Slow Fashion Developing a Conceptual Apparel Design Process

Slow Fashion: Developing a Conceptual Apparel

Design Process

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

Globalization and increased technological advancement have altered all aspects of business

for most industries. As one of the world’s most globalized businesses, the fashion industry has

become highly affected (Birnbaum, 2005; Dickerson, 1999). To maintain a competitive edge,

the industry must remain at the forefront of strategies and issues that not only directly affect the

industry but can provide an advantage.

One of the biggest subjects affecting the industry is the issue of sustainability.

Environmental concern in the United States reached an all-time high by the 1970s (Tortora &

Eubank, 2010, p. 534). The establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in

1970 led to significant political involvement in the fashion industry (Hethorn & Ulasewicz, 2008,

p. 314). Companies had to abide by regulations addressing concerns for the environment, which

included drinking water, chemical usage, and waste disposal. Soon environmental responsibility

became a tangible concept rather than a vague idea. Consumers became more aware of the

negative impacts their purchased products had on the environment. One effect of this awareness

resulted in an influx in consumer partiality to natural fibers during the late 1970s and 1980s

(Tortora & Eubank, 2010, p. 584). The extent of this awareness, and the progress of the

environmental movement within the industry, reached a pinnacle point in March 25, 1990. The

New York Times published a headline story discussing consumers' awareness of the

environmental efforts of manufacturers and designers alike (Tortora & Eubank, 2010, p.584).

The issue of sustainability within the disciplines of textiles, apparel design, and

merchandising has remained a “hot” topic for decades. Countless individuals in academia have

sought to find information and solutions in order to create a more environmentally responsible

fashion industry. While no all-encompassing solution has been found, efforts continue to find

continuity on the subject.

Prior to the effects of mass industrialization in the 1800s, textiles and resource

conservation were a way of life. The cost of resources and labor to create garments was high

thus causing the consumption of apparel to be based on necessity rather than hedonic motivations

for consumers outside of the aristocracy and higher socio-economic echelons (Welters, 2008).

Garments were designed based on the needs of the wearer. The resources used to create

garments were used in their entirety. Repeated repairs were made to garments to extend their

lifecycle. Once garments were beyond repair, the materials were repurposed to fulfill other uses

within a household (Tortora & Eubanks, 2010).

The advent of the Industrial Revolution opened doors for the world-wide distribution and

accessibility of fashion and textiles from all over the world. It also changed the manner in which

apparel was consumed (Tortora & Eubanks, 2010). As technological developments and

advancements occurred, the world experienced the increased ease of textile manufacturing and

the creation of an apparel and fashion industry. The consumption of apparel goods became an

intricate business based on fueling hedonic motivations. During this industrial growth, very little

attention was paid to the manner of depletion or effects on the resources used to create garments.

That inattention continued to grow and adjustments in the use of resources within the apparel

industry were dependent on issues that arose during the time of war.

The depletion of resources and environmental effects of industry did not become an issue

of attention until the 1960s. This awareness grew from the 1962 publication of Rachel Carson’s

book Silent Spring in which the effects of damage to the environment, and subsequently the

effects on humanity, became a topic of public interest. From then on into the 21st century,

environmentalism and sustainable practices have become issues of important consideration

within the apparel industry.

Stuart Walker (2006) wrote that in order to effectively navigate through the contemporary

issues of environmentalism, as a society we must:

“…rethink our notions of material culture, especially in the economically developed

countries. Potentially, designers can make significant contributions to this endeavor by

developing solutions that challenge precedents and demonstrate alternative possibilities –

but to do this we will need to transform design education and design practice and develop

new understandings of product aesthetics and our notions of ‘good’ design (p. 8).”

Academic research within the discipline of textiles, apparel design, and merchandising has

addressed this notion. In 2011, Gam and Banning conducted a problem-based learning study to

design original sustainable garments by undergraduate students enrolled in an apparel design

course. That study’s outcome resulted in student feedback indicating student participants would

continue to incorporate sustainable practices in their future work. Other work by researchers has

addressed the promotion of reusing or recycling waste materials to create garments (Chen &

Burns, 2006; Fletcher, 2008; Joergens, 2006; Poole et al., 2009). Additional studies have

demonstrated the efficacy of using classes on sustainability and sustainable issues to inform and

inspire both merchandising and design students (Cao, Frey, Farr, & Gam, 2006) as well as

incorporating sustainability into curricula (Pasricha & Kadolph, 2009). This research

demonstrates a positive move towards the creation of alternate methods the fashion systems can

use to further implement sustainability within the apparel process.

One such alternative method is that of a fashion movement, known as Slow Fashion, which

is in its early stages within the fashion industry. The term Slow Fashion was coined by

Kate Fletcher, a professor of Sustainability, Design, Fashion at the Centre for Sustainable

Fashion at the London College of Fashion. Slow Fashion originated from the Slow Food

movement, wherein an Italian activist protested the global standardization of food reflected by

the growing fast food industry. Slow Fashion is an approach encouraging the use of responsible

production processes wherein value is added to the apparel product through quality design and

the thoughtful connection between the environment and the individuals who make the apparel

product (Fletcher 2007; Honoré, 2004). According to Fletcher, Slow Fashion is fashion

conceived of from a different starting point versus that of traditional fashion processes and

represents fashion with different values, goals and objectives. Similar to the basic founding

definition of sustainability, Slow Fashion “aims to assemble eco, ethical and sustainable fashion

into one movement, in order to meet fundamental human needs, while allowing for the earth’s

natural regenerations to take place” (Cataldi, Dickson, & Grover, 2010, p. iv).

Research Significance and Justification

Although scholars have put forth research efforts to expand and disseminate the topic of

slow fashion within the disciplines of textiles, apparel design, and merchandising, the novel

concept has been found to not be “well organized as a system” and “not moving strategically

towards sustainability’ (Cataldi et al., 2010, p.5)

The sustainability movement has remained on the forefront of research within the fashion

industry. Studies have shown the importance and need to implement sustainable practices in

fashion as a means to prepare future industry professionals (Gam & Banning, 2011). But

sustainability in fashion is far different from other industries. The fashion industry has created a

constant cyclical change. From seasons to consumer preferences, fashion remains an industry

whose complexity creates barriers to sustainability. The most significant of these barriers

include consumers' desire to consume more, cost, and a highly competitive market (Fletcher,

2008; Hethorn & Ulasewicz, 2008). Products for other industries have longer life spans. Despite

the rise of support for the environmental movement, which led to and increased the research and

creation of more sustainable products within the industry such as alternative fibers made from

bamboo, hemp, and recycled plastic, there are multiple facets of the industry with opportunities

for improvement. Research has demonstrated on numerous occasions the disparity that exists

between consumers’ attitudes, intention, and behavior as it is related to environmental

consumption known as the ‘attitude-behavior gap’ or the ‘values-action gap’ wherein consumers

report a concern about environmental issues but have difficulty converting this concern into

actual purchases (Freestone & McGoldrick, 2008; Kim & Damhorst, 1998; Kollmuss &

Agyeman, 2002; Padel & Foster, 2005; Prothero, Dobscha, Freund, Kilbourne, Luch, Ozanne, &

Thøgersen, 2011; Tsakiridou, Boutsouki, Zotos, & Mattas, 2008; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006;

Young, Hwang, McDonald, & Oates, 2010;). Fashion is a system of multi-dimensional domains.

Hethorn and Ulasewicz in 2008 stated “There is much more to sustainable fashion than the

materials [sourcing] component. New concepts are needed that embrace a rethinking of the

process of garment creation, use, and disposal, re-creation, or re-use with the focus on extending

the life span of products and the meaning they bring.” (p. xx). One of these concepts is that of

slow design and slow fashion. In studying the possible creation of a slow fashion design process,

the body of scholarly knowledge can expand on the options that can further the implementation

of sustainable practices within the fashion industry. An apparel design process is “a creative

problem-solving process” whereby designers use pre-established design strategies that are

critically linked to the development of apparel products (Lamb & Kallal, 1992, p. 43). The

results of this current study could provide researchers, and the industry, with an empirical

definition and a rudimentary measure of slow fashion as it applies to the apparel design process

to further research and industry implementation of sustainability.

Problem Statement

The issue of sustainability brings about not only opportunities for growth within the fashion

industry but also questions of compatibility and constraints (de Brito, Carbone, &

Blanquart, 2008). Each domain of this multi-faceted industry needs considerable changes.

However, sustainability is not a singular, one-dimensional concept. It involves multiple

components that can be implemented alone or in collaboration. Stuart Walker (1995) argued:

One of the main factors to be considered is the alleviation of negative environmental

effects caused by the inherently unsustainable concept of constantly increasing

production, consumption, use, and disposal of products in the economically

developed countries… A reduction in our acquisitiveness helps to attenuate the

environmental problems associated with excessive energy and materials use: it also

has profound effects on how we regard and relate to products. This in turn means a

different set of priorities and expectations pertaining to product acquisition--

longevity, durability, ease of maintenance and repair, upgradeability, etc., become

important considerations-- and these priorities have significant implications for

product design and product aesthetics (Walker, 1995 p.16).

Among the components that could be used as a tool to execute sustainability within the fashion

industry is slow design. As a fairly new concept in regards to fashion, only a few researchers

and industry players have sought out the full value of this variable within the realm of

sustainability and its application to the fashion industry. In 2010, LeHew and Hawley proposed

the need for understanding the relationship between the core disciplines of textiles, apparel

design, and merchandising and the slow fashion movement. For this reason, exploring the

application of slow fashion is important for revealing possible opportunities for implementation

within the fashion process. In the Harvard Business Review, Hart (1997) projected sustainable

development would constitute as one of the biggest opportunities in commerce over the next few

decades. Hart (2000) added that major sources of revenue growth in the future may stem from

environmental opportunities. Any revelations provided by studying the slow fashion movement

could provide elements of competitive advantage and industry growth. Additionally, the

research could define possibilities between the topic of sustainability and design resolution

within the apparel industry.

Research Purpose

This study sought to conduct research in order to define possibilities between the topics of

sustainability and design resolution within the apparel industry. The research will consist of

developing an apparel design process with slow design and slow fashion incorporated into an

existing apparel design process model and evaluating this process.

Research Objectives

To investigate the creation of a Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process, the following

objectives guide this research:

1. Identify and establish themes and concepts of the slow fashion design process

components based on a content analysis of pertinent literature.

2. Incorporate the slow fashion design process components into the Lamb & Kallal

(1992) apparel design framework.

3. Define the conceptualized slow fashion design process for use in apparel design.

This was accomplished by surveying and interviewing members of the

International Textiles & Apparel Association (ITAA) who are:

a. Textiles, apparel design and/or merchandising educators; and

b. Apparel design educators that submit creative scholarship into juried

exhibitions.

4. Finalize conceptual model based on the results from survey and interviews.

Research Questions

1. Can a comprehensive literature review of slow fashion design process reveal the

components of the slow fashion design process?

2. Can slow fashion design components be incorporated into Lamb and Kallal’s (1992)

apparel design framework for application of slow fashion during the design process?

3. Will apparel design and/or merchandising educator members of the International Textiles

& Apparel Association (ITAA) validate the conceptualized slow fashion design process

as is, or with suggested modifications?

Assumptions and Limitations

For the purpose of this study, the following assumptions apply:

1. The two purposive samples for this study were primarily based on individuals in

academia in university settings. These samples create limitations for the generalization

of the research results.

2. It was assumed that the sample groups have a basic understanding and knowledge of

sustainability.

3. It was assumed that the sample groups of apparel design educators and professionals who

are members of the International Textile and Apparel Association have a basic

understanding and knowledge of apparel design processes.

Definition of Terms

Considerations

For the sake of this research study, the term considerations is employed when referring

the apparel design elements or categories that could be used during the apparel design

process to define the various needs or requirements necessary to accurately create slow

fashion apparel. The use of the term is based on the use of “considerations” in Lamb

and Kallal’s FEA Model (1992). Lamb and Kallal had only three considerations

(functional, expressive, and aesthetic) that encompassed and categorized the design

criteria necessary in developing user needs centric design. These considerations are

applied in order to develop the Slow Fashion Apparel Design Model and the Slow

Fashion Apparel Design Process.

Creative Scholarship

“Applied research that involves the design process, in a way that demonstrates a

proficiency of combining creative and technical skills that may or may not have a

theoretical foundation, which was juried or peer-reviewed and retrievable” (Adams &

Meyer, 2011, p. 227).

Design criteria

Explicit goals that must be achieved in order for the development of a product to be

successful according to the parameters under which the criteria are established.

Dress

Modifications of the body and/or supplements to the body that include direct

modifications to the body as wells as items added to the body as supplements such as

clothing and accessories (Eicher & Roach-Higgins, 1992). Within this research, the term

will only encompass items added to the body as supplements when referring to dress.

Slow Design

“A return to traditional craft techniques and practices” (Brown, 2010, p. 57). “Slow

Design focuses on ideas of well-being. Well-being needs are indirect impacts on health through

their relationship to personal fulfillment, quality of life and psychological health. Failure to

meet well-being needs results in psycho-social maladjustment and stressrelated illnesses. The

guiding philosophical principle of Slow Design is to re-position the focus of design on the

trinity of individual, socio-cultural and environmental well-being”

(Fuad-Luke, 2005, p.13).

Sustainable

The terms green, eco-, and environmentally friendly; eco- and environmentally

responsible; and eco- and environmentally conscious are all used in literature to refer to

sustainable practices (Gam & Banning, 2011). To reduce confusion, for the purposes of

this research, the term sustainable is used.

CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF LITERATURE

One objective of this study is to explore the slow design process as it applies to apparel

design, to identify which considerations and design criteria of slow design are better accepted

and practical for implementation into the fashion industry as part of an apparel design process.

For this reason, the review of literature summarizes pertinent aspects of the body of knowledge

related to the elements of the apparel design process, slow fashion, the framework of a

conceptual model, and systems thinking theory.

Apparel Design Process

Design is a process through which ideas are transformed from a conceptual notion into

the development of a workable solution “based on skill, knowledge, inspiration, experience, and

problem solving techniques” (Regan, Kincade, & Sheldon, 1998, p. 37). In 1981, Koberg and

Bagnall summed the value of the design process as follows: “life is a process that has many

spinoffs called products. Although it may be a product you seek, it must be involvement with the

process that will eventually achieve it” (p. 23). Regan et al., (1998) state that the success of an

apparel product relies on one key factor: an effective apparel design process. For this reason, the

use of an apparel design process is imperative for the success of the introduction and execution

of the slow fashion movement within the preexisting fashion system.

The design process is rooted in the engineering design process theory and developed

through the collaboration of engineers, architects, mathematicians, and behavioral scientists.

Engineering design implements the identification of a need and development of a product to meet

that need (Wilcox, 1987). A successful design solves the identified problem within the

boundaries of said problem. In order to establish the boundaries and the process towards a

solution, engineering design process theory includes seven stages: problem recognition, problem

definition, exploration of the problem, search for alternatives, evaluation and decision making,

specification of solution, and communication of solution (Lewis & Samuel, 1989). From this

design process, several apparel design processes were indirectly derived including Orlando

(1979), Watkins (1988), and Lamb & Kallal (1992).

The New Design Process Model (Orlando, 1979) is based on a design process created by

Jones in 1973, which has three stages: divergence, transformation, and convergence. Divergence

is the extension of a design boundary. Transformation is the stage that includes creative insight

and “guesswork.” Convergence is where the identification of variable and objective occurs.

Orlando adapted these stages to develop an apparel design process model for functional apparel

design. Thus, Orlando’s model included the following stages: request made, design situation

explored, problem structure identified, design criteria established, specifications described,

prototype developed, and design evaluations.

In 1988, Watkins sought to clarify the individual stages of the apparel design process

established by Koberg & Bagnall (1981) in an effort to facilitate its implementation specifically

within university curriculum for apparel design students. The stages she reviewed and clarified

were: accept, analyze, define, ideate, select, implement, and evaluate. Accept, the first step, is to

find motivation and reasoning for devotion of time and effort to solving a problem. Analyze is

basic exploratory research wherein an individual learns as much as possible about the particular

design situation they are facing in order to develop the problem and begin generating ideas. The

third stage, define, is a statement of goals determined from the ideas and data collected from the

analysis stage. Ideation, the following stage, is known more so as “the creative, idea-generating

part of the design process” (Watkins, 1988, p. 12). It is an outcome of the design processes

wherein a complete analysis of the problem is necessary to maximize the possible design ideas

that could lead to a solution. Once these ideas are generated, the following step in the process is

selecting the idea that is most effective, which involves the integration of cognitive and intuitive

responses. Cognitive responses are based on logic while intuitive responses are subjective and

sensory. Following idea selection, implementation occurs to seek out whether or not the idea

selected will work for the problem at hand. Lastly, evaluation occurs to determine whether the

idea selected accurately solved the design problem for which the design process was completed.

It is based upon the degree to which the design selected solved the problem determined at the

beginning of the process, meeting the criteria stated in the definition of the problem, and was

within the boundaries set in the analysis of the problem. In the end, the importance of the design

process lies in fact that it provides a framework for action towards the development of a product.

In 1992, Lamb and Kallal developed an integrated design framework via a

problemsolving approach that incorporated functional, expressive, and aesthetic (FEA) principles

as depicted in Figure 1. Permission for its use in this current study was granted by the

International Textiles and Apparel Association (ITAA) and can be found in Appendix A. The

intent was to develop a framework that can be applied to develop design criteria regardless of

who the customer is. Their FEA model is intended to have multiplicity in its applications within

apparel design. The main focus at the center of this model is the intended user, also known as

the target customer. In order to begin the design process, the designer must create a profile on

the user and target information on their demographics and psychographics, physical

characteristics, activities, preferences, and other pertinent information related to the creation of

the product, which, in the case of this model’s use, is an apparel item.

Figure1: Lamb & Kallal (1992) FEA consumer needs model (p. 42)

(Reprinted by permission of the International Textile and Apparel Association)

Culture’s role on dress cannot be excluded within the context of apparel design. As the

layers of the consumer are peeled back, the next pertinent piece of information for the designer is

to understand the culture the consumer is surrounded by and associated with. Culture is a system

within itself that dictates behavioral patterns based on what has been learned through the

association with specific members of society (Hoebel, 1958). Spradley (1972) summarizes

culture as “what people know, feel, think, make, and do” (p. 6). As people create parameters for

what they know, feel, think, make, and do, meanings become attached to things such as clothing.

These meanings are attributed to the social interaction an individual has with others (Blumer,

1969). As an individual, their surroundings, and society evolve, the meanings of dress are

created, maintained, and modified (Damhorst, 2006, p. 5). Kaiser’s (1997) contextual

perspective on the body and dress, stipulates the need for awareness of social, cultural, and

historical influences at any given time. This awareness is essential to understanding dress and its

meanings. In order to critically examine what an individual finds desirable, especially in what

they seek in their apparel items, their cultural ideals must be examined and understood. These

ideals will establish the desires and/or requirements individuals seek in their apparel goods. In

the case of the FEA design process, culture will dictate what is considered an acceptable option

for the resolution of a design problem and thus a designer must be aware when developing an

individual’s profile as well as defining their apparel needs.

At the core of Lamb & Kallal’s FEA model is the target consumer. This end user is the

person or group of people who designers’ directly target the apparel they make towards. The

consumers’ needs must be analyzed in order for a designer to develop a profile of the user that

can include: “demographic and psychographic information, physical characteristics, activities,

and preferences” (Lamb & Kallal, 1992, p.42). The intent is to clarify the consumer’s needs and

wants in terms of the situation in which the apparel is used. This target consumer need can vary

from clothing categories such as evening wear and sportswear to functional use such as a

garment created to assist with a disability. Once a designer is aware of the needs and desires of

an individual, they have the means to establish design criteria for the specific design problem

they face. Lamb and Kallal (1992) classify these design considerations in their model as

functional, expressive, and aesthetic and the specific concerns within each category vary

depending on the user or markets targeted by the designer. Functional considerations relate to

the utility of the apparel product. As seen in Figure 1, fit, mobility, comfort, protection, and ease

of movement are examples of requirements an individual might seek. The symbolic or

communicative aspects of design are considered expressive considerations. Research in the

textiles, apparel design, and merchandising discipline has shown that dress provides non-verbal

communication about the wearer (Damhorst, 1990). An individual will often select apparel items

based on the communication it may convey about them and their individuality. Lastly, the

aesthetic considerations correlate to the human ideal of and desire for beauty. Basic

requirements for this include design elements, such as line, color, form, texture, and pattern that

create a pleasing design. Additionally, apparel goods and dress itself can be considered art

objects. When combined, these three types of design considerations interrelate differently

depending on the intended target and use of the apparel good produced.

To create their FEA model and to relate it to the apparel design process, Lamb and Kallal

(1992) combined features from two design processes to create their framework. Figure 2

represents these combined features from Koberg and Bagnall (1981) and Hanks, Belliston, and

Edwards (1977). Koberg and Bagnall established their seven problem-solving steps as: accept

the situation, analyze, define, ideate, select, implement, and evaluate (1981). Hanks et al.’s

(1977) six design phases include: accept, analyze, define, ideate, implement, and evaluate.

