Analysis of consumer preferences in sustainable fashion consumption
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51599/is.2024.08.03.01Keywords:
sustainability, consumer preferences, sustainable clothing, choice-based conjoint analysis.Abstract
Purpose. Growing consumer concern about the environmental and ethical impact of their clothing purchases has led to an increased desire for more conscious alternatives, which has stimulated the emergence of a market for products that prioritise sustainability. This study aims to explore the complexities of consumer preferences and choices in sustainable fashion consumption by uncovering the key factors that guide consumers in selecting clothing items through choice-based conjoint analysis. To analyse the consumers’ preferences, seven attributes and attribute levels are determined firstly and then the data for the study are collected by designing a survey through the Conjointly online platform.
Results. Price emerges as the most significant factor, indicating the substantial influence of economic considerations on sustainable clothing consumption choices. Following price, the choice of product material ranks second, reflecting the importance consumers place on material quality and the environmental impact of these materials. Ethical production practices, ranking as the third most important attribute, emphasise the critical role of ethical labor conditions in shaping the decision-making process of consumers. Brand reputation ranks among the third less pivotal considerations, while sustainability certificates do not hold the same decisive power as price, product material, and ethical production practices. Supply chain transparency is the least influential attribute while geographical production location demonstrates a comparatively limited influence on consumer choices.
Scientific novelty. This research is motivated by the growing focus on sustainability in the fashion industry and the need to bridge the gap between consumer preferences and sustainable clothing alternatives. The novelty of this research is provide insights into the factors that influence consumers on choosing sustainable clothing by quantifying the comparative significance of the preferences of customers.
Practical value. This study aspires to contribute a fresh perspective and valuable insights to the field of sustainable fashion. Furthermore, it intends to offer practical recommendations for brands and policymakers as they navigate this ever-evolving landscape. Recognising the determinants of consumers’ intentions to purchase sustainable garments is imperative for fashion brands and policymakers striving to promote sustainable practices and tailor their product offerings to match consumers’ preferences.
References
Anderson, R. C., & Hansen, E. N. (2004). The impact of environmental certification on preferences for wood furniture: a conjoint analysis approach. Forest Products Journal, 54(3), 42. Available at: https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A115169790/AONE?u=anon~28e8a5dd&sid=googleScholar&xid=9ceb706e.
Chekima, B., Wafa, S. A. W. S. K., Igau, O. A., Chekima, S., & Sondoh, S. L. (2016). Examining green consumerism motivational drivers: does premium price and demographics matter to green purchasing?” Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 3436–3450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.102.
Chowdhury, M., & Salam, K. R. (2011). A conjoint analysis in high involvement purchase decision process – in context of green cars in Sweden (Master Thesis). Umea University, Umea School of Business. Available at: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Green-Race!-A-Conjoint-Analysis-in-High-Involvement-Chowdhury Salam/e4f3801d9939ae08a4ad267f619a29c47dbed294.
Eggers, F., Sattler, H., Teichert, T., & Völckner, F. (2021). Choice-based conjoint analysis. In C. Homburg, M. Klarmann, A. Vomberg (Eds.), Handbook of Market Research (pp. 781–819). Cham, Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57413-4_23.
Evans, J. R., & Mathur, A. (2005). The value of online surveys. Internet Research, 15(2), 195–219. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240510590360.
Falkner, G., & Hellen, S. (2017). Sailing green – a protection motivation analysis of green consumption choices in China (Master Thesis). Available at: https://biopen.bi.no/bi-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2484376/1758970.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
Gavranovic, A. (2020). Textile market-clothing industry facing new challenges. Textile & Leather Review, 3(2), 103–106. https://doi.org/10.31881/TLR.2020.PP03.
Jacobs, K. (2020). Quantitative empirical studies on sustainable consumption. (Doctorate Thesis), Brandenburg Cottbus-Senftenberg Technology University. Available at: https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-btu/files/5333/Jacobs_Kathleen.pdf.
Kojcic, I., & Kuzmanovic, M. (2022). Conjoint analysis of green consumer preferences for electronic products. International Journal for Quality Research, 16(2), 559–575. https://doi.org/10.24874/IJQR16.02-14.
Krystallis, A., & Ness, M. (2005). Consumer preferences for quality foods from a South European perspective: a conjoint analysis implementation on Greek olive oil. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 8(2), 62–91. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.8161.
Kulshreshtha, K., Tripathi, V., & Bajpai, N. (2018). 1971–2017: evolution, exploration and test of time of conjoint analysis. Quality & Quantity, 52(6), 2893–2919. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0717-6.
Kuzmanovic, M., Radosavljevic, M., & Vujosevic, M. (2013). Understanding student preferences for postpaid mobile services using conjoint analysis. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 10(1), 159–176. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260515194.
Mukherjee, S. (2015). Environmental and social impact of fashion: towards an eco-friendly, ethical fashion. International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies, 2(3), 22–35. Available at: https://www.ijims.com/uploads/b71b53a1a196ea5f111a155.pdf.
Park-Poaps, H., & Kang, J. (2018). An experiment on non-luxury fashion counterfeit purchase: the effects of brand reputation, fashion attributes, and attitudes toward counterfeiting. Journal of Brand Management, 25(2), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-017-0077-x.
Sanad, R. A. (2016). Consumer attitude and purchase decision towards textiles and apparel products. World Journal of Textile Engineering and Technology, 2, 16–30. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308916782.
Sigaard, A. S., & Laitala, K. (2023). Natural and sustainable? Consumers’ textile fiber preferences. Fibers, 11(2), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/fib11020012.
van der Pol, M., & Ryan, M. (1996). Using conjoint analysis to establish consumer preferences for fruit and vegetables. British Food Journal, 98(8), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070709610150879.
Velcovska, S., & Larsen, F. R. (2021). The impact of brand on consumer preferences of milk in online purchases: conjoint analysis approach. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 69(3), 345–356. https://doi.org/10.11118/actaun.2021.032.
Verma, V. K., & Chandra, B. (2018). Sustainability and customers’ hotel choice behaviour: a choice-based conjoint analysis approach. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 20, 1347–1363 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-9944-6.
Zhou, X., & Xu, Y. (2019). Conjoint analysis of consumer preferences for dress design. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, 32(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCST-02-2019-0024.
Zwerina, K., Huber, J., & Kuhfeld, W. F. (1996). A general method for constructing efficient choice designs. Durham, NC: Fuqua School of Business, Duke University. Available at: https://people.duke.edu/~jch8/bio/Papers/Zwerina%20Kuhfeld%20Huber.pdf.
