southward perception of a fashion brand'south sustainability. For practitioners, the model of sustainability in this study tin can provide useful diagnostic information, as it includes the basic, primal aspects of sustainability (i.e., the three dimensions of sustainability) that consumers use in their evaluation of mode brand sustainability.

This study as well delineates the predicting ability of a different facet of sustainability on make outcomes beyond unlike types of fashion brands (RQ2 and RQ3). One of the notable findings is that, for both fast mode brands and sustainable fashion brands, economic sustainability of brands that has been largely ignored in the existing literature, was a significant predictor of both make trust and loyalty. This effect suggests that, no thing where in the continuum of sustainability a fashion make lies (i.east., whether it is a sustainable way make or a fast fashion make), putting quality products at the forefront in the marketing communication tin be an effective strategy to build potent brand relationships. This event can be also interpreted such that, while consumers' environmental or social concern may be compromised for their desire for fashion (McNeill and Moore 2015), quality of products may not be. Therefore, emphasizing right products that are intrinsically linked to product attributes, such equally correct styles, fits, materials, and immovability must be considered as cardinal components of the fashion brands' sustainability claim.

Interestingly, environmental sustainability, where a majority of current brands mainly focus on in their sustainable direction and marketing (Plieth et al. 2012; Niinimäki 2010), was not a significant predictor of make relationships for either of fast mode brands or sustainable fashion brands. This result suggests that, although many fashion brands emphasize the environmental aspects of their sustainable management (e.k., use of environmentally sustainable cobweb) in their sustainability marketing communication, environmental sustainability as a single factor alone may not necessarily elicit positive brand relationships such as make trust or brand loyalty. While this result for fast style brands can be related to previous researchers' findings that consumers' want for new fashion often outweighs their attitudes toward sustainability (Joy et al. 2012; McNeill and Moore 2015), it is noteworthy that the same result (i.e., the insignificant bear on of environmental sustainability on brand outcomes) was found in sustainable style brands. This result indicates that, even for those consumers who shop from sustainably produced fashion brands, the mere fact that brands are environmentally sustainable may not be persuasive enough to develop stiff brand relationships.

Equally for social sustainability of brands, disparate effects on make outcomes were found for different types of style brands. That is, for sustainable fashion brands, social sustainability played a significant office in creating brand relationships, while its bear upon was weaker for fast fashion brands (i.e., the impact on brand trust was significant at the p value of .05 and not significant on brand loyalty). One possible explanation for this consequence is that, for a sustainable fashion brand, its social sustainability is well-embedded in its overall make value then it creates articulate, strong brand values (i.e., positive brand relationships in this case), whereas for a fast style brand, several external factors might interfere with the impact of a brand's social sustainability on make relationships. For instance, consumers' existing perception about fast fashion brands' unsustainable images (e.g., the apply of sweatshop) and their actual consumption experience may weaken the link between their perceived social sustainability of a given fast fashion brand and make relationships. Maybe, a brand's social sustainability can exist better noted by consumers for sustainable way brands than for fast manner brands. In other words, a fast fashion brand'south claim of beingness socially responsible may not exist every bit effective every bit a sustainable fashion brand's claim, as consumers' perception of the brand's social sustainability does not lead to positive brand outcomes.

The enquiry model in this study could be extended by adding possible mediators and moderators among constructs. Particularly, if a brand's environmental or social sustainability does not predict brand relationships, what and so are the factors that could strengthen or weaken this relationship? Hereafter research could investigate additional factors that can lead to meaningful make outcomes. In addition, conceptualizing the three dimensions of TBL sustainability requires farther investigation. Peculiarly, economic sustainability in the CCS perspective in this study mainly focuses on the quality of products offered by brands. Nevertheless, at that place could be other aspects of fashion brands that are associated with the economic well-beingness of consumers (e.g., reasonable price of products). It seems necessary to further anticipate the CCS sustainability as well as its measurement.

Lastly, researchers could replicate this study on other types of brands that offer appurtenances and services. The significance of implementing a sustainable business in the current environment is undeniable across many business sectors. Therefore, futurity research could apply the model of sustainability proposed in our study to other industry sectors, such every bit fast-moving consumer goods, restaurants, and grocery retailing. The measurement calibration will demand to exist modified to fit the specific business organisation sector so it captures precise industry-specific information virtually sustainability. Using the TBL model as a guiding framework, hereafter inquiry also could refine the ways in which the three dimensions of sustainability of brands for style or other product categories are both conceptualized and measured.