Accept refers to when a designer is motivated and finds reasons to devote time and effort to a

problem. Analyze is the step wherein a designers finds all information pertinent to the problem.

In defining the problem, a designer decides the most important aspects of the problem. In ideate,

the designer develops all possible manners by which to solve the problem. In the additional step

in Koberg & Bagnall, select, the designer choses what they deem as the best idea to solve the

problem. The designer then takes action to try the idea selected to solve the problem in

implement. Lastly, to evaluate, the designer analyzes what occurred when the idea was

implemented. If the idea selected was not the correct option to solve the problem, the entire

process or part of the process is repeated until a solution if found.

Lamb & Kallal combined the Koberg and Bagnall (1981) steps and Hanks et al. (1977)

phases to develop their framework. Lamb & Kallal’s framework begins with the problem

identification phase that uses the incorporation of Koberg and Bagnall’s (1981) accept situation,

analyze, and define stages and Hank et al.’s accept, analyze, and define phases. This design

process is initiated by the intended user or designer as they perceive, accept, and seek resolution

to a specific apparel problem for example the development of a seasonal collection for a specific

target market. The problem is what generates and fuels the design process from this point. The

designer identifies and defines the FEA criteria of the target user within the context of the

ideation of the problem. Preliminary ideas correspond with Koberg and Bagnall’s Ideation stage,

process and Hank et al.’s ideate phase of the problem solving process. Afterward, in the design

refinement stage, preliminary ideas are scrutinized for applicability. Criteria from the FEA

model were applied to deal with conflicts between priorities that have been established by the

model. This stage is where additional outside issues such as price may arise and play a role in

the development process. The result from this stage is a limited set of ideas that can be executed

and tested to solve the design problem. This correlates to Koberg and Bagnall’s select stage.

Those selected ideas are then executed as initial samples in the prototype development stage as

sample garments or samples of garment components for example. In relation to other design

process models, this would be considered the Implement stage (Koberg & Bagnall, 1981) and

reverts to the Analysis as well as the Implement phases (Hanks, Belliston & Edwards, 1977).

The Evaluation stage that follows entails the assessments of the prototypes created against the

criteria established in the Problem Identification stage. Subjective and objective measurements

are taken to access meeting the functional, expressive, and aesthetic needs that were

preestablished. Elements can be removed, modified, and refined according to the findings of the

evaluation and ends in the Implementation stage. This corresponds to Koberg & Bagnall’s

Evaluate step and Hank et al.’s Validate phase.

Figure 2: Lamb and Kallal (1992) Apparel design framework (p. 44)

(Reprinted by permission of the International Textiles and Apparel Association)

The evolution of the design process, especially as it applied to the apparel design

industry, is significant to the evolution of sustainability within the industry. The intent of Lamb

& Kallal’s model is to enhance the design process by expanding on the analysis and evaluation

phases. In doing so, the model can not only be applied within the dynamics of the apparel design

process but also in other areas of the apparel industry such as in the evaluation of apparel

products within the constructs of merchandising. In 2011, Niinimaki and Hassi developed a

study to open discussion on opportunities for change within the apparel industry that could cause

a shift towards promoting more sustainable practices. What they found was the need to focus on

consumers’ values and needs and/or increased consumer satisfaction. Additionally, their study

found that consumers have an interest in new design approaches. For this reason, the multiplicity

and detail of Lamb and Kallal’s FEA model is the most aptly suitable design

framework to use as a foundation in seeking to create a slow fashion design process.

Slow Fashion

According to Kate Fletcher (2008), who coined the term “slow fashion”, this approach to

the apparel industry encourages each factor within the supply chain to become more aware and

responsible in their approach to the production of clothing as well as understand the subsequent

impacts their choices and decisions have. The members of the supply chain include: designers,

producers, retailers, and consumers. The concept of slow fashion cannot be fully understood

without comprehension of the Slow Movement, its history, and subsequent movements from

which slow fashion is derived.

Slow Movement and Slow Food

Slow design is derived from the slow movement, which began with Slow Food

movement. The fast food industry has grown into a global economy reaching into every country

worldwide. In 1983, an activist named Carlo Petrini (2003) founded Arcigola, an Italian

nonprofit food and wine association. Based on frustration with the industrialized food chain and

decreased food quality Petrini founded Slow Food in 1986 as a response to the building of a

McDonald’s at the Spanish Steps in Rome and organized a protest against it. This protest was

aimed against the idea of globally standardized food that was reflected in the growing fast food

industry. To Petrini and Slow Food activists, the underlying values created by the fast food

industry homogenize, standardize, and industrialize the food heritages of countries worldwide.

Petrini’s goal was aimed at defending, preserving, and promoting regional traditions of

gastronomy and food production as well as ultimately a slower pace of life (Andrews, 2008;

Slow Food, 2014). The movement strives to encourage the use of farming plants, seeds, and

livestock from local ecosystems and is in essence aimed at socially responsible and sustainable

food production and consumption. Within three years of this event, a delegation comprised of 15

countries met in Paris to pledge to preserve the diversity of the world’s food. From that point on,

Slow Food grew into an international organization whose intent is to support and celebrate the

food traditions in over 150 countries around the world.

According to the Slow Food movement, their approach to fulfilling the organizations

philosophies is based on three principles: good, clean, and fair. Good stands for the creation of

fresh and flavorsome seasonal diets that satisfy the senses and is part of the local culture. Clean

refers to food production and consumption that does not harm the environment, animal welfare

or human health. Lastly, fair refers to creating accessible food prices for consumers and fair

conditions and pay for producers. These principles are the foundation for multiple objectives

fulfilling the movement’s and the organization’s mission and created the basis for subsequent

slow movements for other aspects and industries of consumption. Ultimately, Slow Food gave

rise to the Slow Movement which challenges our culture of speed and efficiency and seeks to

exchange it for awareness of the effects the pace has on eating habits, urban structures, mental

and physical health, as well as relationships (Honore, 2004). It is not necessarily to seek the

opposite of fast but rather a quest for balance with regard to the maintenance of sustainability. In

addition to slow food, sub-movements that arose from the Slow Movement are slow cities and

slow urbanization, slow travel, and slow design.

Slow Urbanization: Slow City Movement

Another slow movement to have evolved is that of Slow Urbanism. The culture of

consumption gave way to urbanization policies that created homogenized communities with little

to no attachment to local values, landscape, history, and culture. This type of urban planning has

caused the overconsumption of natural resources, ecosystems, and local communities (Wheeler,

2004). This overconsumption gave rise to the social concern towards reverting to core values

and rediscovery of the culture behind “place” (Knox, 2005). This new urban planning movement

seeks to deal with the subsequent problems resulting from overconsumption such as traffic

congestion, air pollution, and social segregation through various design approaches such as

those represented by City Beautiful and Garden City (Bressi, 1994). The main goal of this

neotraditional development is to restore social connections believed to have disappeared with

overconsumption (Parker, 2004). The creation of Slow City movement is not merely an effort of

conservationism but rather one that looks into questioning how a city can progress towards

modernization and maintenance within the globalized world without losing its “spirit” (Miele,

2008). Becoming a Slow City requires international accreditation for cities with a population less

than 50,000 who provide protection to the environment, infrastructure, culture and identity in

living environments, landscape, and local products. Cities must meet at least half of the 60 point

criteria that range from categories in environmental policy, infrastructure policy, technology and

facilities for urban quality, hospitality, and awareness (Cittaslow International, 2010). The

characteristics of each criterion can be found in Table 2-1.

Table 1: Slow City Membership Criterion

Criteria Elements for fulfillment

Environmental 

policies 

Verification of the quality of air, water and soil

Development of systems for the dissemination of refuse collection and

composting

Use of alternative sources of energy

Programs for reducing light, noise and electromagnetic pollution.

Infrastructure 

policies 

Conservation and improvement of cultural and historical values Support

of sustainable transportation forms

Development of programs that facilitate family and social life

Improvement of green areas

Technologies 

and facilities 

for urban 

quality 

Encouraging bio-architecture

Reorganizing infrastructural systems that create visual pollution

Taking measures for controlling noise

Use of plants that are peculiar to region in landscape architecture in public

and private areas

(adapted from Cittaslow International, 2010)

Table 1 cont’d: Slow City Membership Criterion

Criteria Elements for fulfillment

Technologies 

and facilities 

for urban 

quality 

Encouraging bio-architecture

Reorganizing infrastructural systems that create visual pollution

Taking measures for controlling noise

Use of plants that are peculiar to region in landscape architecture in public

and private areas

Safeguarding 

autochthonous 

production

Improvement of local and organic farming

Organizing educational programs in taste and nutrition in collaboration with

Slow Food and cooperation with educational institutions

Creation of market places where local products are sold, preserving and

improving the cultural activities and festivals.

Hospitality 

Organization of training courses regarding hospitality

Development of reception methods to facilitate the arrival of guests and

their access to information, service and other activities.

Awareness  Informing the public about the aims and procedures of being a Slow City

Encouraging the adoption of “slow” philosophy

(adapted from Cittaslow International, 2010)

In a 2011 study, Dogrusoy and Dalgakiran posited Slow Urbanism as an alternative approach in

sustainable urban planning to confront urban “deformation” that has occurred as a result of

globalized culture shaped by fast consumption. They aimed at drawing attention to the

challenges of the Slow Urbanization model using three slow city experiences in The Netherlands,

Germany, and Turkey and highlighting the model’s adaptability and flexibility. The initial focus

on the study was on the concept of speed through the industrialization and information ages thus

revealing the deformations and transformations in socio-cultural and physical spheres of

environment such as uniformity, homogenization and loss of belonging, fast consumption of

natural resources, and global warming. The secondary focus was on the introduction of slow

urbanization as an alternative approach to sustainable urban planning through the examination of

three country’s examples of its use. Ultimately, the study demonstrated the use of the Slow City

criterion as a form of design process in the creation and urban planning for these three cities.

Slow Travel

An analysis of tourism revealed high contributions to greenhouse gas emission suggesting

the travel component of tourism is responsible for a large portion of that contribution and is

estimated to grow (Gössling, 2002; Simpson, Gössling, Scott, Hall, & Gladin, 2008). A response

to the growing concern of tourisms effects on the environment is slow travel. The intent of the

Slow Travel movement is the quality of the experience with the reduction of environmental

impact as an optimal outcome (Dickson, Robin, & Lumsdon 2010). Slow travel is characterized

by a differing mantra of tourism to include alternative modes of transportation, shorter distances,

low-carbon consumption and an emphasis on the actual travel experience. Specifically,

Dickinson et al. defined slow travel as an emerging conceptual framework offering alternatives

to travel wherein individuals “travel to destinations more slowly over land, have longer stays,

and travel less”. This conceptual framework was developed alongside the principles of slow

food and slow urbanism with its emphasis on “staying local” when considering elements of travel

such as food, beverages, and attractions. Though an array of writers, advocates, and scholars

have provided ideas on the subject, those writings have unveiled five recurrent themes and values

that can be summarized as: “slow equates to quality time, it is about physically slowing down to

enjoy what is on offer, a quality experience, meaning and engagement, and in tune with ecology

and diversity” (Dickson & Lumsdon, 2010, p.4). Yet, there are institutional barriers in the

traditional travel and tourism structures that impede the widespread use of slow travel. In order

to function as an applicable framework for travel, an adaptation strategy needs to be developed

for implementation (Dickinson et al., 2010).

Slow Design Theory

Slow Design theory was first introduced in 2002 by Alastair Fuad-Luke. His paper

outlined the basic principles and concepts that founded Slow Design. The premise was to posit a

new design theory, based in the Slow Movement, which focused on the individual, sociocultural,

and environmental well-being and emphasizes the value of time and experience.

Specifically:

Slow design outcomes encourage a reduction in economic, industrial and urban

metabolisms, and hence consumption, by: serving basic human needs; designing

for space to think, react, dream, and muse; designing for people first,

commercialization second; balancing the local with the global and the social with

the environmental; demystifying and democratizing design by re-awakening

individual’s own design potential; and catalyzing social transformation towards a

less materialistic way of living (Fuad-Luke, 2004, p.19).

The basic execution of Slow Design theory would encourage the use of local resources, the

creation of richer and engaging experiences, and involve the end user.

Since Fuad-Luke’s introduction of Slow Design, various researchers have touched on the

subject of slow design from various angles. One example can be found in the 2012 thesis by Yu

Fen Kung where in the research explored the experimental approach advocating the concept of

slow design to visual communication. In studying the negative environmental impacts of the use

of paper coffee cups, the researcher sought to explore a graphic design approach towards an

advertising campaign to provide knowledge of the impacts of paper coffee cups. Ultimately a

slow design approach was applied to the final design application to seek a relationship between

main subjects in this project: time, environment, design and people. Kung split his study into

three evolutionary stages. In stage one, the design process was emphasized and the essential

elements were grouped into: experimentation, unpredictable graphics, and interaction.

Individuals created their own billboard design when passing by a billboard advertising the

awareness of global warming. When passer-byes touch the billboard, the surface would change

color with the rise of temperature from touch. This connected the project to the element of

interaction with people. Results and feedback from this stage pointed toward the lack of a strong

connection with human activity. For stage two, Kung continued with the issue of global

warming but sought to promote more project involvement and get participants to see the

importance of global issues in a fresh and innovative manner. Subsequently, the specific topic

chosen was that of an approach to educate teenagers on the consequences of smoking. Feedback

from this stage resulted in the need to narrow the topic more as well as changing the vehicle of

participation as the billboard was not sustainable. Stage three introduced the topic of the use of

paper coffee cups. This stage aimed at creating an advertisement campaign for a specific coffee

organization or company to advocate the use of personal reusable cups. The campaign

implemented the creation of a tree composed of paper coffee cups made from removable

adhesive paper. Participants could remove the paper cups to create the sense of awareness

through interaction. The results and feedback form this stage indicated the need for another

poster or advertisement depicting the landfill changes resulting from the “removal efforts”. These

three stages and their subsequent results lead to the creation of interactive posters providing

information about disposable paper coffee cups. The final design decisions and application

included logo and typeface design, and color scheme.

In 2008, Strauss and Fuad-Luke published a paper about the little known concept referred

to as the Slow Design Principle. The definition of slow design, as stated by Alastair Fuad-Luke

(2008), is “an approach that encourages a slower, more considered, and reflective process, with

the goal of positive well-being for individuals, societies, environments, and economies” (p. 361).

In this research, they concluded with six principles of Slow Design that resulted as a set of

intentions, qualities, and values representative of slow design methodology. Those six principles

and their meanings are depicted in Table 2. These principles offer a design approach to evaluate

the purposes of design activities and were specifically presented as a tool for designers to

evaluate and reflect on within the parameters of their design ideas, processes, and outcomes.

Many projects to develop prototypes, objects, and artistic and cultural design projects have been

created using each of these principles (Dunne & Raby, 2001; Heijdens, 2004; NEXT Architects

& Melis, A.L., 2004; Remy, 1991; Sinai, 2010; Von Hoff, 2003;). A 2011 thesis by Abigail

Sandberg employed Slow Design as the foundation to create functional pieces out of wood and

metal using Computer Numerical Control and Rapid Prototyping technologies. The intent of her

research was to execute the theoretical involvement of the user with an object to evoke an

emotional response as well as establish interaction beyond aesthetic appreciation. In the end,

Strauss and Fuad-Luke (2008) intended these principles to be used not as a strict formula for the

practice of slow design, but rather to provide designers with new tools and strategies to evaluate

design and engage designers and activists in dialogue. As of yet, these Slow Design principles

have not been applied to the creation of mass produced consumer products (Fuad-Luke, 2005).

The principles are abstract and require a “translation” phase to assist designers in using these

principles. This abstract nature could also be the reason why these principles have not been

universally applied in product development and design. Yet, although the principles are

considered abstract in nature, they have been applied within academia for the creation of

products.

Table 2: Principles of Slow Design

Principle of Slow Design

Principle 1: Reveal Slow design reveals spaces and experiences in everyday life that are

often missed or forgotten, including the materials and processes that

are can easily be overlooked in an artifact’s existence or creation.

Principle 2: Expand Slow design considers the real and potential “expressions” of artifacts

and environments beyond their perceived functionality, physical

attributes and life spans.

Principle 3: Reflect Slowly designed artifacts and environments induce contemplation and

“reflective consumption.”

Principle 4: Engage Slow design processes are “open source” and collaborative, relying on

sharing, cooperation, and transparency of information so that designs

may continue to evolve into the future.

Principle 5: Participate Slow design encourages users to become active participants in the

design process, embracing ideas of conviviality and exchange to foster

social accountability and enhance communities.

Principle 6: Evolve Slow design recognizes that richer experiences can emerge from the

dynamic maturation of artifacts and environments over time. Looking

beyond the needs and circumstances of the present day, slow design

artifacts become (behavioral) change agents.

(Adapted from Strauss & Fuad-Luke, 2008)

Grosse-Hering, Mason, Aliakseyeu, Bakker, and Desmet published a design case study

paper in 2013 exploring the application of the theory of Slow Design on mass produced products

with a goal to establish a mindful use of those products. Their intent was to promote product

attachment and promote the sustainable benefits of long-term use of products. The case study

followed the application of Slow Design principles in the design of an electric fruit juicer. The

case study resulted in a revision of the Slow Design Principles for their use by product designers.

Additionally, the main findings revealed that Slow Design principles can be used to create

“mindful” interactions that stimulate positive user involvement.

Hay (2008) developed a new interpretation of Slow Design to reflect going about doing

things in a slower, thorough, and more exceptional manner versus just doing less. Her thesis was

meant to use time as a design focus with a practical framework based on Slow Design

methodology towards the creation of an applied art project. The art piece developed named

RAFT, was a multi-purpose floating structure constructed from salvaged materials for aquatic

and land use. The thesis project was intended to be a critical view into the roles of producers and

consumers within the realm of sustainable research as it is applied to creative scholarship.

Application to Fashion

The sustainable design philosophy rooted in the slow movement has a strong influence

across many industries. Artists, academics, researchers, and activists have sought additional

routes through which the slow movement can flourish in more industries. One of those industries

is that of fashion.

In 2010, Eleonor Johansson developed a thesis with the objective to study the implication

of slow fashion, how it could make the industry sustainable, and if there is as business structure

or model available to aid in that process. Johansson studied consumer behavior using a slow

fashion approach. In her thesis, she concluded that slow fashion, as a concept, could be a

solution to creating a more sustainable fashion industry if consumers and businesses follow slow

fashion principles, which she summarizes into the guidelines presented in Table 3 and Table 4 in

dealing with issues including but not limited to consumption, production, designing, use and

waste.

Table 3: Guidelines to Slow Fashion for consumers

Guidelines for consumers:

•Reflect on our addiction of shopping as well as our addiction to washing, which results in

overconsumption as well as waste of energy for unnecessary laundries.

•Activate your inactive clothes, (fashion waste), in the wardrobe by either selling, giving

away, swop, re design or mend if broken or leave for recycling.

•Take time to experience and appreciate fashion. This will make you hold onto your

garments and use them over a longer time.

(Adapted from Johansson, 2010, p. 81-82)

Table 3 cont’d: Guidelines to Slow Fashion for consumers

Guidelines for consumers:

•Reflect on our addiction of shopping as well as our addiction to washing, which results in

overconsumption as well as waste of energy for unnecessary laundries.

•Activate your inactive clothes, (fashion waste), in the wardrobe by either selling, giving

away, swop, re design or mend if broken or leave for recycling.

•Take time to experience and appreciate fashion. This will make you hold onto your

garments and use them over a longer time.

•Way of consuming, going from quantity to quality “buying less but of the best”-where best

is high material quality as well as fashion durability but foremost personal style and value,

something that makes you hold onto it longer.

•Shop according to personal style and what you value, not trends!

•Balance your way of consuming:

•When buying out of need save up and choose well-meaning clothes that are built to last:

long lasting both in material and fashion. When buying out of desire choose already

produced and used fabric/materials and garments or swap with friends or at swapping

events.

•See the purchase as an investment -- As it should last for several years.

•Be aware of the impacts products have on workers, communities and ecosystems, which

involves environmental, social, fair, and ethical aspects – be aware of what you buy.

•Think about what you really need and want, not just consume for consuming.

•Make thoughtful and aware choices, consume reflectively, which indicates to consume

consciously and responsibly.

•Be aware on how we use our clothes, in terms of care, such as laundry, tumble drying and

ironing.

•Do you wash clothes that are not really dirty?

•Understand why garments are so cheap, the true cost of low cost, which is a high cost of

the environment as well as for workers involved upstream the supply chain.

•Reflect upon your consuming behavior and relationship with clothes and fashion, why you

consume and what you consume. Is it a healthy one?

•Consuming second hand, vintage and do swapping and take care of what already exists,

maximizing use of garments life and reducing waste the fashion industry creates.

(Adapted from Johansson, 2010, p. 81-82)

Table 4: Guidelines to Slow Fashion for businesses

Guidelines for businesses:

•Think from quantity to quality.

•Quality in designing and making, which includes time consuming techniques for

manufacturing as well as durability in material and fashion.

•Creating long term and mutually beneficial relationships in the supply chain.

•Regard social matters as living and working conditions for workers as well as the quality

of environment, for a non-polluted environment.

•Make clothes that are built to last, meaning durability for the physical garment as well as

the fashion style, creating long-lasting fashion.

(Adapted from Johansson, 2010, p. 82-83)

Table 4: Guidelines to Slow Fashion for businesses

Guidelines for businesses:

•Aim for making clothes that can become favourites in people’s wardrobes.

•Allow things to take time, it is beneficial to retailers, designers and the suppliers.

•Have knowledge and awareness of the industry, involving environmental, social, fair and

ethical aspects. Be aware of the impacts products have on workers, communities and

ecosystems.

•Search for real needs and diversity in fashion and move away from a homogenized fashion

and society.

•Producing locally could help preserving local traditions, knowledge and materials, not

losing the diversity of different cultures and traditional handcraft and creating diversity in

both productions as well as in products.

•A smaller maker and designer brand can be more flexible and diverse, helping the industry

and products to gain diversity.

•Produce and design with a diversity – create personal style and value.

•Think long-term planning, rather than short-term gains.

•Balance the entire process throughout the whole supply chain.

•Slow down processes of making the clothes, production in supply chain, product

development and selling to be able to be creative quality garments by the use of quality

skills.

•Integrity for the design process, take pressure off time for designing.  Garments made

from renewable, organic and pesticide free material.

•Designed to be washed at low temperatures or not at all.

•Use what already exists and what already is produced to balance the new resource

extraction with the waste the fashion industry creates and thereby extending the lives of

fabric, material and garments.

•Re-design, Re-use, and Re-cycle, to reduce processes that have a negative impact on

environment and people. Design quality garments that have the ability to being

Redesigned, Re used or Re cycled.

Clark (2008) conceptualized slow fashion as a collaborative approach working along with

the current fashion system in place with the inclusion of three primary dimensions: “the valuing

of local resources and distributed economies; transparent production systems with less

intermediation between producer and consumer; and sustainable and sensorial products” (p. 429).

LeHew and Hawley (2010) posited that the creation of a slow fashion movement could

systematically function as a model within the fashion industry paralleling the Slow Food

Movement with the addition of Clark’s conceptualization of Slow Fashion. LeHew and Hawley

further discuss synthesizing a hypothetical Slow Fashion Model giving way to the considerations

that would be applicable to the three principles set by the Slow Food Movement and Clark’s

(2008) Slow Fashion approach. Their intent is to explore and research the principles or the slow

fashion movement to create, or in the least, cultivate, an alternative to the current fashion

production system. While these researchers have sought out ways in which the fashion system as

a whole can approach an alternative to the fashion system as a whole through the use of the slow

fashion movement, the proposed research will concentrate on one singular aspect of the fashion

system: the design process.

A 2010 thesis (Cataldi et al., 2010) was developed to explore the Strategic Sustainable

Development conceptual framework as an approach to sustainability in the fashion industry

through the use of the Slow Fashion movement. The results were the development of 30

strategic recommendations targeting various participants in the Slow Fashion movement. Within

those 30, the research posed three key recommendations to further the Slow Fashion movement:

co-create Slow Fashion Principles to represent the values of the movement and a shared

definition of sustainability, establish a global network Slow Fashion movement, and coordinate

global garment and textile labeling initiatives under a Slow Fashion label. As a by-product of the

first key recommendation, the researchers developed a draft of what they considered principles

for the Slow Fashion movement to encompass. Those drafted principles are further elaborated

on in Table 5. The intention of these principles is not as a solution but rather as a means of

inspiring ‘player’s’ creativity to adapt them to the individual ‘player’s’ needs towards a social

sustainable contribution (p. 43). Their recommendations enhance the need for research on

possible application of the Slow Fashion movement to the pre-existing fashion process and

agenda.

Table 5: Slow Fashion movement principles

Principles Explanation of Principle

Principle 1:

Seeing the big picture

Recognizing all players are interconnected to the larger environmental

and social system and make decisions accordingly.

Principle 2: Slowing

down consumption to

allow earth’s natural

regeneration

Slowing down the use of raw materials by slowing fashion production to

allow for the earth’s regenerative capabilities thus alleviating pressure

on the earth’s natural production cycles so as to insure the Slow Fashion

movement’s rhythm with the earth’s provisions.

Principle 3:

Diversity

Three part diversity:

Biodiversity- preserving and supporting the variety of life and habitats

on Earth

Business – a multiplicity of answers and options joining together in

response to sustainability as models contributing to the Slow Fashion

Movement such as vintage, second-hand, recycled large fashion houses,

clothing swaps, etc.

Cultural – Encouraging traditional methods of garment making, textile

making, and dyeing techniques. The incorporation of regional

knowledge on maximizing local resources to use in addressing climate

change concerns as well as the use of family traditions in efforts to

increase the lifespan of items and offer emotional experiences.

Principle 4:

Respecting people

Support and participate in campaigns that help to educate and inspire

fair treatment of people. Including efforts of independent designers

working with local communities to help the community become more

resilient by giving community members to trade their goods.

Principle 5:

Acknowledging

human needs through

co-creation

Encourage meeting fundamental human needs by offering fashion with

emotional significance. Among these needs met by fashion are:

creativity, identity, understanding, and participation.

Principle 6:

Building relationships

to collaborate and

cocreate

Trusting and lasting relationships create a stronger movement.

(Co-creation refers to a collaborative partnership between designer and

consumer

(Adapted from Cataldi et al., 2010, p. 44-46)

Table 5 cont’d: Slow Fashion movement principles

Principles Explanation of Principle

Principle 7:

Resourcefulness

Relying on local resources and skills by focusing on locally abundant

materials when possible and supporting the development of local

businesses and skills.

(Local Labor, Local Knowledge, Local Materials)

Principle 8:

Maintaining quality

and beauty

Encouraging classic design over trends thus creating longevity through

quality.

Principle 9:

Profitability

Contribute to the economic strength of the industry by making a profit

and increasing market visibility to remain relevant and competitive.

Principle 10:

Practicing

consciousness

Making decisions based on personal passions, awareness of connection

to people & environment, and the responsibility & willingness to act

accordingly thus making well-informed decisions based on quality

information to ensure sustainability is considered and integrated.

(Adapted from Cataldi et al., 2010, p. 46-49)

Framework for a Conceptual Model

In 2006, Dickson and Eckman conducted a study to clarify the concept of social

responsibility as it relates to apparel and textile business activities with a specific intent to define

socially responsible business, according to its meaning to apparel and textile scholars. At the

time, the apparel and textile industry, as well as the academic discipline, lacked a full

understanding of social responsibility. The study’s results were composed of responses to an

open-ended question on defining socially responsible apparel/textile business, which ultimately

revealed a three-dimensional concept. But, in order to achieve this, they had to first seek out the

fundamental step of defining the concepts and terminology used to communicate the issue of

socially responsible apparel/textile business. The current research study on slow fashion sought

to conduct similar work to encompass the concept of slow fashion within the area of apparel

design.

Conceptual Model

Jabareen (2009) defines conceptual framework “as a network…of interlinked concepts

that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena” (p. 51).

Conceptual frameworks possess ontological, epistemological, and methodological characteristics.

The ontological characteristics represent the knowledge relating to the nature of what is real

(Guba & Lincoln, 1994). Epistemological characteristics relate to the manner in which things

function or work within the nature of reality established. Methodological characteristics relate to

the process involved in building and assessing a conceptual framework. As a conceptual

framework is developed, a conceptual model can be created. A conceptual model is a visual

representation that maps out hypothesized relationships among variables. It can illustrate

concepts underlying an issue. The intent of a conceptual model is to describe and communicate

variables as well as identify links between said variables. A conceptual model is successful

when it makes a complex problem or issue more understandable. Thus, a conceptual model can

represent the ontological, epistemological, methodological work being conducted within the

development of a conceptual framework. The main objective of the proposed research is to offer

an integrated explanation for slow fashion and its design processes represented by a newly

developed conceptual model.

Purpose and importance of developing a slow fashion conceptual model

Conceptual models can be the first step in developing more detailed quantitative models.

The development of a conceptual model can aid in introducing terminology and conceptual

understanding of new research. The conceptual framework within this current study attempts to

integrate slow fashion research from various resources so that researchers are able to have an

aptly constructed definition to the concept of slow fashion as it applies to the apparel design

process. Ultimately, the intent is to provide researchers with definitive parameters to select

investigation areas relevant to their own apparel related research interests as they apply to slow

fashion.

Developing a conceptual model

Similar to a study by Beach, Kincade, & Schofield-Tomschi (2005), data collection was

guided by criteria on defining the concept of slow fashion, as it is found to be relevant to the

creation of a conceptual model/framework. Ideas, concepts, and relationships among the data

gathered on slow fashion were selected for further organization and analysis. Data collected was

analyzed and forward searches were conducted on initial data found. The study then returned to

the analysis stage. Within the data analysis, a construct-oriented or categorical approach to

identify information and look for concepts was used. Main themes from the ideas, concepts, and

relationships found in research were identified and systematically assembled. According to

Beach et al., establishing verification can be done using several ways: triangulation of data

sources, documentation and journaling by the lead author, the use of an outside auditor, the use

of peer checkers, or a criterion list based on the approaches of Strauss and Corbin (1990) and

Leiber and Stiegal (1979, 1990). Additionally, further tests of credibility and transferability can

be established. The developed model/framework can be evaluated relative to the goal of a

theoretical framework. Said goal is to explain the phenomena as it was identified in the data

through interpretations that provided a perspective for guiding the action (or giving a direction)

toward the phenomena in the future.

Theoretical Framework: Systems Thinking Theory

In seeking to establish a slow fashion model and framework to aid in the creation of a slow

fashion apparel design process, there is still a need for an underlying theoretical foundation to

guide the research. Considering the scope of this current research, the most aptly related

theoretical framework to provide this foundation is systems thinking theory. The foundation of

general systems theory is derived from Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s 1920’s concept of “the system

theory of the organism” wherein he introduced a new approach to the study of biology (von

Bertalanffy, 1972). Rather than approaching the study of biology through the examination of

singular parts or processes, von Bertalanffy suggested viewing it as “organismic biology” or

rather as an interrelated system whose individual parts give a complete explanation of the

phenomena of biology. In the 1930’s, von Bertalanffy first framed general systems theory as a

discipline to explore and explain the “forces” between pre-existing models, principles, and , laws

(von Bertalanffy, 1972, p. 411). Research explains the general systems principles that apply to

any and all systems (Von Bertalanffy, 1950). Von Bertalanffy (1968) and Rappoport (1966) held

the idea of open systems, wherein the notion that systems interact, exchange, and receive

feedback from their environments and include human and social factors as well as technical

elements.

In a more simplistic format, systems thinking is the process of seeking out understanding of

how things work. “Things” are regarded as systems that influence one another within a whole.

For example, ecosystems are one example of systems thinking in nature wherein air, water, flora,

fauna, and their individual movements work together to create a system. Another example is an

organization which can be analyzed as a system composed of people, structures, practices and

behaviors that dictate the process through which the organization functions. Systems theory is a

specific way to conceptualize the world around us. In a broad sense, a system consists of

elements linked together in a certain way, i.e., inter-relationships that connect parts to form a

whole. And it has a boundary, which determines what is inside of a system and what is outside

whether it is context or environment (Hummelbrunner, 2011). Ultimately, general systems

theory seeks a single, interdisciplinary explanation for system behavior (Bausch, 2001).

Porter and Cordoba (2008) explain that a systematic means of understanding and

implementing appropriate actions still remains an area of concern within systems theory as it

applies to sustainability and sustainability-related issues and concepts. In order to fulfill this

void, they found one promising approach in using systems thinking as a practical and

pedagogical framework (Hammond, 2003; Senge, 1990; Senge, Aleiner, Roberts, Ross, & Smith,

1994; Starik & Rands, 1995; Waddock, 2006). Within this approach, it is a fundamental guiding

principle that the organization must be perceived as a system in order to ultimately create

meaningful interventions. In using the Systems Theory approach, researchers view the

phenomena and the study as a whole unit and thus, in doing so, are better adept to create more

meaningful research due to the deeper understanding of the phenomena as part of a system.

Following this principle, Porter and Cordoba (2008) state that this type of directional thinking

can help in the appreciation of the complexity behind sustainability-related issues thus provide

frameworks and tools for developing and implementing solutions. It is this type of fundamental

process that can be directly applied to the sustainability-related issue of slow fashion. In using

systems theory to inquire rather than immediately attempt to solve sustainability issues,

researchers can recognize that there is no one-size-fits-all definition approach but rather an

ongoing process of examination, learning, reframing, and action, based on mutually agreed upon

definitions of sustainability in a particular context such as that of slow fashion. Interpretive

approaches can aid in seeking out the strengths and limitations of purely scientific models, by

incorporating multiple and qualitative dimensions into the more academically traditional hard

systems design.

Systems Theory in the Fashion Industry and Discipline

The textiles, apparel design, and merchandising disciplines have been no stranger to the

application of systems theory within its research. Shim and Drake (1989) used systems theory to

aid in developing an integrated explanation for the processes, that produce different search

patterns used by employed women in the purchase of employment apparel. Specifically it was

applied to present a set of interrelated components of consumer information search activities of

employed females and to identify the processes, which produce different information search

patterns. Additionally, Cataldi et al. (2010) integrated systems thinking as a part of their research

methods towards an interactive approach to assess the Slow Fashion movement. In each case,

the intent was to use the theoretical framework to establish an understanding of the multi-

dimensional and interrelated components within the scope of fashion and fashion research to

further understand the industry and its processes as an interrelated organization or organism.

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY

This research was designed as an exploratory investigation to provide the development of a

conceptual model for a slow fashion apparel design process rooted in scholarly exploration. In

order to achieve this, the variables and concepts within the model must be validated through

generally accepted scientific practices set forth by scholars.

Different types of environmental indicators have been developed to meet the increasing

need of assessment instruments of environmental impacts. As any tool developed by

research, indicators must be elaborated according to a scientific approach. One of the

important steps of this elaboration is the validation. The overall objective of this paper is

to present a methodological framework to validate indicators. According to the definition

of an indicator, three kinds of validation are presented: the “design validation” to

evaluate if the indicators are scientifically founded; the “output validation” to assess the

soundness of the indicator outputs, and, the “end use validation” to be sure the indicator

is useful and used as a decision aid tool. The output validation is inspired from validation

of simulation models, which is shortly reviewed. Because indicators differ from models

in many cases, validation procedures commonly used in modelling have to be adapted

(Bockstaller & Girardin, p. 639).

This current study on slow fashion addresses the first two kinds of validation, design

validation and output validation. To estimate the role of slow fashion in the apparel industry, the

researcher first interpreted the term “slow fashion” in relation to the industry. Sustainability in

fashion is, at times, fragmented as a reflection of the applicability of the subject or issue across a

wide range of topics and implications. This would give insight into the role of slow fashion in

clothing consumption, industry, and design. Fragmentation is at the core of epistemological

assumptions such as knowledge for the sake of knowledge versus knowledge for application.

Knowledge of slow fashion thus far is conceptual. This section contains the methods guiding this

exploratory investigation, which include the following: analysis of slow design and slow fashion

based on a content analysis, identification of slow fashion design process components,

incorporation of slow fashion apparel design process components into an existing apparel design

framework (Lamb & Kallal 1992), instrument development for assessing the proposed slow

fashion design process by ITAA design and merchandising educators, and participant selection

and sampling.

Method of Analysis

To execute the methodology of this research, this exploratory investigation was comprised of

four parts:

A. Analysis of the Slow Fashion movement as it applies to the apparel design process.

Which consisted of:

1. Conducting a literature search of slow design and slow fashion to develop a

literature review.

2. Exploring the literature review and conducting a content analysis to establish

themes, considerations, and components for the creation of a slow fashion design

process.

B. Incorporation of slow fashion design process components into the Lamb and Kallal

FEA (1992) apparel design model and framework.

C. Development of a survey and interviewing instrument to evaluate the application of the

conceptualized slow fashion apparel design process by:

1. Survey textiles, apparel design and/or merchandising professionals; and

2. Interview apparel design professionals that submit creative scholarship into juried

exhibitions.

D. Assess the conceptualized slow fashion design process for use as an apparel design

process by apparel design educators who are members of the International Textiles &

Apparel Association.

The results of the evaluation of this Slow Fashion framework were reviewed, considered for

inclusion and/or revision, and incorporated into the final Slow Fashion apparel design process

model. This developmental study could potentially be used for research and industry application.

Research Design and Procedures

This research was developed based on mixed research methods. The first assessment in

the research design dealt with identifying sources referencing and incorporating slow design and

slow fashion within any applicable industry such as architecture, engineering, or fashion. Due to

the nature of the research topic, the first step in this research process involved the researcher

seeking out literature on the topic of slow design and slow fashion. The second assessment

involved identifying terminology within the identified sources that contained references to the

focus of the research study.

Qualitative Analysis

Qualitative methods were implemented for the initial portion of the study and consisted

of a content analysis of literature on slow design and slow fashion processes. Qualitative

methods are used when a researcher is seeking out information on a particular phenomenon.

Data analysis for qualitative research is an integral process of data collection and analysis, which

must include segmenting text, decontextualizing text, coding, and re-contextualizing text (Tesch,

1990). According to Kirk and Miller (1986), there are four phases to qualitative research:

intervention, discovery, interpretation, and explanation.

The research design or plan of action is developed in the intervention phase. For this

slow fashion study, the intervention stage consisted of conducting a literature review and

executed via establishing the sources of pre-existing literature on slow design and slow fashion.

Due to the relatively novel phase of this particular area of sustainable research, the investigator

was required to research pre-existing published literature that contained reference to the slow

design and slow fashion movements and their processes.

The decision to conduct a literature review for this research study was based on previous

research conducted in developing conceptual frameworks from literature reviews. In 2008,

Seuring and Muller conducted a literature review of 191 papers on supply chain management

published from 1994 to 2007. A conceptual framework then summarized the research found and

identifying two strategies for more sustainable supply chains. In 1997, Putz-Anderson, Bernard,

Burt, Cole, Fairfield-Estill, Fine, and Tanaka conducted an extensive literature review for the

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to examine the epidemiologic evidence of

the relationship between musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity and the low back and

exposure to physical factors at work. The literature review was intended to further understand

the associations between these factors and relate them to the cause for musculoskeletal disorders

in an effort to identify possible preventative and therapeutic solutions. In a similar manner, the

proposed study aimed at using a literature review to seek out and identify consistent terms,

principles, and qualities reflecting a Slow Fashion design process.

The discovery phase is the platform from which the researcher conducts data collection

that produces information on the particular phenomenon being studied. This information was

revealed upon conducting and organizing the information gathered from the literature search.

From the literature review, the researcher continued to the second phase of the research design in

which the principles, ideologies, and qualities that characterize the slow fashion movement were

identified and labeled as design criteria. The assessment criteria for these principles, ideologies,

and qualities were established based on previously validated functional, expressive, and aesthetic

product development processes. The proposed research will mainly concentrate on the

conceptual model established by Lamb and Kallal’s functional, expressive, and aesthetic (FEA)

model (1992). A three-part synthesis involving evaluation, analysis, and understanding of the

data collected defines interpretation as the third phase. Lastly, the fourth phase, explanation,

communicates the interpretation of the message behind the research conducted. The results from

phases three and four were revealed upon the completion of phases one and two of the study.

Dabbs (1982) indicated that qualitative research, when differentiated from quantitative,

refers to the following: meanings, concepts, definitions, characteristic, metaphors, symbols, and

descriptions. The essence of qualitative research lies in the what, how, when, and where of a

phenomenon. To execute the search for answers to these questions, research uses participant

observation, interviewing, observation of experimental natural settings, photographic and

videotaping techniques, historical analysis, document and textual analysis, socio-metric,

sociodrama, ethno-methodological experimentation, ethnographic research, and other

unobtrusive techniques as approaches to qualitative research methodology (Berg, 1995, p.3).

This current research study employed document and textual analysis as well as interviewing.

In an effort to answer the question of how the type or tradition of qualitative inquiry

shapes the design of a study, Creswell (1998) presented five qualitative research design

traditions: biographical, phenomenological, grounded theory study, ethnography, and case study.

It is from these research traditions that a research design was selected for the study on slow

fashion. Biographical research elements focus on the life of one single individual and study their

experiences as either told to the researcher or as derived from documents and/or archives

(Creswell, 1998). Research is constructed based on the stories and epiphanies events within a

broader context and are constructed through biographical study, autobiographical study, life

history or oral history. In phenomenology, the research concentrates on understanding a concept

or phenomenon (p. 37). Phenomenological study “describes the meaning of the lived

experiences for several individuals about a concept or the phenomenon” (Creswell, 1998, p.51)

and is deeply rooted in the social and human sciences. Grounded theory study develops a theory

(p. 37). Ethnographic research is descriptive, analytical, and interpretive studies on specific

cultural groups or people (Creswell). Lastly, case studies examine specific cases in order to

excise problems, the context of the problems, provide the issues behind said problems, and the

lessons acquired from the problems (Creswell). Ultimately, the purpose and direction of this

research on slow fashion was best described within phenomenological methodology.