Determination

Overall, this inquiry provides meaning and benign contributions from both academic and managerial perspectives. From a theoretical standpoint, this study supports using the TBL framework to understand consumers' perceptions of fashion brand sustainability. The findings also further our understanding of a consumer's perception of a fashion make's sustainability and its role in forming brand relationships for fast fashion brands as well as sustainable fashion brands. From a managerial perspective, this study also emphasizes the bespeak that consumers perceive economic, ecology and social sustainability from mode brands, whether they are fast or sustainable brands. Consequently, fashion firms must piece of work toward meeting all three pillars of sustainability to achieve strong sustainability (Molthan-Colina 2014). The failure of a firm to fully incorporate these three pillars of sustainability in its business may inflict significant harm to its brand image as well every bit the style its customers perceive its ongoing sustainability efforts.

References

• Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. Westward. (1998). Some methods for re-specifying measurement models to obtain unidimensional construct measurement. Periodical of Marketing Research, 19(iv), 453–460.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Bhaduri, Thousand., & Ha-Brookshire, J. East. (2011). Practise transparent concern practices pay? Exploration of transparency and consumer purchase intention. Habiliment & Textiles Research Journal, 29(ii), 135–149.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Cline, E. L. (2012). Overdressed: The shockingly high cost of cheap manner. New York: Portfolio Hardcover.

  Google Scholar

• Cronin, J. J., Smith, J. S., Gleim, Chiliad. R., Ramirez, E., & Martinez, J. D. (2010). Green marketing strategies: An test of stakeholders and the opportunities they present. Periodical of the Academy of Marketing Scientific discipline, 39(1), 158–174.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Curwen, Fifty. G., Park, J., & Sarkar, A. Grand. (2012). Challenges and solutions of sustainable wearing apparel product development: A case study of Eileen Fisher. Habiliment and Textiles Research Periodical, 31(ane), 32–47.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Dickson, Chiliad. A., & Littrell, M. A. (1996). Socially responsible behavior: Values and attitudes of the culling trading organization consumer. Periodical of Manner Marketing and Management, 1(i), fifty–69.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Dishman, Fifty. (2013). Within H&M'due south quest for sustainability in fast fashion. http://www.forbes.com/sites/lydiadishman/2013/04/09/within-hms-quest-for-sustainability-in-fast-fashion/.

• Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, prove and implications. Academy of Management Review, 29(1), 65–91.

  Google Scholar

• Edwards, A. R. (2005). The sustainability revolution: Portrait of a paradigm shift. Gabriola: New Society Publishers.

  Google Scholar

• Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Gabriola Island: New Gild Publishers.

  Google Scholar

• Erdem, T., & Swait, J. (2004). Brand credibility, brand consideration and selection. Periodical of Consumer Research, 31, 191–198.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and Statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Fulton, K., & Lee, South. (2013). Assessing sustainable initiatives of apparel retailers on the internet. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 17(3), 353–366.

  Commodity  Google Scholar

• Gardetti, M. A., & Torres, A. L. (2012). Introduction. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 45, 5–15.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Gerbing, D. Due west., & Hamilton, J. G. (1996). Viability of exploratory gene analysis as a precursor to confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, three, 62–72.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Gruber, V., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Houston, M. J. (2014). Inferential evaluations of sustainability attributes: Exploring how consumers imply product data. Psychology & Marketing, 31(six), 440–450.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Hanss, D., & Bӧhm, Grand. (2012). Sustianability seem from the perspective of consumers. International Periodical of Consumer Studies, 36, 678–687.

  Commodity  Google Scholar

• Huang, M., & Rust, R. T. (2011). Sustainability and consumption. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Scientific discipline, 39(1), 40–54.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Hustvedt, G., & Dickson, M. A. (1996). Consumer likelihood of purchasing organic cotton fiber dress: Influence of attitudes and self-identity. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An international Journal, 13(1), 49–65.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Joy, A., Sherry, J. F., Venkatesh, A., Wang, J., & Chan, R. (2012). Fast fashion, sustainability, and the ethical appeal of luxury brands. Fashion Theory, 16(3), 273–296.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Jägel, T., Keeling, K., Reppel, A., & Gruber, T. (2012). Individual values and motivational complexities in ethical clothing consumption: A ways-end approach. Periodical of Marketing Management, 28(3–4), 373–396.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Kang, J., & Hustvedt, Yard. (2014). The contribution of perceived labor transparency and perceived corporate giving to brand equity in the footwear industry. Wear and Textiles Research Periodical, 32(4), 296–311.

  Commodity  Google Scholar

• Kilduff, P. (2005). Patterns of strategic adjustment in the Usa textile and apparel industries since 1979. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 9(2), 180–194.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Kim, H., Choo, H. J., & Yoon, N. (2013). The motivational drivers of fast manner avoidance. Journal of Fashion Marketing & Management, 17(2), 1361–2026.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Kim, H.-S., & Damhorst, M. Fifty. (1998). Environmental business concern and wearing apparel consumption. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, xvi(3), 126–133.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Kozlowski, A., Bardecki, M., & Searcy, C. (2012). Environmental bear on in the way industry: A life-wheel and stakeholder framework. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 45, 17–36.