Content Analysis

Berelson (1952) defined content analysis as “a research technique for the objective,

systematic, and quantitative description of the manifest content of communication” (p.18).

Krippendorff (1980) further defined content analysis as “a research technique for making

replicable and valid references from data to their context” by using “specialized procedures for

processing scientific data” (p. 21). When employing a content analysis, it is vitally important to

define clear boundaries to delimitate the research conducted. For the context of the current

research, the following important notes are made:

1. This analysis is aimed at using peer-reviewed journals in English with a focus on

slow design and slow fashion.

2. Secondary references with the focus on slow design and slow fashion.

The search for related publications was conducted as a structured keyword and forward search.

Major academic databases, which included but were not limited to, Academic Search Complete,

Business Source Complete, and JSTOR, were used to search for related articles. Taking the

stated delimitation into account, a total of 62, resources were identified. Descriptive dimensions

were used to classify the resources used as the initial step in evaluation. The content of the

resources were further assessed by means of a descriptive analysis.

Content Analysis Validation: Survey

Upon compiling the principles, ideologies, qualities, and components of slow fashion

from the themes established in the content analysis, these findings were synthesized into an

apparel design process framework based on Lamb and Kallal’s (1992) FEA model. In order to

assess this conceptualized slow fashion apparel design process, a survey was developed as well

as interview questions. The variables to be examined in this slow fashion study were established

upon completion of the literature review. Those variables were organized into their applications

with the apparel design model by Lamb and Kallal used as a foundation for the design process.

Interviews

To further analyze the slow fashion apparel design model developed, the semistandardized

interviewing process is used as part of the data collection of this research. This type of

interviewing uses a structured schedule of questions wherein the interviewer has predetermined

and is required to ask all subjects allowing each interview participant the same stimulus in order

to generate comparable responses (Babbie, 1983). Questions are asked in a consistent and

systematic order, but the interviewer is allowed and expected to probe beyond those

predetermined questions (Berg, 1995). The most important assumption for this type of

methodology is that questions must be developed using terminology familiar to the participants.

The questions had to be developed and asked using language understood from the participants’

perspective as different groups understand society in varying manners. In approaching

participants form their perspective, the researcher is better adept to obtain accurate responses.

To accomplish this, researchers must expand and probe further on responses to standardized

questions.

According to Berg (1995), the development and execution of semi-standardized interviews

begins with establishing the relevant categories related to the research conducted. From there,

the researcher needed to develop sets of relevant questions for each category. The sequencing,

phrasing and language, subject matter and style of questions will depend on the types of

participants. For this current study, the interview questions and the interview consent, featured

in Appendix B, were developed using this strategy and aimed at scholars and professionals with

the textiles, apparel design, and merchandising disciplines. Participant selection and sampling is

explained in-depth in the following section.

Pre-testing the interview questions is important to accessing their effectiveness and is

accomplished in a two-step process. Once developed, the questions should be critically

examined by individuals familiar with the research subject matter in order to identify problems

such as poor wording, offensive or emotion-laden wording, or questions revealing biases,

personal values or blind spots that could otherwise taint the results (Berg, 1995). The second

step in this assessment is to conduct a pilot study involving practice interviews to assess

effectiveness of the interview and determine if the information sought can be obtained.

Chadwick, Bahr, & Albrecht (1984, p. 120) suggest five question for this assessment:

1. Has the researcher included all of the questions necessary to test the research

hypothesis?

2. Do the questions elicit the types of responses that were anticipated?

3. Is the language of the research instrument meaningful to the respondents?

4. Are there other problems with the questions, such as double meaning or multiple

issues embedded in a single question?

5. Finally, does the interview guide, as developed, help to motivate respondents to

participate in the study?

This two-step assessment was accomplished by a pilot study consulting with apparel design

professionals and graduate students, all who qualify for the same participant characteristics as

those individuals sampled. Due to their participation in the pilot study, their answers and

participation were excluded from the final interview pool and analysis.

Invitation to Participate

In order to capture a sample population of these professionals, potential participants were

invited through their membership in the International Textile and Apparel Association. The

researcher sought and obtained Institutional Review Board (IRB) and ITAA administrative

approval to contact the individuals enrolled as 2014 members of the organization. Approval of

the IRB Exemption can be found in Appendix C. The ITAA Council was notified and approval

was granted as to the researcher’s intent to notify those members qualifying as participants and

well as the intent of the study. The demographic characteristics of the population sample

consisted of both design educators that submit design scholarship to juried exhibitions and design

educators that are versed in sustainability and/or slow fashion. These qualifying characteristics

were determined in the Qualtrics survey. Answers were giving according to how participants

characterized themselves. The survey instrument can be found in Appendix D along with the E-

mail Invitation to Participate sent out to recruit participants found in Appendix E.

Participant Selection

This study uses survey research methods to determine the conceptual definition of slow

fashion and the design methods that dictate this concept within the context of apparel design. To

accomplish the purpose and objective of this study, the design process must be rooted in theory

and supported by those versed in textiles, apparel design, and merchandising theory. This would

require the use of a population with the expertise to understand this process. Therefore it is

necessary for those who are sampled to be versed in the scholarly understanding and knowledge

of textiles, apparel design, and merchandising disciplines. For this reason, the population group

most adequately equipped to do so are educators and scholars within the field. One outlet

through which these individuals can be sought out is through the membership in the International

Textiles and Apparel Association (ITAA). As the ITAA website states:

The International Textiles and Apparel Association “is a professional, educational

association composed of scholars, educators, and students in the textile, apparel, and

merchandising disciplines in higher education. ITAA welcomes professionals employed

in those fields that wish to join with members of the Association in the pursuit of

knowledge, interchange of ideas, and dissemination of knowledge through meetings,

special events, and publications. The International Textile and Apparel Association

promotes the discovery, dissemination, and application of knowledge and is a primary

resource for its members in strengthening leadership and service to society” (ITAA,

2013).

Therefore, a purposive sample for this research was obtained from the ITAA membership

population.

Criteria for Participant Selection

The organization has a total of 846 members who fall into the following membership

categories: corporate, Honorary, Emeritus, professional, graduate students, and undergraduate

students. For the integrity of this study, all but the honorary and undergraduate student

categories were included in the dissemination of the survey resulting in a total of 707 members.

The reasoning for removing undergraduate students was due to the lack of experience with the

level of theoretical understanding necessary to understand the questions in the survey. The

decision to remove honorary members was due to the lack of information regarding why and

how those individuals were made honorary members. Additionally, it is unknown as to those

individual’s level of professional experience with the subject matter. Due to the nature of this

research study, there were two samples employed. Both samples were derived from the ITAA

membership described above. The first sample was participants for the survey and the second

sample for interviews. The two samples were categorized as survey participants and interview

participants.

Survey Participants

The first sample of participants came from the possible participant pool of 707 ITAA

members. An e-mail invitation was sent to the participant pool. The survey was created using

Qualtrics® survey program. The survey was available online for a total of 14 days. During this

time, the pool of possible participants received an e-mail invitation at the start of the start of the

14-day period followed by an e-mail reminder after seven days. Twenty-four hours before the

closing deadline, the participant pool received another reminder inviting them to participate.

Once the deadline was reached, the survey was closed and only completed surveys were used in

the research analysis. A total of 71 participants completed the online survey.

Interview Participants

The second sample was derived from the initial sample of participants who took the

survey. These participants were required to be apparel design professionals with experience in

submitting creative scholarship in to peer-reviewed juried competitions. The reasoning for this

requirement is rooted in the delineated structure and process required of these professionals when

submitting their creative scholarship. The process in the creation of their scholarly work must be

documented and rooted in design theory. In order to accomplish this, creative scholarship

requires three evaluation criteria: “adding to the body of knowledge, meeting the rigors of peer

review including indicating the significance to the discipline, and dissemination in a format that

could be cited and retrieved” (Kotsiopulos & Birdsong, 2000, p.49). For this reason,

professional expertise in submitting creative scholarship is vital for the examination of slow

fashion as it relates to the development of a slow fashion apparel design process. That structured

and documented process was the subject matter discussed during the interview process. In order

to capture this particular sample within the population, during the survey, participants who

designated themselves as apparel design were prompted with a question inviting them to

participate in a follow-up interview. Participants who elected to participate in the follow-up

interview were then prompted to provide their e-mail address through which they would be

contacted. This is the only identifying information provided from the survey as all participants

were only asked demographic information.

Creswell (1998) explains that within a phenomenological study, it is “essential that all

participants experience the phenomenon being studied” (p. 118). For this reason, criterion

sampling is best used for this type of research study. Criterion sampling means all participants

are individuals representative of those who have experience with the phenomenon studied.

Within the parameters of this study, they meet the criteria of having knowledge of or experience

with the phenomenon of apparel design and slow fashion. Therefore, the individuals interviewed

were derived from the initial sample of survey participants. The survey (Appendix D) asks

participants interested in being contacted about their experience with the apparel design process

to provide their contact information in the form of an e-mail address. From this sample pool, the

researcher narrowed the interview sample to those individuals who also indicated experience

with or considered themselves an apparel design professional in the initial survey. This was

achieved through participant self-report and guaranteed that the interviewee sample met the

criteria of experience with apparel design. The number of interviewees selected was based on

information collection for phenomenological studies. Multiple qualitative methodology studies

recommend the use of up to ten individuals to interview especially when interviews last up to

two hours (Creswell, 1998; Dukes, 1984; Polkinghorne, 1989; Riemen, 1986). The area

explored in this study is very specialized and specific with minimal amounts of previous

research. A total of five participants from a pool seven of participants who volunteered were

selected for interviewing.

Recruitment

In order to capture a sample population of apparel design professionals and scholars,

potential participants were invited through their membership in the International Textile and

Apparel Association. The researcher sought and obtained Institutional Review Board (IRB) and

ITAA administrative approval to contact the individuals enrolled as 2014 members of the

organization. Approval of the IRB Exemption can be found in Appendix C. The ITAA

Council was notified and approval was granted as to the researcher’s intent to notify those

members qualifying as participants and well as the intent of the study. The demographic

characteristics of the population sample consisted of textiles, apparel design, and merchandising

professionals. Within the population sample, both design educators that submit design

scholarship to juried exhibitions and design educators that are versed in sustainability and/or

slow fashion were found. These qualifying characteristics were determined in the Qualtrics®

survey. Answers were giving according to how participants characterized themselves. The

survey instrument can be found in Appendix D.

Interview Schedule and Procedure

Once the 14 day online survey deadline was met, an interview schedule was set. The

interviewees were given a three day period one week after the close of the survey from which to

select. The three day period provided an open schedule during which interviewees could chose a

day and time most convenient to their schedule. Interview volunteers were contacted within 24

hours of the close of the online survey via the e-mail addresses they provided. In the e-mail, a

brief explanation of the interview process was presented through the Interview Invitation to

Participate (Appendix F) and again briefly prior to the actual interview. Additionally, the

researcher reviewed a letter explaining the interview procedure as well as the IRB document for

consent, and the objectives of the 21 semi-structured, open-ended interview questions (Appendix

B). Prior to the interview, the researcher read the consent to participation document to the

interviewee and recorded their consent. They were each individually informed, via e-mail, of the

three day period during which the interviews would be conducted. Additionally, they were

informed of the researcher’s estimation of the interview’s length ranging from one to two hours.

Each interviewee was asked to provide two date and time selections in insure optimal scheduling

for each interview. Interviewees were given the option of conducting the interview via the

telephone or Skype, again to provide optimal convenience for the volunteers. Table 6 depicts the

schedule set, as well as the form of interview, upon confirmation from each interviewee based on

Central Standard Time. The complete list of semi-structured, open-ended interview questions can

be found in Appendix B.

Table 6: Interview Schedule

Day Morning Afternoon Evening

1: Monday

2: Tuesday

3: Wednesday

Participant 1: Phone

(2:30 pm – 4:30 pm)

Participant 2: Phone

(1:30 pm – 3:30 pm)

Participant 3: Phone

(4 pm – 6 pm)

Participant 5: Skype

(4 pm – 6 pm)

Participant 4: Phone

(9am – 11 am)

CHAPTER FOUR CONTENT ANALYSIS AND DATA COLLECTION

The following chapter presents the information obtained from the content analysis

described in the previous chapter as well as a descriptive and thematic analysis of said

information. The exhaustive literature search resulted in 62 identified sources used for the

content analysis containing slow design and slow fashion terminology. Within those 62

resources, 38 phenomena related and/or applicable to apparel design were found. The 62

resources are denoted with an asterisk in the Reference section of this study. Those findings

were examined for frequencies relating to apparel design. Subsequent analysis of findings

involved identifying and discussing aspects of slow design, slow fashion, and their application to

Lamb & Kallal’s FEA Model (1992).

A directed content analysis method was used to analyze sustainable literature containing

slow fashion and slow design. The terminology and phenomena discovered in the content

analysis was extracted and categorized according to Lamb & Kallal’s (1992) Functional

Expressive Aesthetic (FEA) consumer needs model. Not all terms directly related to the FEA

categories as defined by Lamb & Kallal. Therefore, additional categories were added. The

consideration categories for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model were: functional,

expressive, aesthetic, designer, and other considerations. Designer and other categories reflected

the need for expansion of the original FEA consumer needs model due to the differing objectives

of the Slow Fashion apparel design process. Designer considerations reflected phenomena

related to decisions determined by the designer in the process of creating apparel items. This

could include, but not be limited to, inspiration, identity, professional commitments, or other

elements relating to the “agenda” of the designer and the task of creating apparel goods. Other

considerations reflected general design criteria that are important to the apparel design process

but unable to be categorized in to the four previous established consideration categories.

Additionally, modifications had to be made to the apparel design framework depicted in

Figure 3 to meet the needs of the Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework being created in this

study. As previously mentioned in chapter two, the apparel design framework in Figure 2

depicts a six stage design framework that includes (in order): problem identification, preliminary

ideas, design refinement, prototype development, evaluation, and implementation (Lamb &

Kallal, 1992). Each stage in the design process is rooted in definitive design considerations

associated with the ability to find resolution for and complete the task defined by each stage in

order to move on to the subsequent stage in the design process. The end game being the creation

of an apparel good that meets the resolution of the problem identified in the first stage. For

example, the preliminary ideas stage is described as the creative phase in the design process.

Design solutions for this phase are achieved through varying techniques relating to the original

design problem the designer seeks to resolve (Lamb & Kallal, 1992). According to Lamb and

Kallal, this can include “sketching, brainstorming, research, and question-and-answer sessions”

(p.44). The solutions would depend on the specific design problem and therefore vary in the

technique type and scope. A design problem relating to the creation of a specific collection

would require, for example, the use of sketching, trend board creation, and/or color palette

options. Conversely, a design problem relating to the creation of a garment for a specific

purpose, such as use by athletes in high impact, competitive sports, would garner a different

direction in the preliminary ideas stage. The designer would need to seek out techniques such as

research to gather information on fabrics capable of holding up to the wear and tear of the

activity. Or the designer may seek out research on the incidence of injury due to inadequate

garment protection in an effort to create a more suitable uniform.

For these reasons, the design criteria established through the content analysis were also

separately categorized into considerations reflective of the various possibilities a design might

encounter within the six phases in the apparel design framework. Those consideration categories

were: material, quality, production, design, evaluation, and implementation. Material

considerations would contain design criteria adapted to the various options for resources used in

the creation of an apparel item. Quality considerations have design criteria relating to the level or

standard of craftsmanship in creating a garment. Production considerations outline design

criteria related to the tangible making or manufacturing of a garment. The design criteria within

this consideration reflected the aspects of production that are directly related to the design of the

garment and not on the production process itself. In other words, there are aspects of the

production process that correlate directly to the design of a garment. These design aspects create

unique situations in the production process that the designer and production team have to keep in

mind when creating a garment. Design considerations contain design criteria relating to, but not

limited to, art and design elements, art and design principles, and functional, expressive,

aesthetic, structural, or decorative aspects of design. Evaluation and implementation

considerations contain the same design criteria regarding the evaluation of a garment and the

subsequent final implementations used to create a garment that meets the resolution standards to

solve the problem identified initial stage. Similarly to the production considerations, the design

criteria within these last two considerations directly relate to aspects involved in the actual design

of a garment. Ultimately, this chapter reviews the process from the content analysis of the

literature through the creation of the survey and interviewing instruments.

Literature Content Analysis

Content analysis has been viewed as a flexible method for analyzing textual data

(Cavanagh, 1997). The analysis of literature revealed information regarding the themes referring

to slow design and slow fashion. The themes found during the content analysis were studied for

similarities and correlations to pre-existing design standards, characteristics, elements, and

considerations relating to the apparel design process. The themes from the content analysis were

then shortened into categorized terminology as an organizational tool for this study. Table 4-1

depicts the frequency of terminology discovered from the content analysis. The most prevalent

themes referenced were: emotional durability of garments, the concern for material sourcing, and

concern for disposal of fashion goods.

Table 7: Frequency of Slow Fashion Terms (N=62)

Term/Theme n %

Emotional (need, attachment, bond) 29 47%

Material Souring: Eco/Natural/Renew/ 2nd hand/Fair Trade/Low

impact/reduce 29 47%

Disposal: Recycle/Reuse/Redesign/Exchange/Donate 26 42%

Quality 22 35%

Local 22 35%

Co-Design/ Co-Produce 22 35%

Longevity/Durability 20 32%

Educate 19 31%

Care/Launder/Maintenance 18 29%

Material Sourcing: Recycle/Reuse/Redesign 18 29%

End of life plan 16 26%

Transparency 16 26%

Handcraft/Artisan/Traditional 14 23%

Disposal: Disassembly 13 21%

Extend life span/cycle 12 19%

Repairability 12 19%

Table 7 cont’d: Frequency of Slow Fashion Terms (N=62)

Term/Theme n %

Dye 10 16%

Aesthetics 9 15%

Multi-function; Flexibility 9 15%

Color 9 15%

Classic/Timeless 8 13%

Disposal 7 11%

Technology 7 11%

Open source designs 7 11%

Materials, in general 7 11%

Service: Repair, rent, share 6 10%

Eco-Efficiency 5 8%

Psychological need 5 8%

Bio-mimicry 5 8%

Modular; structural design 5 8%

Packaging 5 8%

Few pieces/Limited Collection 5 8%

Multiplicity: unisex, uni-size 4 6%

Fair Trade 4 6%

Customization 4 6%

Investment 2 3%

Silhouette 2 3%

Efficient Use of Materials 1 2%

N=62

Data Interpretation

The FEA model (Figure 1) depicts the various design criteria that correlates to each

individual consideration (functional, expressive, and aesthetic). The terminology from this

research was reviewed and analyzed as to its correlation to Lamb & Kallal’s FEA model. The

design criteria in Lamb and Kallal’s 1992 FEA model were categorized according to the defining

principle foundation of each consideration. Functional design considerations are based on an

apparel products’ relation to utility (p.43). It relates to how an item works physically and how it

performs (Davis, 1996, p.17). Expressive considerations are related to “the communicative,

symbolic aspects of dress”, and aesthetic considerations relate to “the human desire for beauty”

(p. 43). Similarly to the categorization of design criteria within the FEA model, the terminology

established from the content analysis was reviewed and analyzed in order to be categorized to

reflect slow fashion design criteria.

Descriptive Analysis of Themes and Terminology

As these terms can be interpreted differently by individuals, it was insured that the

participants knew exactly what the researcher intended each term to mean. The survey provided

them the ability to view the definition if they required a clarification. Certain themes and

terminology acquired from the content analysis are easy to discern and understand. Many

referred to basic design elements. For example, color refers to the color palettes a designer

would chose for his or her collections. The trendier the colors the less likely the garment would

be retained by the user once the trend had subsided. In conjunction with color, dye refers to the

textile and fiber dyeing processes used in order to obtain a designer’s color choices. The main

concern was the environmental impact of the dyeing process employed to obtain said color

choices. While a broad term, aesthetics refers to the visual elements that come into play when

designing a garment such as style and color (Aakko & Koskennurmi-Sivonen, 2013). Silhouette

refers to the overall shape of and outline of an object, which, in terms of this research, is that of a

garment (Davis, 1996, p.373). The garment silhouette assumes its major contours from the body

structure (p.91). The higher the satisfaction a consumer has with a garment’s basic design

characteristics, which includes the silhouette, the higher the probability the garment will be kept

by the consumer. If a clothing item suits the physical shape well and is flattering, there is a

tendency it will be retained in the wardrobe. Classic/Timeless refers to the integrity of the

garment. In designing garments that reflect classic and/or timelessness, the style is one that can

transcend decades and trends. Examples of these pieces are the iconic “little black dress” or the

trench coat. These pieces are intended to be core items in an individual’s wardrobe and

emphasize longevity (Brown, 2010). In this study, this theme is referred to as Classic.

Product design, which includes the design of fashion and apparel goods, encompasses

decisions related to a product’s features (Caniato, Caridi, Crippa, & Moretto, 2012). This can

include the choice of materials, the development of individual components for an item, and the

design of the packaging. While packaging does not seem like a term relatable to design, within

the content analysis, it was found that concern for packaging was important and relevant to

design. Additionally, how an item is designed effects the packaging used to ship, store, and/or

display. An intricately designed apparel item may require more packaging due to the delicacy of

its nature. To solve the problem, during the design process, a designer can take into

consideration the ability to take the garment apart for ease of transport thus changing the type

and reducing the amount of packaging materials. This can reduce the use of resources to make

the packaging supplies and reduce the amount of waste once packaging is discarded. Quality

refers to the standards to which the creation of a garment was created. The higher the quality and

importance placed on the craftsmanship of a garment, the more sustainable it was to be

considered as the consumer would keep it for a longer period of time. This term went hand-

inhand with longevity/durability wherein the more quality a garment had, the higher the certainty

the garment would last longer through normal wear and tear. This may compel a consumer to

keep and care for the garment longer than one of lesser quality. For the sake of this research, it is

referred to as Longevity. Consequently, the theme of clothing and design as an investment arose.

The higher the quality and longevity of a garment, the higher the craftsmanship devoted to its

creation. This would mean the cost of the garment would be higher than fast fashion garments.

Subsequently, the higher price point would deem the purchase of such garments an investment

(Clark, 2008). When the product is an investment and has functional longevity it retains its

attraction for the user increasing its sustainability (2008). Co-design/coproduce refers to the

design collaboration between a designer and the consumer in relation to the development and

creation of a product such as apparel. For the sake of this research, it will be referred to as

Codesign.

According to Blincoe, Fuad-Luke, Spangenberg, Thomson, Holmgren, Jaschke,

Ainsworth, & Tylka, the intent of this process is to “design and solve problems together or in

synergy” (2009). By including the end user in the design process, it aids the designer in creating

a garment that is more suitable for said user. The assumption being the garment would fulfill

more needs for the user than ready-made purchased garments. The subsequent effect of this

collaboration means a co-designed garment would have a longer life span with the consumer. It

is believed that design collaborations such as these deliver better quality products through giving

the user a “voice” in the design process (Gill, 2011). In the development of a garment, the

designer also needs to consider the collection to which that piece will belong. During the course

of the content analysis, the theme of few pieces/limited collections arose. This theme refers to

the limitation in the number of pieces per collection that a designer creates. In doing so,

designers limit the amount of resources used and waste created when developing their

collections. An example of this type of design process is developed by designer Magdalena

Schaffrin who shows a collection once a year with pieces offered in summer or winter weights to

accommodate the various seasonal changes (Brown, 2010). For the sake of this research, it is

referred to as few pieces in tables throughout this study.

Certain themes in the content analysis related to additional values incorporated into a

garment or dealing with external variables. Repairability refers to the ease in repairing a garment.

While it would be expected that a garment would withstand normal wear and tear, the content

analysis uncovered a concern for a user’s ability to repair a garment in order to extend the

product’s life for longer consumer use. Care/launder/maintenance refers to the way a consumer

cares for a garment. Within slow fashion, it deals with a consumer’s ability to maintain the

garment while expending the least amount of resources. Its importance stems from the fact that,

within the United States and Western Europe, 20% of each households water usage comes from

cleaning clothing, in addition to the energy consumed by the appliances use to clean these

garments (Elzen, Geels, & Green, 2004, p. 79). In this current study, it is referred to as Care.

Service: repair, rent, share refers to an available service that comes in conjunction with a

garment. This includes services such as those provided by RenttheRunway.com, which give a

consumer the ability to rent a garment such as an evening gown which would have a one-time

use within the consumer’s wardrobe. Within this category, sharing includes services related to

swapping of clothing through swap parties and resale shops. In this idea of service, sharing

indicates a garment’s ability to be used by a varied of individuals of different sizes and body

types. This term indicates added values that can be provided with a garment. In this study, this

term will be referred to as Service.

The idea of multiplicity emerged within the content analysis in various forms. The term

multi-function refers to a garment’s ability to be flexible in its configuration and function. It’s

meaning refers to a garment’s ability to be converted into different garments. For example, a

garment that seemly looks like a top could be converted into a skirt and a poncho providing the

user with one item that can fill the role of three. The intent of multifunction design is to reduce

the use materials, pollution, and waste (Kim, 2010). For the sake of this current research, it is

referred to as Multi-function. Similarly, modular/structural designed garments are items that can

be used and converted into various configurations. The garment is designed to allow quick

disassembly and reassembly into a new configuration. An example of this type of garment

would be a jacket whose sleeves can be zipped off into sections to create shorter sleeves or a

vest. The intent of modular and structural design garments is to increase variety without

increasing consumption (Fuad-Luke, 2010, p. 147). In this current study, the term is referred to

as Modular. Lastly, multiplicity: unisex, uni-size refers to garments designed to fit either gender

and/or a variety of sizes thus increasing the amount of usage each piece receives. These designs

provide greater versatility and opportunity for the garments to be shared or handed down to

someone else, while holding additional intrinsic value for the user and possibly leading to

keeping it longer (Clark, 2008). It is referred to as Multiplicity in this current study.

Other themes from the content analysis dealt with the resources. Local refers to the use

of local or regional resource for the creation of a garment. It included, but was not limited to,

fibers, dyes, workforce, artisans, production, and manufacturing. The intent is, by focusing on

locality, local identity and community stewardship are supported while simultaneously reducing

pollution and providing attachment to those garments (Strauss & Fuad-Luke, 2008). Educate

refers to providing a form of learning experience with a garment. It could, for example, include

the ethical and sustainable standards used, the materials used and their origination, and details on

how a garment was made (Cataldi et al., 2010). The purpose of educating the user is to build a

relationship between the user and the brand or designer. This relationship creates a bond of trust

increasing user knowledge and persuading the user to make more conscientious purchases. In

line with making conscientious purchases are the themes of Fair Trade and

Handcraft/Artisan/Traditional. Fair Trade relates to trade in which fair prices are paid to

producers in developing countries. It builds a significant bridge between the consumer and the

producer and therefore not only contributing to social responsibility but also adding a

relationship with the garment (Barber, 2007). Handcraft/Artisan/Traditional refers to the added

value provided to a garment through the working craftsmanship of individuals with specialized

and unique skills (Parrott, 2010). This craftsmanship can include, but not be limited to, skills

such as weaving, knitting, and dyeing techniques. In this current study, the term is referred to as

Artisan.

Conversely, the term technology refers to the use of technology in creating a garment.

For example, using CAD programs to design a garment would reduce the waste created when

producing prototypes. CAD programs and equipment allow for increased accuracy and thus

reduce the number of prototypes needed to establish good fit. Additionally, increased innovation

in technology has afforded the fashion industry with additional options for the design process.

Garment patterns created using CAD programs can be imported into 3D avatar simulations to

check for fit and accuracy as well as aesthetic appeal. The benefit in using technology is the

reduction of waste in the design and development process as well as providing additional value

to a garment to increase retention. This value could be added in the form of electronic

technology that can monitor body function or an embedded audio system to provide the user the

ability to plug-in their iPod (Fuad-Luke, 2004). In conjunction with the use of technology to

create garments, the idea of open source designs (OSD) also appeared repeatedly in the content

analysis. An open source design refers to the open provision of designs via a database to allow

other designers and the public the opportunity to share ideas and promote collaboration

(Sandberg, 2011). An existing collaboration is being developed between Droog, a conceptual

Dutch design company, and the Waag Society, a foundation that develops creative technology

for social innovation (Waag Society, 2014). These two entities are developing an online

downloadable design database to serve as a digital platform from which product designs can be

uploaded and downloaded. These designs would serve as “blueprints” that users can choose and

assemble in their individual regions and localities. A benefit of this type of database would be

the constant improvement of designs that will better serve the end user. Another technological

element revealed in the content analysis was the idea of bio-mimicry. Bio-mimicry is an

approach to design wherein the design seeks to emulate the strategies and mechanisms of nature

(Dietrich, 2009). This would not only enable innovation in fashion and textile design but also

allow the use of more sustainable practices in apparel design, and aid in the creation of more

meaningful clothing for consumers (Sgro, 2011). A design example presented was that of Janine

Benyus who created a garment using Morphotex fibers that do not use pigments or dyes but

rather the perception of color is created via varying thicknesses and structures of fibers (Dietrich,

2009). Although technology is not always used, the theme of customization arose within the

analysis. With the use of technology, it is easier for designers to customize garments for the

masses through the use of CAD programs and body scanning. Conversely, garments can be

customized on an individual basis with one singular designer handling each detail in the creation

of the garment. Regardless of the level, customization can create personal meanings for the user

and form attachments to products through the more active role in the product design process

(Niimimaki & Hassi, 2011).

Other themes and terminology are not as easily discerned for the unversed individual.

Disposal, for example, refers to how a garment would be discarded after the consumer has

finished using it. Commonly, disposal of a garment being evokes the idea of simply throwing it

away. In this research, disposal was split into three categories due to the information from the

content analysis. One use of disposal refers to the generalized idea of disposing of a garment.

The second use of the term disposal refers to a garment’s ability to be recycled, reused, redesign,

exchanged for another garment, or donated. The last form of disposal was referencing a

garment’s ability to be taken apart to be disposed of in various manners. For example, if a jacket

was able to be taken apart, the various elements could be recycled or reused for other garments.

Material sourcing is also another term that had similar division. One form of material sourcing

refers to the use of more sustainable and socially responsible materials. These included:

ecofriendly, natural, renewable, second-hand, fair trade, low impact, and reduced-impact

materials. The second form of material sourcing refers to the use of recycled, reusable, and re-

designable materials in the creation of a garment. The third form was the general reference of

concern for the materials sourced in the creation of a garment without specific types. An

additional theme regarding materials also arose in the content analysis. The efficient use of

materials refers to the conscientious consideration of the materials involved in creating a

garment. This ranged from the efficiency of patternmaking to the efficiency of fabrics through

the efficiency of the production and manufacturing processes use of water and energy. The

support for this theme resides in the use of sustainable practices such as waste management,

decrease in pollution, limitation of resources exhausted, and recycling (Kim & Damhorst, 1998).

Emotional refers to the emotional durability of a garment. Fashion is a consumer’s link

to their individual emotional needs (Niinimaki, 2009). Often, garments purchased or owned

fulfill an emotional need or retain an emotional significance for a consumer. An attachment or

bond is formed compelling the user to keep the garment longer. An example of this is a vintage

coat or dress originally owned by a person’s grandparent. The garment represents the emotional

bond to the individual. The aim of a design or garment with an emotional attachment for the user

is retained over a longer period of time and not as easily disposed of (Fuad-Luke, 2008;

Niinimaki & Hassi, 2011). Similarly, fashion also fulfills deep inner motivations and

unconscious needs through consumption of goods, which include fashion and apparel

(Niinimaki, 2009). These psychological needs include, but are not limited to, affection,

understanding, participation, recreation, identity, and freedom (p.127). They can be satisfied

through the external representations fashion reflects such as brands and status symbols.

End of Life Plan (ELP) refers to the creation of garments with specific intentions and/or

considerations regarding the issues that occur once a garment reaches its product life cycle.

Design would need to consider what will become of the garment once it has reached the end of

its useful life (Argument, Lettice, & Bhamrz, 1998). This can include designing garments with

intent for them to be recycled, reused, or composted for example. Conversely, the term “extend

life span/cycle” (ELS), relates to the creation of utility past the original end of a product’s life

cycle. When designing garments, the item has a set expiration date for the user. To extend the

life span of a garment, a design would need to take into consideration the pre-established

expiration of an item and the reasons for why it would “expire.” Upon discovering this, the

designer would need to add value to the item in order to extend the life of the item. To do so,

Niimimaki & Hassi provide the example of increasing intrinsic product quality as well as

durability (2011, p. 1879).

Transparency denotes the clarity of information regarding the creation of a garment. This

would require companies and designers to be transparent of all the resources and processes used

in the creation of a garment. In doing so, it provides the consumer reassurance of environmental

responsibility (Barber, 2007). In order to demonstrate and provide access of this information for

consumers, examples included the provision of “ecolabels” wherein tags with barcodes came

attached to clothing that can be scanned to provide information relating to the garment’s creation

(Aakko & Koskennurmi-Sivonen, 2013). Eco-efficiency is the principle of producing the same

or more products using fewer resources and gain benefit out of the use of fewer goods and

services (Niinimaki, 2009). By incorporating eco-efficiency into the design process, it slows

down the production of pollution, habitat destruction, and other negative impacts on the

environment caused by the over depletion of resources (Sun, 2012). When these terms were

referred to in the survey, participants were given the definition or meaning or the terminology in

information sections of the survey.

FEA Categorization

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, Lamb & Kallal (1992) categorized design criteria

based on their correlation to the three elements in their FEA model: functional, expressive, and

aesthetic. Functional design considerations are based on an apparel products’ relation to utility,

expressive considerations are related to “the communicative, symbolic aspects of dress”, and

aesthetic considerations relate to “the human desire for beauty”. The themes revealed in the

content analysis of slow design and slow fashion literature were categorized as design criteria

according to the defining foundation of each element in the model. Due to the nature of this

topic, not all design criteria met the definition of the three design considerations. During the

analysis of literature, it was found that two additional considerations needed to be added. Those

considerations were designer and other. For this reason, two additional considerations were

added to the pre-existing FEA model as depicted in Figure 3. The design criteria for each

consideration are delineated in Table 8. Some criteria were applicable in multiple categories.

Those design criteria are denoted with an asterisk within the table.

Figure 3: Slow Fashion Design Considerations Model

[Based on slow design and slow fashion content analysis of literature and adapted from Lamb &

Kallal FEA Model (1992)]

Table 8: Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Model

Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other

Quality Investment Artisan Few pieces OSD

Longevity

Local *Multiplicity Technology Service

Care

Emotional Aesthetics Dye Packaging

*Multiplicity

*Co-design Silhouette Transparency Fair trade

Multifunction Educate Classic ELP *Customization

*Modular

Psychological

need

*OSD Repairability *Co-Design

*Denotes design criteria eligible for multiple considerations

Table 8 cont’d: Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Model

Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other

*Co-design

*Materials, in

general

Color ELS

*Transparency

*Eco-efficiency Bio-mimicry Customization *Educate

Disposal:

disassembly

*Modular

*Eco-efficiency

*Materials Sourcing

(recycle, reuse,

redesign)

*Co-Design *Co-Design

*Materials

(Recycled, Natural,

Eco, Organic,

Renewable, etc.)

*Materials, in

general

Transparency

*Educate

*Eco-efficiency

Efficient use of

Materials

Disposal, in

general

Disposal (recycle,

Reuse, redesign,

exchange, donate)

*Denotes design criteria eligible for multiple considerations

Framework Categorization

When developing an apparel design process, there must be a structured and delineated

procedural framework designers follow to develop an apparel item. The framework is a step by

step process to aid the designer in solving the design problem. Additionally, following a

framework allows the process to be recreated to the exact instructions established upon the initial

development of a particular apparel item. Along with the implementation of the FEA model for

this study, a design process framework derived from the research conducted by Lamb & Kallal is

also used. That framework was depicted earlier in this study on Figure 2. The steps within the

procedure are as follows: Problem Identification, Preliminary Ideas, Design Refinement,

Prototype Development, Evaluation, and Implementation. Each step in this framework correlates

to specific considerations (function, expressive, aesthetic) within the FEA model and thus there

are specific design criteria that are categories into each step of the framework. Consequently, the

themes discovered in the content analysis were redistributed and categorized to fit the needs of

the framework as it applies to slow fashion. The considerations to be taken into account in the

slow fashion design framework are: material, quality, production, designer, evaluation, and

implementation. This categorization, along with the design criteria for each category, developed

from the content analysis can be found in Table 9. Evaluation and Implementation considerations

are two separate consideration categories each with the same design criteria. For the sake of this

study, both considerations are placed into on column in Table 9. Design criteria applicable in

multiple consideration categories are denoted with an asterisk.

Table 9: Design Criteria for Design Framework

Material Quality Production Design Evaluation

and

Implementation

Care Longevity Technology Modular OSD

Dye

Investment Fair Trade Aesthetics Packaging

Color

Classic Transparency Silhouette Few pieces

Bio-mimicry Transparency *Local Emotional Repairability

Service

Artisan Eco-efficiency Customization Transparency

Disposal Quality Multiplicity Educate

ELP

Multifunction

Table 9 cont’d: Design Criteria for Design Framework

Material Quality Production Design Evaluation and

Implementation

Repairability Co-Design

ELS

Transparency

Educate

Artisan Psychological

need

Local

Eco-efficiency

Material, in general

Disposal: recycle, reuse,

redesign

Efficient use of materials

Materials Sourcing

(recycled, redesigned)

Materials Sourcing (eco-,

natural, renewable)

Disposal:

disassembly

The design framework developed for the development of slow fashion apparel is reflected

in Figure 4. Each step in the framework denotes the considerations that aid in the completion of

each step. This includes not only the elements and considerations from the initial Slow Fashion

model developed, but also those developed in Table 9.

Figure 4: Lamb & Kallal’s (1992) FEA Model Design Process Incorporated with Slow Fashion

Apparel Design Framework.

[Based on content analysis of literature and adapted to the stages of the design process in Lamb

& Kallal’s (1992) framework]

Instrumentation: Survey Development and Content Analysis

With the content analysis of literature and the development of the slow fashion model and

design framework completed, a survey instrument was created to seek out more information

regarding the validity of the design criteria and their categorizations into the respective

consideration previously explained in this chapter. Appendix D provides the hard copy version

of the electronic survey created via Qualtrics. First, the initial considerations used to develop the

Slow Fashion model in Figure 3 were placed on a Likert scale giving participants the opportunity

to rate from strongly agree to strongly disagree to the criteria’s implementation within each

design criteria of functional, expressive, aesthetic, designer, or other (FEADO) considerations.

A final option was provided for the participants if they felt their knowledge on the subject matter

rendered them unable to answer. The results from this survey section can be found in Table 10:

Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Criteria (FEADO).

Table 10: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Criteria (FEADO) (N=71)

A. Functional Design Criteria

Neither Strongly

Functional Agree Strongly agree Agree Disagree

Design Criteria nor disagree

Don't

Know

Disagree

Quality 47 10 4 0 1 9

Longevity 39 18 4 0 1 9

Care 32 14 9 3 1 12

Multifunction 13 26 16 5 1 10

Modular 9 23 18 6 0 16

Disposal: disassembly 12 21 19 4 4 11

Co-design 8 27 21 4 2 9

Eco-efficiency 22 24 9 2 1 13

Multiplicity 4 17 24 12 3 16

Material Sourcing (natural,

eco, organic, renewable

materials)

23 20 14 4 1 9

Material Sourcing (recycled,

reused, or redesigned) 22 25 10 4 1 9

Table 10: Categorization of Slow

B. Expressive Design Criteria Fashion Design Cr

iteria

(FEADO) (N=71)

Strongly

Expressive Design Criteria agree Agree

Neither

Agree

Disagree

nor

Disagree

Strongly

disagree

Don't

Know

Emotional 26 23 11 0 0 11

Investment 19 25 13 1 0 13

Local 26 21 11 2 0 11

Modular 4 23 23 3 0 18

Psychological need 15 29 13 1 0 13

Material Sourcing, in general 15 31 11 1 0 13

Co-design 13 25 19 3 0 11

Educate 30 22 7 1 0 11

Table 10: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Criteria (FEADO) (N=71)

C. Aesthetic Design Criteria

Aesthetic Design Criteria Strongly

agree Agree

Neither

Agree nor

Disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

Know

Artisan 32 20 7 1 0 11

Multiplicity 6 15 27 11 0 12

Aesthetics 33 23 4 0 0 11

Silhouette 27 22 8 2 0 11

Classic 25 18 16 1 0 10

OSD 15 16 17 7 0 16

Color 26 18 14 1 0 12

Bio-mimicry 3 18 30 3 0 17

Co-design 10 23 20 4 1 13

Modular 9 18 23 2 0 19

Material Sourcing, in general 15 33 11 1 0 11

Table 10: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Criteria (FEADO) (N=71) D.