  Google Scholar

• Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. (2004). The event of corporate social responsibility on customer donations to corporate-supported nonprofits. Journal of Marketing, 68(four), xvi–32.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Lubin, D. A., & Esty, D. C. (2010). The sustainability imperative. Harvard Concern Review, 88(5), 42–50.

  Google Scholar

• Mathwick, C., Malhotra, N., & Rigdon, E. (2001). Experiential value: Conceptualization, measurement and application in the catalog and Internet shopping surroundings. Journal of Retailing, 77(ane), 39–56.

  Article  Google Scholar

• McNeill, L., & Moore, R. (2015). Sustainable fashion consumption and the fast fashion conundrum: Fashionable consumers and attitudes to sustainability in clothing choice. International Periodical of Consumer Studies, 39, 212–222.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Molthan-Hill, P. (2014). The business concern student's guide to sustainable direction: Principles and practice. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

  Google Scholar

• Morgan, L. R., & Birtwistle, G. (2009). An investigation of young way consumers' disposal habits. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33, 190–198.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Niinimäki, G. (2010). Eco-clothing, consumer identity and ideology. Sustainable Evolution, eighteen, 150–162.

  Commodity  Google Scholar

• Norum, P. South., & Ha-Brookshire, J. (2011). Consumer merchandise-off analysis and market share estimation for selected socially responsible product attributes for cotton apparel. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 29(4), 348–362.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Park, H., & Kim, Y.-Grand. (2016). Proactive versus reactive apparel brands in sustainability: Influences on make loyalty. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29, 114–122.

  Commodity  Google Scholar

• Parker, Fifty., & Dickson, M. A. (Eds.). (2009). Sustainable fashion: A handbook for educators. Bristol: Labour Backside the Label.

  Google Scholar

• Plieth, H., Bullinger, A. C., & Hansen, Due east. Thousand. (2012). Sustainable entrepreneurship in the apparel industry: The case of Manomama. Periodical of Corporate Citizenship, 45, 123–136.

  Commodity  Google Scholar

• Ramirez, E. (2013). Consumer-defined sustainably-oriented firms and factors influencing adoption. Journal of Business organisation Enquiry, 66, 2202–2209.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Schmitt, J., & Renken, U. (2012). How to earn coin by doing good!: Shared value in the clothes industry. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 45, 79–103.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Shen, B., Wang, Y., Lo, C. K. Y., & Shum, Thousand. (2012). The impact of upstanding fashion on consumer purchase beliefs. Journal of Manner Marketing and Management, xvi(2), 234–245.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Sheth, J. N., Sethia, N. Grand., & Srinivas, South. (2011). Mindful consumption: A customer-axial approach to sustainability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(ane), 21–39.

  Article  Google Scholar

• Slaper, T. F., & Hall, T. J. (2011). The triple bottom line: What is it and how does it work? Indiana Business organization Review, 86(i), four–8.

  Google Scholar

• Stern, Southward. (2007). President Clinton, Google grows, $100 oil, but no US recession—this is 2008. http://world wide web.ft.com/intl/cms/due south/0/eb14b4b2-b6fe-11dc-aa38-0000779fd2ac.html#axzz3LhELqCbr. Accessed 15 Sept 2015.

• Waage, Southward. A., et al. (2005). Fitting together the edifice blocks for sustainability: A revised model for integrating ecological, social and fiscal factors into business organisation decision-making. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(12), 1145–1163.

  Article  Google Scholar

• World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. New York: Oxford University Press.

  Google Scholar

• Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. 50., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(two), 31–46.

  Article  Google Scholar

Download references

Authors' contributions

HP carried out research and drafted the manuscript. Y-KK guided the analysis of the results and revision of the draft. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Affiliations

1. Department of Design, Housing and Merchandising, 442 Man Sciences, Oklahoma Country Academy, Stillwater, OK, 74078-6142, USA

   Hyejune Park

2. Department of Retail, Hospitality, and Tourism Management, University of Tennessee, 244A Jessie Harris Building, Knoxville, TN, 37996-1911, United states

   Youn-Kyung Kim

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hyejune Park.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Eatables Attribution iv.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in whatsoever medium, provided you lot give advisable credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Park, H., Kim, YK. An empirical examination of the triple bottom line of customer-centric sustainability: the case of fast style. Fash Text 3, 25 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-016-0077-vi

Download citation

• Received: 17 January 2016

• Accepted: 19 September 2016

• Published: 26 December 2016

• DOI : https://doi.org/x.1186/s40691-016-0077-6

Keywords

• Triple bottom line (TBL)
• Sustainability
• Fast manner
• Sustainable style
• Brand trust
• Make loyalty

Share this post