Designer Design Criteria

Designer

Design Criteria

Strongly

agree Agree

Neither

Agree nor

Disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

Know

Few pieces 16 21 19 4 0 11

Technology 17 21 18 1 1 13

Dye 17 25 16 3 0 10

Transparency 21 24 12 3 0 11

Disposal, in general 17 27 13 2 0 12

ELP 20 23 14 1 1 12

Repairability 26 27 6 1 0 11

ELS 30 20 7 1 0 13

Customization 19 30 10 1 0 11

Modular 8 20 21 2 0 20

Co-design 8 27 20 4 0 12

Transparency 18 24 13 2 0 14

Educate 28 23 9 0 0 11

Eco-efficiency 28 23 6 0 0 14

Efficient use of materials 37 21 3 0 0 10

Disposal, (recycling,

reusing, redesigning,

exchanging, donating)

27 25 9 0 0 10

Table 10: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Criteria (FEADO) (N=71)

E. Other Design Criteria

Other Design

Criteria Strongly agree Agree Neither Agree

nor Disagree Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

Know

OSD 10 19 23 3 0 16

Service 18 28 12 1 0 12

Packaging 20 20 15 0 0 16

Fair Trade 21 29 8 0 0 13

Customization 15 28 14 0 0 14

Co-design 12 23 20 2 0 15

Transparency 20 23 13 1 0 14

Educate 30 21 7 0 0 13

Eco-efficiency 28 21 7 0 0 15

After this section was completed, participants were given an opportunity to voluntarily

place the slow fashion design criteria terms into the Slow Fashion model categorization. This

categorization had the five design process consideration categories to select from: functional,

expressive, aesthetic, designer, and other. Participants were provided the list of 38 slow fashion

terms and they were able to voluntarily select which consideration each design criteria belonged

to, according to their professional experience The intent of this section was to allow each

participant the opportunity to categorize the design criteria without being prompted by

preexisting categorization tools. Results from this section and the frequency of each design

terms categorization are provided in Table 11. If there was a different category they felt was

needed but had not been listed, they were prompted to list the slow fashion term and the new

category they felt it belonged in. Results from their responses are found in Table 12.

Table 11: Voluntary Categorization of Slow Fashion Apparel Design Criteria (FEADO)

Term Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other Does

not

apply

answer

Quality 31 3 3 5 0 0 29

Longevity 47 0 0 1 1 0 22

Care 42 0 0 5 1 0 23

Multiplicity 10 8 4 7 9 11 22

Multifunction 24 2 2 15 4 2 22

Modular 7 3 7 20 5 6 23

Table 11 cont’d: Voluntary Categorization of Slow Fashion Apparel Design Criteria (FEADO)

Term Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other Does No

not

apply

answer

Customization 2 25 5 12 5 0 22

Investment 8 11 1 6 15 5 25

Local 5 5 1 18 18 0 24

Emotional 1 38 5 3 0 1 23

Artisan 1 12 25 9 1 0 23

Aesthetics 0 4 39 6 0 0 22

Silhouette 0 4 36 8 0 2 21

Classic 4 6 25 10 1 3 22

OSD 2 3 4 19 12 8 23

Color 0 6 33 7 0 2 23

Bio-mimicry 5 3 6 9 11 10 27

Few pieces 0 6 4 33 3 1 24

Technology 12 1 0 17 16 1 24

Dye 7 4 12 15 5 3 25

Transparency 1 3 2 18 17 4 26

ELP 14 1 0 16 13 2 25

Repairability 28 0 0 9 8 1 25

ELS 22 5 0 16 3 1 24

Service 15 4 1 4 17 4 26

Packaging 2 3 9 6 24 3 24

Fair Trade 1 5 0 13 27 0 25

Educate 0 4 0 13 26 3 25

Eco-efficiency 4 3 3 30 5 1 25

Co-design 1 9 2 21 8 5 25

Psychological

need

1 38 4 1 0 2 25

Efficient use

of materials

13 0 1 27 5 0 25

Disposal, in

general

13 1 0 12 17 2 26

Disposal:

disassembly

14 1 0 16 11 3 26

Material

Sourcing,

specifically

the use of

natural, eco,

organic,

renewable

materials

7 4 0 31 7 0 22

Table 11 cont’d: Voluntary Categorization of Slow Fashion Apparel Design Criteria (FEADO)

Term Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other Does

not

apply

answer

Material

sourcing, in

general

5 1 1 29 9 1 25

Disposal:

recycling,

reusing,

redesigning,

exchanging,

donating

12 5 1 14 15 0 24

Material

sourcing:

recycled,

reused,

redesigned

6 3 0 31 5 0 26

Table 12: Additional Design Criteria Categorization

Design Criteria Consideration Category Additional Information

Fit/Quality of fit to

wearer

Aesthetic Might fall within customization but not

always. We might customize design

features like color, components of silhouette

and not pay attention to getting something

that is correct size and flattering fit. In my

opinion, efficient, effective sizing IS

sustainable since products produced would

fit and flatter and therefore appeal, be worn

for a long time and many times across that

period of longevity. Most of what is for sale

is small sizes, we don’t even make clothing

for most people’s body size and type.

Zero Waste

Construction

Designer

Organic/Animal

Welfare Certification

Designer

Following this, participants were then prompted to another survey section wherein the

design criteria were to be rated from strongly agree to strongly disagree according to their use or

implementation within the considerations developed from the design process framework

(material, quality, production, design, evaluation, and implementation). A final option was

provided for the participants if they felt their knowledge on the subject matter rendered them

unable to answer. The results from this survey section can be found in Table 13: Categorization

of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria.

Table 13: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria A.

Material Design Criteria

Material Design Criteria Strongly

agree Agree

Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

know

Care 28 14 1 0 0 28

Dye 19 16 7 0 0 29

Efficient use of materials 30 10 2 0 0 29

Color 9 19 10 1 0 32

Bio-mimicry 1 8 22 4 0 36

Service 9 12 16 4 0 30

General disposal 11 21 7 2 0 30

Disposal (recycling,

reusing, & redesign) 16 19 6 0 0 30

ELP 18 14 8 1 0 30

Repairability 16 17 7 1 0 30

ELS 19 18 4 0 0 30

Transparency 11 11 12 2 0 35

Material sourcing, in

general 18 17 7 0 0 2

Material sourcing (eco,

natural, renewable) 20 16 6 0 0 29

Material sourcing

(recycled, reused,

redesign)

19 17 5 0 0 30

Artisan 10 18 14 0 0 29

Local 12 19 10 0 0 30

Eco-efficiency 17 17 6 0 0 31

Table 13: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria B.

Quality Design Criteria

Quality Design Criteria Strongly

agree Agree

Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

know

Longevity 29 11 0 0 0 31

Investment 15 21 4 0 0 31

Classic 12 15 12 1 0 31

Transparency 8 15 10 2 0 36

Artisan 12 14 13 1 0 31

Quality 33 7 0 0 0 31

Table 13: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria C.

Production Design Criteria

Production Design Criteria Strongly

agree Agree

Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

know

Technology 17 17 5 1 0 31

Fair Trade 17 18 7 0 0 29

Transparency 11 16 10 0 0 34

Local 19 16 6 0 0 30

Eco-efficiency 19 15 5 0 0 32

Table 13: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria D.

Design Criteria

Design Strongly

agree Agree

Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

know

Modular 7 9 16 1 0 38

Aesthetics 23 14 3 0 0 31

Silhouette 13 16 7 2 0 33

Emotional 19 15 5 0 0 32

Psychological need 15 17 7 0 0 32

Disposal: disassembly 12 17 9 2 0 31

Customization 11 13 11 2 0 34

Multiplicity 3 13 14 4 2 35

Multifunction 11 19 8 0 0 33

Co-design 5 17 13 0 0 36

Transparency 8 14 9 1 0 39

Educate 18 16 4 0 0 33

Table 13: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria E.

Evaluation Design Criteria

Evaluation Strongly agree Agree

Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

know

Open source design 4 12 15 2 1 37

Packing 7 13 14 1 0 36

Few pieces 6 19 10 2 0 34

Repairability 13 19 6 1 0 32

Educate 16 16 6 0 0 33

Transparency 11 11 12 0 0 37

Table 13: Categorization of Slow Fashion

F. Implementation Design Criteria

Design Framework

Criteria

Implementation Strongly agree Agree

Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

Don't

know

Open source design 5 12 15 2 1 36

Packing 8 16 10 2 0 35

Few pieces 9 16 10 3 0 33

Reparability 10 20 7 1 0 33

Educate 17 14 9 0 0 31

Transparency 12 11 12 0 0 36

Lastly, following the completion of this section, participants were then prompted to

voluntarily place the slow fashion design criteria terms into the consideration categories

developed for the Slow Fashion design framework: material, quality, production, design,

evaluation, and implementation. Participants were again provided the list of 38 slow fashion

terms and they were able to voluntarily select which consideration each design criteria belonged

to, according to their professional experience. Results from this survey section are depicted in

Table 14: Voluntary Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria. If there was a

different category they felt was needed but had not been listed, they were prompted again to list

the slow fashion term and the new category they felt it belonged in. No answers were provided

for this survey section.

Table 14: Voluntary Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria

Design

Criteria Material Quality Production Design Evaluation Implementation

Does

not

apply

Un-

known

Quality 2 18 1 1 1 0 0 48

Longevity 8 15 2 1 2 0 0 43

Care 15 6 0 2 4 1 0 43

Multiplicity 0 0 1 17 3 2 2 46

Multifunction 0 0 1 23 0 1 1 45

Modular 0 0 4 21 0 0 0 46

Customization 0 1 5 11 1 4 0 49

Investment 1 12 2 0 4 4 1 49

Local 5 0 12 0 2 3 1 49

Emotional 0 3 0 3 14 2 2 47

Artisan 4 5 11 4 0 1 1 45

Aesthetics 1 3 0 16 5 0 1 45

Silhouette 0 1 0 20 2 0 3 45

Classic 0 6 0 10 4 0 2 49

OSD 0 0 5 11 2 1 3 49

Color 2 1 0 17 3 0 2 46

Bio-mimicry 0 0 0 12 1 1 6 51

Few pieces 0 2 7 13 2 0 1 46

Technology 1 1 16 2 1 2 0 48

Dye 8 0 10 4 0 2 1 46

ELP 0 6 1 5 10 2 0 47

Repairability 2 11 1 3 4 3 2 48

ELS 2 10 1 3 2 4 1 48

Service 1 6 0 2 5 6 4 47

Packaging 1 0 9 2 2 6 2 49

Fair Trade 4 0 11 0 2 6 0 48

Educate 1 1 0 2 4 14 2 47

Eco-efficiency 6 1 8 3 4 2 0 47

Co-design 0 0 4 14 0 2 3 48

Transparency 2 0 6 1 5 3 4 50

Psychological

need 0 2 0 5 12 2 2 48

Efficient use

of materials 3 1 16 1 1 2 0 47

Table 14 cont’d: Voluntary Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria

Design

Criteria Material Quality Production Design Evaluation Implementation

Does

not

apply

Un-

known

Disposal, in

general 3 0 1 1 12 4 1 49

Disposal:

disassembly 3 1 2 8 3 4 2 48

Material

sourcing, in

general

19 1 1 1 1 1 0 47

Material

Sourcing

(natural, eco,

organic,

renewable

materials)

24 1 3 0 0 0 0 43

Disposal

(recycling,

reusing,

redesigning,

exchanging,

donating)

3 4 1 0 9 9 0 45

Material

sourcing

(recycled,

reused,

redesigned)

20 0 1 1 2 0 0 47

The content analysis of literature provided themes to begin the process of establishing

considerations and design criteria to be implemented towards the development of a conceptual

slow fashion apparel design process. This slow fashion apparel design process is comprised of a

design process model and a design framework. Both the model and framework are based on the

research conducted by Lamb & Kallal to create their FEA model and design framework (1992).

In conjunction with the content analysis, an analysis of survey responses provided data to further

examine the model and framework these data were used to establish a slow fashion apparel

design process. These findings determined what considerations and design criteria are most

important and assisted in refining final the model and framework for the slow fashion apparel

design process.

CHAPTER FIVE RESEARCH FINDINGS

The purpose of this study was to apply a pre-existing apparel design process model and

apparel design framework to develop a conceptual slow fashion apparel design process, while

investigating the role specific design criteria play within each step in the design process. In this

chapter, descriptive statistics are provided for the population sample based on the instrument

used. Edits to the slow fashion apparel design model and framework design criteria are provided

prior to the addition of the analysis of the interview transcripts. Lastly, the results of the

qualitative analysis of the interviews is presented to provide additional further edits to and

support for the slow fashion apparel design model and framework as well as the individual

design criteria for each consideration.

Sample Size and Participant Characteristics

As previously mention in chapter three, the population was derived from a purposive

sample obtained from the ITAA 2014 membership. In order to obtain a representative sample of

industry and academic professionals from this population, the researcher contacted the

organization in order to be granted permission to disseminate the survey for this study. The

membership categories available within the organization are: corporate, Honorary, Emeritus,

professional, graduate students, and undergraduate students. The population group sampled from

totaled 707 individuals and excluded honorary and undergraduate students. The reasoning for

excluding those categories was due to the lack of experience with the level of theoretical

understanding necessary to understand the questions in the survey. The survey was live for 14

days during which 124 surveys were started of which 71 were completed. Table 15 shows the

demographic information regarding the 71 participants from this study. Some participants, 29

individuals, decided to remain anonymous and thus their demographic information is noted as

unknown. Overall, the responding sample was comprised mainly of women (56.3%), Caucasians

(49.3%), and individuals at the level of professor at academic institutions (27%). The doctorate

(26%) had the highest rate of frequency in terms of highest degrees obtained. The most frequent

discipline classification was that of apparel design (21%). A number of participants chose to not

respond to the answers regarding demographic information. For this reason, a weighted

percentage category was added to Table 15 to show the percentages values for the actual

responses to the demographic questions. This weighted percentage represents the participants

who answered these demographic questions.

Table 15: Demographic Profile of Participants (n=71)

Respondent N % Weighted %

Gender

Female

56.3

95.2

Male 2 2.8 4.8

Unknown 29

40.8

Race

Caucasian

49.3

83.3

Black/African-American 2 2.8 4.8

Asian 3 4.2 7.1

Unknown 29 40.8 69

Other: 2 2.8 -

European-American (1) (1.4) (2.4)

Latina (1)

(1.4)

(2.4)

Academic Classification

Graduate/Professional Student

11.3

Instructor 4 5.6 9.5

Professor 27 38 64.3

Unknown 29 40.8 -

Other: 3 4.2 7.1

Administrator (1) (1.4) (2.4)

Lecturer at University (1) (1.4) (2.4)

Professor pursing PhD (1) (1.4) (2.4)

Table 15 cont’d: Demographic Profile of Participants (n=71)

Respondent N % Weighted %

Highest Degree Obtained

Bachelor’s

2.8

4.8

Master’s 13 18.3 31

PhD 26 36.6 61.9

Unknown 29 40.8 -

Other: 1 1.4 2.4

Writing dissertation

(1)

(1.4)

(2.4)

Discipline Classification Apparel

Design

29.6

Merchandising 8 11.3 19

Textile Science 5 7 11.9

Historic Costume 4 5.6 9.5

Unknown 29 40.8 -

Other: 4 5.6 9.5

Apparel and Textile Design (1) (1.4) (2.4)

Costume Design (1) (1.4) (2.4)

Product Development (1) (1.4) (2.4)

Social and cultural aspects of clothing (1) (1.4) (2.4)

Due to the diversity of specializations and topics within the textiles, apparel design, and

merchandising disciplines not all topics could be listed. For this reason, participants were given

the choice to provide their topics of specialization. This information was provided by 40

participants who chose to further expand on their individual specializations. In order to further

condense this information, the researcher combined specializations with similarities to each

other. The reasoning for this is due to the variation in naming of subjects within the textiles,

apparel design, and merchandising discipline. For example, certain academic institutions refer to

costume history as historic costume and vice versa. While the word configuration is different,

the area of specialization is the same. Additionally, certain specializations can be combined. For

example, specializations in CAD programs or digital printing can be combined into apparel

technology. Similarly, costume, functional, or aesthetic design can all be combined under a

universal design category. Lastly, some participants had more than one specialization topic,

further expanding and diversifying the scope of knowledge of this sample population. Table 16

reveals the reconfigured participant specializations. In analyzing the reconfiguration, the most

frequent specializations are in design and sustainability. This further supports the use of this

purposive sample as one with the expertise and knowledge in the subject matter and therefore

having the aptitude to contribute to the validation of the slow fashion apparel design process

model and framework created in this study.

Table

16:

Reconfigured Participant Specializations (n=112)

Additional questions were asked regarding the expertise of the participants in various

areas related to the topics this research study covered: apparel design, sustainability, slow design,

and slow fashion. Information regarding those participant characteristics is shown in Table 17.

It is assumed the voluntary information provided by each participant is an accurate and honest

representation of their skill levels.

Specialization

N %

Design: Apparel, Costume, Functional, Aesthetic, Knit, Integrated,

Technical, Specific apparel categories (evening, casual, sportswear, etc.)

25 22%

Sustainability: Zero Waste, Sustainable design practices, slow fashion,

design

12 11%

History: Historic Costume, Costume History, History, Fashion History 10 9%

Apparel Technology: CAD, digital printing, etc. 9 8%

Textiles/Textile Science 8 7%

Construction 7 6%

Patternmaking 6 5%

Draping 5 4%

Consumer Behavior: 3 3%

Dyeing 2 2%

Trends/Trend Forecasting 2 2%

Illustration 2 2%

Buying 2 2%

Management/Retailing 2 2%

Merchandising: Visual, Promotion Strategies 2 2%

Social/Psychological: Self-expression, Identity 2 2%

Supply Chain 2 2%

Career Preparation: Internship Placement, HR 2 2%

Tailoring 1 1%

Theory 1 1%

Local 1 1%

Handcraft/Artisan 1 1%

Sourcing 1 1%

Global Issues/Globalization 1 1%

Creativity/Creative Process 1 1%

Fashion Innovation 1 1%

Social Responsibility: social entrepreneurship 1 1%

Table 17: Participant Expertise (n=71)

Respondent N %

Apparel Design Expert

Yes

59.2

No 23 32.4

Unknown

8.5

Expertise in Apparel Design Expert

39.4

Proficient expertise 15 21.1

Competent expertise 13 18.3

Advanced expertise 7 9.9

Novice/No expertise 7 9.9

Unknown

1.4

Expertise in Sustainability Expert

Proficient expertise 22 31

Competent expertise 31 43.7

Advanced expertise 6 8.5

Novice/No expertise 6 8.5

Unknown 1

1.4

Expertise in Slow Design

Expert

Proficient expertise 12 16.9

Competent expertise 21 29.6

Advanced expertise 10 14.1

Novice/No expertise 22 31

Unknown 1 1.4

Table 17 cont’d: Participant Expertise (n=71)

Respondent N %

Expertise in Slow Fashion Expert

5.6

Proficient expertise 15 21.1

Competent expertise 23 32.4

Advanced expertise 9 12.7

Novice/No expertise 19 26.8

Unknown 1 1.4

Lastly, questions regarding professional development were asked to learn more about the

participants’ engagement in apparel design and creative scholarship within the discipline. These

questions included topics regarding the courses they teach as well as questions about their

creative scholarship. Table 18 shows the information found regarding teaching engagement.

Table 19 shows the information regarding engagement in creative scholarship. Overall, the

sample population represented apparel design professionals who actively teach apparel design

courses. While over 50% of the population teaches sustainability within their courses, less than

30% teach slow fashion in those courses. Nevertheless, the sample population is accurately

representative of the characteristics sought by the purposive sample to validate the slow fashion

consideration and design criteria for the slow fashion apparel design process model and

framework.

Table 18: Teaching Engagement (n=71)

Respondent N %

Apparel Design Professional

Yes

74.6

No 17 23.9

Unknown

1.4

Teach apparel design courses? Yes

59.2

No 26 36.6

Unknown 3 4.2

Table 18 cont’d: Teaching Engagement (n=71)

Respondent N %

Teach sustainability in courses? Yes

78.9

No 14 19.7

Unknown 1 1.4

Teach slow design in courses?

Yes

25.4

No 52 73.2

Unknown

1.4

Teach slow fashion in courses?

Yes

No 41 57.7

Unknown 3 4.2

Table 19: Creative Scholarship (CS) Engagement (n=71)

Respondent N %

Conduct creative scholarship (CS) garments &/or fiber art?

Yes 36 50.

No 17 23.

Unknown 18 25.

With CS, do you use a specific/structured/documented design process?

Yes 27 38

No 22 31

Unknown 22 31

With CS, do you purposefully incorporate sustainable techniques into design

process?

Yes 34 47.

No 16 22.

Unknown 21 29.

With CS, do you purposefully incorporate slow design techniques into design

process?

Yes 21 29.

No 29 40.

Unknown 21 29.

Table 19 cont’d: Creative Scholarship (CS) Engagement (n=71)

With CS, do you purposefully incorporate slow fashion techniques into

design process?

Yes 21 29.6

No 29 40.8

Unknown 21 29.6

Do you submit CS pieces to ITAA or other peer-reviewed competitions?

(regardless of acceptance)

Yes 30 42.3

No 23 32.4

Unknown 18 25.4

Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process: Pre-Interviews

Frequency analysis of the survey responses resulted in the modification of the original

Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model and well as the Slow Fashion Apparel Design

Framework. With regard to the Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model, the overall

categories that delineated the considerations (functional, expressive, aesthetic, designer, and

other) used in developing slow fashion apparel were retained. Design criteria within each

consideration category that lacked significant frequency levels were removed. Only responses to

“Strongly agree to the use/implementation of” the design criteria and “Agree” were included.

The cumulative agreement, restricted to these two response types, needed to reach a total of 50%

or higher of the total responses for each term within the consideration category in order to

indicate the design criteria’s use within that consideration. In addition, frequency analyses from

the participants’ voluntary categorization of the design criteria within the different considerations

were also taken into account. The voluntary categorization represents the portion of the survey

Respondent N %

wherein the participants were given the opportunity to voluntarily place each design criteria term

into a consideration box they felt best represented its use or implementation within the design

process. Table 20 depicts the results from both these frequency analyses with regard to the

design criteria for the Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process model. Design criteria eligible for

multiple consideration categories is denoted with an asterisk. Design criteria in italics represent

terms that were placed into that consideration voluntarily by participants but were not originally

in that category from the results of the content analysis. Items in bold denote the placement of

design criteria within the category due to the results from the voluntary categorization. Lastly,

design criteria that are in bold and underlined denote items originally placed in the consideration

category which were removed due lack of support from the results from the agreement portion of

the survey but were reinstated due to the results from the voluntary categorization.

Table 20: Adjusted Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model A.

Survey (Agreement)

Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other

•Quality

•Longevity

•Care •

•Multifunction

•Eco-Efficiency

Material Sourcing

(natural, eco,

organic,

renewable)

•Materials

Sourcing

(Recycled,

reused, redesign)

•Investment •

•Local •

Psychological

need

•Material •

Sourcing, in •

general •

•Co-Design •

•Educate

Artisan •

Material • Sourcing,

• in general •

Aesthetics

Silhouette

Classic

Color

•

• •

•

• •

•

Few pieces •

Technology •

Dye •

Disposal •

(recycle, • reuse,

•

redesign, •

exchange,

donate)

Efficient use

of materials

Transparency

Disposal in

general

ELP

Repairability

ELS

Customization

Educate

Eco-

efficiency

Service

Packaging

Fair Trade

Customization

Transparency

Educate

Eco-

Efficiency

Table 20: Adjusted Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model B.

Survey (Voluntary)

Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other

•Quality • •

Longevity •

•Care •

•Multifunction

•Repairability

•ELS

Customization

Emotional

Psychological

need

•Artisan

•

•Aesthetics

•Silhouette

•Classic

•Color

•

• •

•

• •

•

• •

•

Material •

Sourcing •

(natural, eco, •

organic, •

renewable)

Modular

Local

Material

Sourcing, in

general •

OSD

Few pieces •

Technology •

Dye •

Efficient use of •

materials

Transparency

ELP

Eco-efficiency

Disposal:

disassembly

Material

Sourcing

(Recycle,

redesign, reuse)

Co-Design

Investment

Local

Bio-mimicry

Disposal

(recycle,

reuse,

redesign ,

exchange,

donate)

Disposal, in

general

Service

Packaging

Fair Trade

Educate

Table 20: Adjusted Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model C.

Post-Survey Required Design Criteria

Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other

•Quality •

•Longevity

•Care

•Multifunction

Psychological

need

•Artisan •

•Aesthetics •

•Silhouette •

•Classic

•Color •

•

Technology •

Dye •

Efficient use • of

materials •

Transparency

ELP

Eco-efficiency

Service

Packaging

Fair Trade

Educate

The analysis of the survey responses were also reviewed in regard to the Slow Fashion

Apparel Design Framework. Modification of the original consideration categories and design

criteria were warranted as a result of the frequency analysis. Design criteria that received a

frequency percentage lower than 50% were removed from the consideration category. The 50%

benchmark was for cumulative agreement on the use or implementation of particular design

criteria within a specific consideration. This cumulative agreement benchmark only included the

responses indicating “Strongly agree to the use/implementation” of the design criteria and

“Agree”. From this frequency analysis, no design criteria within the production, evaluation, and

implementation consideration categories met the 50% benchmark. Those categories are

highlighted in Table 21. In addition, adjustments are also indicated the Table 21 reflecting the

frequency analysis from the participants’ voluntary categorization of the design criteria within

the different considerations.

Table 21: Adjusted Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework A.

Survey (Agreement)

Material Quality Production Design Evaluation Implementation

•Care

•Efficient use

of materials

•ELP

•Material

Sourcing (eco,

natural,

organic,

renewable) •

Material

Sourcing

(recycled,

reuse,

redesign,

donated)

•Longevity

•Investment

•Quality

• Aesthetics

Table 21: Adjusted Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework B.

Survey (Voluntary)

Material Quality Production Design Evaluation Implementati

•Care

•Material

Sourcing

(eco, natural,

organic,

renewable •

Material

Sourcing

(recycle,

reuse,

redesign ,

donated) •

Material

Sourcing,

in general

•Ecoefficienc

•Quality

•Longevity

•Investment

•Repairabilit

•ELS

•Service

•Local •

•Artisan

•

•Technology

•Dye •

•Efficient

use of materials

•

•Transparen

cy •

•Packaging

•Fair Trade

•

•Eco- •

efficiency •

•

• •

•

Aesthetics

Multi-

plicity

Multifunctio

n Modular

Custom-

ization

Silhouette

Classic

OSD

Color

Biomimicr

y Few

pieces

Disposal:

disassembl

y Co-

design

•Emotional

•Psychologic

al need

•Disposal

(recycle,

reuse,

redesign,

exchange,

donate)

•Disposal, in

general

•ELP

•Disposal

(reuse,

redesign,

recycle,

exchange,

donate)

•Service

•Educate

Table 21: Adjusted Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework C.

Post-Survey Required Design Criteria

Material Quality Production Design Evaluation Implementation

•Care

•Material

Sourcing

(eco,

natural,

organic,

renewable •

Material

Sourcing

(recycle,

reuse,

redesign ,

donated)

•Quality

•Longevity

•Investment

•Aesthetics

•Multiplicity

•Multifunction

•Modular

•Customization

•Silhouette

•Classic

•OSD

•Color

•Bio-mimicry •

Few pieces •

Disposal:

disassembly

•Co-design

Interviews

As discussed in chapter three, the sample of interviewees to assist in further validating the

design criteria in the considerations categories was procured through voluntary methods.

Participants who completed the online survey were prompted to indicate if they would be willing

to participate in a follow-up interview. If the participant answered yes, they were then prompted

to provide an e-mail address at which they could be contacted. Of the participants who

volunteered, a total of five were able to participate in the follow up interview. The interviews

ranged from 45 minutes to an hour and 15 minutes with an average of 58 minutes.

Descriptive Analysis of Results

Qualitative research has three types of degrees of structure by which interviews are

characterized (structured or standardized, non-schedule standardized, and unstructured or

nonstandardized) with the opportunity for varied combinations of these (Williamson, Karp,

Dalphin, & Gray, 1982). The most popular of which is the semi-structures interview. The

semistructured, open-ended interview questions (Appendix B) used for this research were

intended to prompt data that is similar for all respondents regardless of demographics but also

allows the ability to derive data from questions personalized for the individual and unique

experiences of each interviewee (p.173). Participants were asked to provide a description of slow

fashion, based on their professional point of view.

The creation of a slow fashion movement is derived from the original slow food

movement. Knowledge of slow fashion is often derived from knowledge of the slow food and

the various aspects related to said movement such as local, organic foods. Yet while the

characteristics cannot be directly correlated, the issue of quality and durability are often the most

highly mentioned and associated themes related to slow fashion.

I know a lot of the correlations between apparel and food that is the closest way to phrase

it. That borrows terminology from the slow food movement. So slow fashion, for me, is

more on the durability side. People throw around how you should buy really well made

clothes that are going to last you forever. But styles change, your size changes, and that’s

not possible. It’s feasible for slow fashion to be able to buy a couple high quality items

and then wear them the rest of your life. For me, more on the life cycle aspects of the

garments is more on the actual life span of the garment itself and how long you’re going

to keep and not throw it away or hand it down. Versus it is organically grown or fair

trade. And that is part of it. But what I focus on when I am shopping or designing is

really on the aspect of making something that is going to hold up to repeated wearing and

repeated washing. It’s not going to fall out of fashion in 6 months. It’s either going to fit

well through weight gain or weight losses or it’ll only need to be tailored or altered to fit

changes in weight gain and losses instead of having to go buy a new wardrobe you just

alter what is preexisting. Long story short, being fair trade and sustainable fibers and

agriculture or renewable resources aspects of slow fashion is important but my focus is

more on the downstream aspect of when you are making it or wearing it and how long

you’re going to keep it.

(Participant 4)

Responses varied from the limitation of resources used and placing an emphasis on the supply

chain:

I would describe slow fashion as a business model whose intention is to limit the amount

of resources that are being used in fashion through the maintenance of the end of supply

chain product. And through the limitation within the supply chain product that’s made

available to consumers. And then almost the control and manipulation of the consumer

process the consumer cycle through supply chain management policy and procedures.

(Participant 1)

In addition to supply chain management, concerns relative to sustainability, dealt with quality,

durability, longevity and how those concerns can counter the negative aspects on society and the

environment.

It is a reaction to fast fashion which is incredibly detrimental to people and places and

making things of the best quality that you can at whatever speed that requires. And I

suppose making that part of your marketing strategy as well. That you are making things

carefully, you’re in control of your supply chain and that you are not putting out 52 lines

a year or more.

(Participant 2)

Yet often the question of slow fashion is rooted in asking questions about the design process,

sourcing, resources, and other aspects of design. It is an introspective look, reminiscent of other

slow movements, that seeks a connection with intent.

It is like art. You know it when you see it. But at least I find it is hard to give a

definition. To me slow fashion is the opposite of the over production of apparel that is

meant to flood the market and be constantly changing like H&M and Zara. Slow

Fashion… I think a lot of the slow food movement and the process and intentionality of

where the materials are being sourced, sustainable techniques, and ideas around ‘where

are the materials coming from?’, ‘who is making it?’ intentionality about that.

Purposefulness about connecting the designer with the user. Rather than making

something just to make it or making something with the hope that somebody buys it but

more of a connectedness between the designer and the user. Sustainable technique also.

I mention where you are getting the fabric from so maybe its created where it has

sustainable processes or is renewable. It’s maybe supporting a local industry or a

supporting local community or continuing a specific cultural process of an area. And

then lets the designer starts looking at the pattern. There could be sustainable practices in

patternmaking techniques and zero waste. So to put it in a nutshell, intentionality around

the process, material and the user and being mindful of all of those stakeholders.

(Participant 3)

Regardless of varying descriptions rooted in professional experience, learning and understanding,

slow fashion is often derived from past experience that draws a person to seek further

information to better understand such a novel component within the topic of sustainability.

I first learned about it when I was in undergrad at UC-Davis when I was reading Kate

Fletchers books and stuff. I saw that she cited the slow movement. So I guess I learned

about it through that context. And I started to read more books that talk about in general

slow food systems. The book by Carl Honoré. So that gave me a better idea of what it

meant. So for my undergrad I drew on the idea of like slow fashion meaning contributing to

the upcycling process. That informed by undergrad research on US based designers that

upcycle with second hand materials. And then in my graduate work, I’ve taken a perspective

that’s more related to [resources]. So in my graduate work is looking at the resources in New

York that contribute to the slow fashion framework. So like the animal fiber resources like

sheep farms, goat farms, and alpaca farms. So my graduate work has taken more of the local

approach to slow fashion.

(Participant 5)

Table 22 reveals the content analysis of slow fashion themology from the interviewees’

responses to describing slow fashion.

Table 22: Interview Content Analysis of Description of Slow Fashion

Themology Describing of Slow Fashion Coding Terms

Making something that is going to hold up to repeated wearing and

repeated washing

Durability

Really well made clothes; making things of the best quality Quality

Going to last you forever; wear them for the rest of your life Longevity

Life cycle aspects of the garments Garment life cycle/span

Actual life span of the garment and how long you’re going to keep

and not throw it away or hand it down

Extend life cycle/span

Length of garment life cycle/span Product life cycle

Material sourcing (organic; renewable resources; animal fiber;

sustainable fibers)

Material sourcing

(natural, eco, organic,

renewable)

Fair Trade Fair Trade

Repeated washing Care/Launder

Maintenance

Fit well Fit

It’s not going to fall out of fashion in 6 months Classic

Limit the amount of resources that are being

Limitation within the supply chain product; control and

manipulation of the consumer process the consumer cycle through

supply chain management policy and procedures; in control of

your supply chain

Supply chain

management policy

Incredibly detrimental to people and places Human and

environmental impact

Best quality that you can at whatever speed that requires Speed

making that part of your marketing strategy Marketing strategy

Intentionality of where the materials are being sourced Material sourcing

Sustainable techniques Sustainable Techniques

Support of local industry/community; local resources Local

Continuing a specific cultural process of an area Artisanal

‘where are the materials coming from?’, ‘who is making it?’ Transparency

Fit well through weight gain or weight losses instead of having to go

buy a new wardrobe you just alter what is preexisting.

Multiplicity

Through weight gain or weight losses it’ll only need to be tailored or

altered to fit changes in weight gain and losses instead of having to

go buy a new wardrobe you just alter what is preexisting.

Repairability

That you are making things carefully Craftsmanship

Contributing to the upcycling process Upcycling

The interviews provided this study the opportunity to further analyze important design

criteria and considerations that are vital to slow fashion. What is particularly important with this

aspect of the research is the first-hand experience the interviewees can describe and relay

concerning their own experiences as designers in various capacities. Interview questions were

divided between two objectives. The first six questions of the semi-structured interview

pertained to seeking out information regarding what professionals know about slow fashion. The

latter 13 questions related to seeking information regarding these professionals’ design process

and the applications of slow fashion.

Interviewees were asked about the various design criteria referred to throughout this

study. They were asked to provide what they believed to be general qualities referring to slow

fashion design criteria from a designer standpoint. Table 23 provides the content analysis of the

interview transcripts wherein themes regarding functional, aesthetic, expressive, designer, and

other slow fashion considerations were found. A frequency analysis of the slow fashion

considerations can be found in Table 24.

Table 23: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic, Design and Other (FEADO) Slow Fashion Criteria

Interview Functional Expressive Aesthetic Design Other

1 Quality

Fabric choice

Durability/

Longevity

Care/

Maintenance

Sustainability

Consumer

consciousness

Tactile quality

Material (natural

fibers)

Color

Lines (clean,

simple)

Multiplicity

Multi-function

Simple

silhouettes

Durability

Material

sourcing

Manufacturing

End use

Quality

Longer life

span

Longevity/dura

bility

Care/

maintenance

Classics/

Reasonality

sourcing

Local

(focus on

locality of

where

sourcing

come

from)

Material

Sourcing

Packaging

Freshness

Local

Timeless

Marketing

Table 23 cont’d: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic, Design and Other (FEADO) Slow Fashion

Criteria

Interview Functional Expressive Aesthetic Design Other

2 Adaptable

to changes

in the body

Quality

Investment

Classic

Material

sourcing

Flexibility

Bond

Care/

Maintenance

Quality

Longevity

Co-design

Material

sourcing

Educate

Classic

Longevity/

Durability

Multifunction/

Flexibility

Material sourcing

(donated fabric)

Pattern Perfecting

Efficient use of

materials

Material sourcing

(natural fibers)

Care/Launder

Transparency

3 User

centered

Customizat

ion (to

functional

needs of

end user)

End user

(reflect the

needs of

end user)

Co design

End user

Functional

needs

Expressive

needs

Aesthetic

needs

Social/

Psychologica

l needs

Meet the

attributes in the

FEA

model

Being more

thoughtful &

integrated into

the design

process then

current model

manufacturing

Material sourcing (in

general)

Transparency

Process of

patternmaking

Obtaining longevity

Care/launder/

maintenance

Cradle-to-cradle

thought processes

Product life cycle

End user

Functionality

Product life

cycle

Material

sourcing, in

general (Fiber

content)

Not

dependent on

price

Transparency

Fair labor

practices

Co-design

Design process

used

Complete

Expressive

Aesthetic

product life

cycle

Table 23 cont’d: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic, Design and Other (FEADO) Slow Fashion

Criteria

Interview Functional Expressive Aesthetic Design Other

Fit

Multiplicity

Efficient use of

materials

Multifunction

Silhouette

Investment

Dyes

Material

sourcing

(organic

fibers)

Simple

shape

Multiplicity

(unisex)

Color

Dyes (Natural)

Texture

Care/Launder/

Maintain

Comfort

Emotional

(personal bond)

Efficient use of

materials

Material

sourcing

(recycle, reuse,

redesign)

Cost

Educate

Quality

Care/Launder/

Maintenance

Longevity/

Durability

Comfort

Silhouette

Styling

Multi-use of a

garment

(Multifunction)

Material

Sourcing (natural

fibers)

None that

haven’t already

been discussed

in previous

considerations

5 Fit

Limited

Collections

Customization

Sizing

Artisan

Co-design

Longevity

Aesthetic

Colors

User centric

Local

Quality

Production

processes

Material

sourcing (in

general)

Table 24: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic, Design and Other Slow Fashion Criteria Content

Analysis Frequencies

A. Functional Consideration

Functional f

Quality 3

Material sourcing 2

Longevity 1

Care 1

Investment 1

Classic 1

Multifunction 3

User Centered 1

Customization 1

End User 1

Co-design 1

Fit 2

Multiplicity 1

Efficient use of materials 1

Silhouette 1

Limited Collections 1

Table 24: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic, Design and Other Slow Fashion Criteria Content

Analysis Frequencies

B. Expressive Consideration

Sustainability 1

Consumer consciousness 1

Emotional 1

Care 1

Quality 1

Longevity 2

Co-design 2

Material sourcing, in general 1

Educate 1

End user 1

Expressive

Functional needs 1

Aesthetic needs 1

Social/Psychological needs 1

Investment 1

Dyes 1

Material sourcing (natural, eco, organic renewable) 1

Shape 1

Multiplicity 1

Handmade/Handcraft/Artisan/Tradition 1 Table 24 cont’d: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic,

Design and Other Slow Fashion Criteria

Content Analysis Frequencies C.

Aesthetic and Designer Considerations

Aesthetic f Designer f

Tactile quality 1 Material sourcing (in general) 2

Cost 1 Manufacturing 1

Color 3 End use/end user 2

Lines (clean, simple) 1 Longevity/Durability 3

Multiplicity 1 Care/launder/ Maintenance 4

Simple silhouette 1 Classis/Timeless 1

Durable/Longevity 2 Pattern perfecting 2

Freshness 1 Efficient use of materials 1

Local 1 Transparency 1

Classic 1 Product life cycle 1

Multifunction/Flexibility 2 Functional 1

Meet attributes of FEA model 1 Expressive 1

Thoughtful & integrated process 1 Aesthetic 1

Dyes 1 Quality 2

Texture 1 Comfort 1

Care/Launder/Maintenance 1 Silhouette 1

Comfort 1 Local 1

Emotional (need, attachment, durability, bond) 1 Production process 1

Efficient use of materials 1 Multifunction/Flexibility 1

Material sourcing (recycle, reuse, redesign) 1 Material sourcing (recycle

fabrics)

Educate 1 Longer life span/Extend life

span

Aesthetic 1 Materials sourcing (natural

fibers)

User Centric 1 Cradle-to-cradle thought

process

Material sourcing (natural, eco, organic, renewable) 1

Table 24 cont’d: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic, Design and Other Slow Fashion Criteria

Content Analysis Frequencies D.

Other Considerations

Other f Other f

Reasonality of sourcing 1 Product life cycle 1

Local 1 Not dependent on price 1

Material sourcing (in general) 3 Fair labor practices 1

Packaging 1 Co-Design/Co-Produce 1

Transparency 2 Design process used 1

Complete product life cycle 1

Interviewees were also asked about the considerations taken into account within the

individual apparel design process frameworks they use in developing creative scholarship. The

most prominent consideration taken into account, indicated by all interviewees, is that of material

wherein the interviewee expressed a concern and priority in the decision making process in

deciding the materials use. Table 25 provides the frequency analysis regard the considerations

the interviewees take into account.

Table 25: Framework Considerations

Material 5

Quality 2

Design 3

Production 3

End user 1

Emotional 1

To end the interview, participants were asked to think about the design processes they go

through as they create pieces in a professional, personal, or extracurricular manner. Often

designers never truly see the structured developmental process they repeat each time they design

a garment. After spending time thinking about the various minor details and aspects of design,

participants were prompted to provide a description the slow fashion design process.

The slow fashion process is less consumer driven and less market driven and is more

design driven. It is more of a conscious decision in sourcing. From the original designer

to the sourcing, to the manufacturer; that is what really drives the slow fashion design

Framework Considerations

process. As opposed to the traditional design process where it is about ‘what does the

consumer want’. When we teach design in education we teach ‘who is your target

market?’ When you look at student design you ask’ who are you designing this for?;

who is your target market?; who is the end customer?; what are they going to buy?; what

do they want?’. Versus slow design, which is more ‘what do we want as designers in

sustainability?’ And if they decide to choose the garment it is up to them.

(Participant 1)

I think you’d have to start with “ok here is your consumer…how do I get that 22 year old

to buy that garment and wear that garment for the next 10 years?’ I’d start there. Let’s not

start by thinking in terms of alternative fashion. Let’s think about the functional aspects

of that garment right off the bat. We want to design a garment (and of course we are

going to design ourselves right out of business) but we want to design clothing that

someone if going to wear for a long time, cherish for a long time, be proud of for a long

time. Then let’s look at how can we make it appear trend forward but also have

longevity in terms of its aesthetics. Then I think you’d have to encourage them to find

materials that they have done the fact checking on. Having them go through a process of

analyzing the supply chain. Or finding maybe instead of working from fabric to pattern

to finished garment, maybe you do your mood board with the parameters that I’ve

already set up and find clothing at Saver and you will reconstitute it as something that is

going to be that way. And then once they have a fabric that is a safe fabric then in the

design process you can set it up. You can say alright design something that is going to

waste as little fabric as possible. You’re going to get a better grade the les fabric you

waste. And maybe the sustainable thing to do is do everything on CAD. You make a

pattern, you make a marker and then you bring it to the dress from and you go from there.

IS it possible to avoid the muslin stage? Can you put the fashion fabric right on there and

do a fit to the dress form and have that be your final garment? Probably not for beginning

designers. But maybe that’s a goal. You know you can eliminate some of the fabric in

the development either the muslin or the fashion fabric used. One in the sample and one

in the final garment. And then you can do a postmortem; what worked, what didn’t

work, is it possible to create a garment that someone is going to wear for 10 years, is it

possible to find the fabric. It could be a two-semester project.

(Participant 2)

For me it starts with the end user so meeting with him or her. And either literally with

some of the work I do or figuratively, think about how it is for and really immersing

yourself. And really if you have the opportunity to [actually] talk to or meet with them.

Getting a sense of who they are, what the needs are. I’m going to go off of what I’ve

done with the kids. So thinking of them, once I’ve met with them, then creating a board

and once I have a sense of who they are, creating a board of inspiration [images].

Probably at that point I have thought of fabrics. But meeting with them, collecting data

from them.. The boards are more of a jumping off point for dialogue with them. And

based on the conversation, I take all that back with me and I start to, I’ve talked about

color, and other things I can test out like fabrics I would use. A color story and fabrics.

Try to meet with them again and show them what I’ve pulled together. From there starts

putting designs together. And some of that gets cycled back around. I start sketching

and design ideas with them in mind and get approval from them. When thinking about

the kids that I work with, one I’ve got the basic comfort and function and I know the

functional needs that have to go in to it, I combine the expressive and aesthetic together

to find what makes them happy. What are the qualities and characteristics that the

garment need to have for them to want to wear it, for them to be happy to wear it, to be

excited to get to wear it. Especially since I work with kids with disabilities I want them

to be motivated to wear something that usually they’d be stigmatized for or have a

concern for being stigmatized for. And now the patternmaking, incorporating all of that

into the garment designs and patterns. Do they reflect all of that? With longevity in mind

and the product lasting as long as they are the same size. And the techniques that I know.

In all of those things and all of those processes, I also try to keep educating myself with

‘Ok what’s the best way I can do this?’ ‘What are the newest things that maybe I don’t

know about?’ ‘What are the best materials that maybe I don’t know about that can give

them the right product and the right attributes for them to perform the way it needs to

perform, feel the way it needs to feel, to look the way it needs to look and to last a long

time?’ so that at the end of the day the garment has had everything thought about and

everything has been considered. There’s a huge amount of buy in for me and a huge

amount of buy in for them and we’ve created something really special.

(Participant 3)

…The only difference than a conventional design process it that you have to spend more

time in the planning aspect. If for example you are doing zero waste, you are going to

have to spend more time planning in the patternmaking process and the sewing, testing

out the pattern that you’re using so that you are maximizing all your fabric. I think that is

the main different for a conventional design process where you ideate, plan, and produce.

And in SF you just have to plan a lot more. And then for production you make sure that

it is fair trade, locally produced, and well made.

(Participant 4)

I guess it is a lot of attention to the materials being used and choosing the specific process

that is going to be used. Thinking about if you are using yarns from a local farm Taking

into consideration the unique features that you are using to create the garment but also

thinking about why those features are significant. One of my main motivations in

creating my garment was based on the inspiration of the house that my father built for us.

Talking to people about the connection between inspiration and personal experience.

Thinking about the story and how you can tell people things that they might not

necessary know just by looking at it and being able to tell them the story. Really

knowing about the process and creating something from it.

(Participant 5)

In the process of creative scholarship, the use of distinct processes by professional

designers provides a guideline for the execution of a diversified range of garments. Depending

on the focus and main intent of the designer, these processes give way to specific overall

considerations important in guiding the design processes. Rooted in those considerations are

specific design criteria that establish priorities and details in what is incorporated and

emphasized in the development of said garment. In the general development of any specific

apparel design models and frameworks, the establishment of set considerations and guiding

design criteria are vital to the creation and proper execution of a garment with a set purpose and

end user in mind.

CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSION

The purpose of this research was to develop a conceptual slow fashion apparel design

process, consisting of a design process model and design framework adapted from an established

design process model and design framework developed by Lamb and Kallal (1992).

Consideration categories and design criteria for each consideration were developed through the

content analysis of slow design and slow fashion literature. These consideration categories and

their corresponding design criteria were used to develop a design process model and design

framework representative of a slow fashion apparel design process. Textile, apparel design, and

merchandising professionals, who are members of the International Apparel Association (ITAA)

and versed in areas of sustainability, evaluated the consideration categories and correlating

design criteria for the slow fashion apparel design process model and slow fashion apparel

design framework that was established. The evaluation process consisted of a survey and

interview portion. A total of 71 participants answered survey questions regarding the use and

implementation of design criteria with in specific consideration categories in addition to

answering demographic questions. Apparel design professionals with experience in creative

scholarship were asked to volunteer for a follow-up interview to seek further information

regarding their design processes and applications to slow fashion. Of the 71 participants, 36 had

experience in conducting and submitting creative scholarship. A total of seven participants with

creative scholarship expertise volunteered but only five were able to be interviewed. This

chapter provides the findings from the final evaluation process that involved the interviews of

those five participants from the purposive sample and conclusions that include the final slow

fashion apparel design process model and framework derived from this study. The implications

derived from this study are also presented along with limitations and possible future research.

Major Findings and Conclusions

The final step in this research study was to finalize the development of the Slow Fashion

Apparel Design Process model and its corresponding Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process

Framework. The results of the content analysis from the interviews contributed to this final

research dimension. Themology that arose from the interviews provided additional support as

well as modifications to the Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process model and framework. Based

on the analysis of information from the survey as well as the interviews, several conclusions

were made. With regard to the Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process model, it was revealed that

there are several criteria that were supported within each consideration category (functional,

expressive, aesthetic, designer, and other). The basis of this support is rooted in the survey

agreement of its use or implementation within the consideration category, the voluntary

categorization of the criteria within the consideration also from the survey, and the revelation of

the criteria in the analysis of the interview data. In other words, if a criteria received support

from the agreement portion of the survey, was placed in the consideration through the voluntary

categorization portion of the survey, and was also revealed in the interview data, then it is

concluded that the criteria is necessary and labeled as required within that particular

consideration category. Several criteria within the various consideration categories are

concluded as highly recommended due to the agreement of their use and implementation found

in the survey agreement results and inclusion in the interview results. Recommendation for

criteria is given if it was found to be included in the results from the voluntary categorization and

the interviews. Inclusion in the data from the interview results was necessary in order to be

included as a required, highly recommended, or recommended criteria as the interviews provided

additional support to the survey results. The expertise of the interviewees and their involvement

in creative scholarship is vital to the understanding of criteria inclusion in the actual design

processes. Table 26 provides the criteria within each consideration and their required, highly

recommended, or recommended designation.

In the functional consideration, the most prominent and supported criteria were quality,

durability/longevity, care/launder/maintenance, and multifunction/flexibility. These four criteria

not only received substantial confirmation in their use and implementation within the functional

consideration in the survey but also in the interviews conducted. Within the parameters of

expressive consideration, the only criteria supported for this category was psychological need. It

was noted that four criteria can be recommendation for use in expressive considerations. These

four recommended criteria for expressive considerations are: investment, educate, material

sourcing in general, and co-design/co-produce. Under aesthetic considerations, aesthetic,

silhouette, classic/timeless and color are highly recommended criteria to be used and

implemented within this consideration. Designer considerations was revealed to only include

highly recommended and recommended criteria. Other revealed packaging as required design

criteria with transparency as highly recommended, and local as recommended. Table 26

provides the listing of required, highly recommended, and recommended criteria within their

corresponding consideration categories.

Table 26: Final Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model A.

Required Design Criteria

Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other

Required Quality

Longevity

Care

Multifunction

Psychological

need

Aesthetics

Silhouette

Classic

Color

Packaging

Table 26: Final Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model B.

Highly Recommended and Recommended Design Criteria

Functional Expressive Aesthetic Designer Other

Highly

Recommended

Local Transparency

Efficient use

of materials

Extend life

span/cycle

Transparency

Recommended Emotional Local

Material

sourcing

(recycle,

reuse,

redesign)

Material

sourcing

(natural, eco,

organic,

renewable)

Local

This research also sought to determine what stages of the Lamb & Kallal FEA apparel

design framework, if any, are most important to the creation of slow fashion apparel. The

interview results provided insight as to the specific areas of consideration that are most important

in the apparel design process of creative scholarship when pertaining to slow fashion. Due to the

fact that creative scholarship is rooted in apparel design theory, the processes used to create

apparel for the purpose of creative scholarship are far more rigorous and documented than those

employed outside of the arena. The reason for this is the use of documented, scholarly

procedures in the creation of this type of academic scholarship. As with scientific studies, the

development of creative scholarship requires the implementation of methodology that can be

repeated by other scholars (Adams & Meyers, 2011; Kotsiopulos & Birdsong, 2000; Black &

Cloud, 2009). Creative scholarship would include design research wherein the scholar provides

an “analysis or synthesis component based on an inquiry” (Bye, 2010, p. 6). An example of this

is the application Lamb & Kallal (1992) used when developing their FEA model. The intent of

their research was to use the model to develop clothing for users with special needs. Those

garments, if distributed to peer-review competitions, include a structured, documented process

by which the scholars developed the creative scholarship piece based on the inquiry of how to

develop a special needs garment that incorporates function, expressive, and aesthetic

considerations. Thus, the information regarding design process considerations used by design

professionals versed in creative scholarship is vital to the development of a conceptual Slow

Fashion Apparel Design Process framework.

Results from the interview data revealed four main consideration categories vital in the

creation of slow fashion. The most important consideration, agreed upon by all interviewees, is

that of material. The other three consideration categories are quality, design, and production.

From the survey results regarding the agreement of the use and implementation of criteria within

the consideration categories for the slow fashion apparel design framework, no criteria in the

production, evaluation, and implementation consideration categories were supported. The

implication of this result could indicate the lack of importance of those considerations when

looking strictly at the apparel design aspect of developing slow fashion apparel. Subsequently, in

the voluntary categorization portion of the survey instrument, participants did indicate there were

other criteria not previously noted in the production, evaluation, and implementation

considerations.

While no definitive conclusions can be made regarding the criteria within these

considerations, it is concluded that the insufficient support for the evaluation and implementation

consideration categories indicates there inclusion in the design framework is not a prominent

factor when dealing with the development and design of slow fashion apparel. For this reason,

only the material, quality, production, and design consideration categories are the most important

considerations to be taken into account when designing slow fashion apparel. Data from the

interviews revealed the criteria interviewees used with each consideration when developing

creative scholarship. Table 27 provides the frequencies of these criteria for category.

Table 27: Interviewee Criteria for Consideration Categories in Slow Fashion Apparel Design

Framework

A. Material and Quality Considerations

Material f Quality f

Material sourcing (in general) 4 Quality 3

Supply chain analysis 2 Material sourcing 2

Longevity/Durability 3 Durability/Longevity 1

Efficient use of materials 2 Multifunction 3

Technology 3 Extend life span/cycle 1

Care 2 Fit 2

Emotional 2 Efficient use of materials 1

Co-design/Co-produce 1

Waste 2

Table 27 cont’d: Interviewee Criteria for Consideration Categories in Slow Fashion Apparel

Design Framework

C. Production and Design Considerations

Production f Design f

Quality 3 Design 1

Material sourcing 2 Material sourcing 2

Technology 2 Durability/Longevity 1

Customization 1 Technology 2

End User 1 Investment 1

Co-design 1 Classic 1

Efficient use of materials 1 Multifunction/Flexibility 3

User Centered 1

Customization 1

End User 1

Co-design 1

Educate 1

Fit 2

Multiplicity 1

Aesthetic 1

Silhouette 1

Limited Collections 1

Criteria was placed as a required, highly recommended, or recommended within each

consideration category based on the same principles as the suggestions made for the final design

criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model in Table 27.Table 28 shows these

considerations along with the criteria supported for each category. There were only required and

recommended criteria for the Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework.

Table 28: Final Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework

Material Quality Production Design

Required Efficient use of

materials

Material

sourcing

(recycle, reuse,

redesign)

Material

Sourcing (eco,

natural,

renewable)

Care/Lauder/

Maintenance

Quality

Longevity/

Durability

Aesthetics

Recommended Extend life

span/cycle

Technology

Transparency

Local

Eco-Efficiency

Customization

Co-Design/

CoProduce

Classic/

Timeless

In solidifying the consideration categories and corresponding design criteria for each

through the analysis of survey and interview data, the final model for this slow fashion design

process is formulated. In the use of Lamb & Kallal’s FEA model, it was discovered that the slow

fashion movement creates additional dimension to the FEA user needs model. A Slow Fashion

Design Considerations Model, adapted to the FEA model was created to better address the

considerations and categories associated with slow fashion. Figure 3 depicts this adapted model

first presented in chapter four. The outcome of the data collected support the retention of all five

considerations within the model. Additionally, the interview analysis revealed the importance of

maintaining the end user, or target customer, as the main focus during the process of developing

slow fashion apparel.

Figure 5: Final Slow Fashion Apparel Design Considerations Model

[as adapted from Lamb & Kallal’s FEA Model (1992)]

Note: no changes were necessary from the original Figure 3 presented earlier in this research

Conversely, the outcome of the survey and interview results revealed the lack of support

for two of the stages adapted from Lamb & Kallal’s Design Framework. This lack of support

could imply the decreased importance of these stages when strictly dealing with design aspects of

developing slow fashion apparel. Figure 6 depicts the adaptation of Lamb and Kallal’s design

framework to the creation of slow fashion apparel. The stages found to lack support in this study

are differentiated in color.

Figure 6: Lamb & Kallal’s (1992) FEA Model Design Process Incorporated for Slow Fashion

Apparel Design Framework

In the development of this current study, three research questions were posed, framing the

study. The first research question, “Can a comprehensive literature review of slow fashion

design process reveal the components of the slow fashion design process?” was answered with

the results of the content analysis. A total of 62 publications and pieces of literature on slow

design and slow fashion revealed 38 themes related to the apparel design process. These 38

themes were incorporated in Lamb & Kallal’s (1992) FEA model in order to establish a

conceptual slow fashion apparel design model and framework and thus answer the second

research question “Can slow fashion design components be incorporated into Lamb and Kallal’s

(1992) apparel design framework for application of slow fashion during the design process?”.

The initial distribution of considerations and design criteria for the conceptual model and

framework revealed the need for modifications to the pre-existing model developed by Lamb &

Kallal. This was then tested for support in the use and implementation of the considerations and

design criteria of both the model and framework. In doing so, the third and final research

question “Will apparel design and/or merchandising educator members of the International

Textiles & Apparel Association (ITAA) validate the conceptualized slow fashion design process

as is, or with suggested modifications?” was answered. The developed model and framework

were tested for support in use and implementation by textiles, apparel design, and merchandising

professionals who are members of ITAA through a survey and interview process. After the

analysis of survey and interview results, the initial model was modified to reveal the final

conceptual slow fashion apparel design process model and framework. Ultimately, the three

research questions posed for this current study were answered affirmatively and supported by the

creation of a slow fashion apparel design process model and framework.

Implications

While the implementation of a slow fashion apparel design process is conceptually

feasible, there are still many factors that can affect the reception of slow fashion garments and

the slow fashion movement in the retail market. As Participant 1 indicated in their interview,

One of the biggest challenges that (slow fashion) is facing is the marketing, from the

consumer standpoint to know what slow fashion is and how it works. And I think that

they understand extremely well from a food perspective. A lot of people know the terms

‘farm to table’ they know ‘slow food’ and buying local for produce and things like that.

But I don’t think they understand the same concepts for fashion because they have this

perception of ‘well fashion is all made overseas and shipped here’. And so I think there

is a big challenge with slow fashion of changing consumer mindset. That without that

shift and without that change, then slow fashion is going to be something that may catch

on to a very niche market but it will never be something that is widespread without an

overall consumer mindset change.

Slow fashion apparel can be designed and produced with the utmost care and attention to

maintain the standards and principles of the slow fashion movement. But without the consumer

interest in purchasing these well-crafted garments, the movement may never get off the ground.

For this reason, as with the effort to increase sustainable awareness, increasing slow fashion

awareness and its benefits is a cause that must be taken on by each factor within the fashion

process. Therefore, it implies a unified effort by players at various levels if the fashion process

to collaborate in disseminating the information regarding this movement within the parameters of

the sustainability agenda. A possible first step could be taken at the academic level. The more

information and emphasis placed on this sustainable option in the classroom, the increased

possibilities of awareness within the fashion industry as those student become professionals.

Limitations

In research, limitations can arise that pose unique circumstances in the research processes.

While not invalidating, they add additional dimensions that can warrant further research. One

such situation concerns the removal of the evaluation and implementation considerations. Both

considerations where derived and adapted to the last two stages of Lamb &

Kallal’s 1992 design framework. The intent of this study was to seek out a conceptual design

model and framework that can be applied to the creation of slow fashion apparel. A possible

limitation for the lack of support for these considerations, and their corresponding design stages,

within the slow fashion design process could be attributed to the limitation of the type of

designers within the participant pool. While the participant pool was selected for their

professional experience and expertise, it is unknown as to the driving force behind their design

process. Designers often develop their creative scholarship based on functional or creative

design. The minimized prioritization on the part of designers for evaluation and implementation

could be due the variation in the type of designer the participants categorize themselves as. This

outcome warrants further investigation which could include conducting research on investigating

the prioritization the stages of the design process by designers based on functional and creative

design aspects.

The population was derived from a purposive sample of textiles, apparel design, and

merchandising professionals who are members of ITAA which is a very unique population. The

surveys and interviews were conducted during the summer months, which are traditionally

vacation time for the majority of this population group. Most participants in this sample pool

work in academic settings at universities and have contract stipulating their work year as a nine

month schedule ranging from August or September to May or June versus as twelve month

calendar. During the summer months, universities have minimal faculty and staff working

during those months. Therefore, the information provided in this study could be limited due to

the fact that this population group might not be available during the timeframe of the survey

dissemination. Additionally, the length of the survey could have posed another limitation to this

research study as it was indicated via the Qualtrics output that a total of 126 surveys were started

but only 71 were completed resulting in a 56% completion rate. The length of the survey, in

conjunction with the time of year during which many ITAA professionals are on vacation or

outside of the academic setting, could have contributed to the high rate of incomplete surveys.

Another limitation for this study is the user interface provided by Qualtrics. For the survey

questions wherein participants had to place terms relating to fashion design elements into boxes

provided, there was some difficulty in scrolling through the page while simultaneously

maintaining the term clicked in order to drop it into the grouping of choice. This interface issue

could have limited participants from selecting certain categories and thus, selecting alternate

choices that were not their primary selections. An effort to counter this interface issue was

implemented. After participants completed this portion of the survey, they were given an

opportunity to input any considerations and/or design criteria they felt was missing or wished to

expand further. The intent of this survey portion was to allow participants the opportunity to

submit any information they were unable to do in the previous section due to interface issues.

Lastly, an additional limitation in this research study was the lack of reaching saturation in

the interviews. In qualitative research, data is collected until the researcher meets a point of data

saturation. Saturation is a tool used for ensuring that adequate and quality data are collected to

support the study. Data saturation occurs when a researcher is no longer hearing or seeing new

information. Within the interviews conducted for this study, new information was occurring in

the last interview. Further research and studies may need to be conducted to seek saturation.

Future Research

In academia and research, the intent is to further the body of scholarly knowledge through

conducting studies and disseminating the results to the public. To do so, researchers must

develop studies to learn more about the subject matter within their disciplines. In conducting a

research study, the identification of future research can be found through the conclusions,

implications, and limitations in a study. One such example can be found in the limitations of this

research study. Future research can be conducted to learn more about how designers’ prioritize

and emphasize certain stages of the design process when differentiating between functional and

creative design. In relation to slow fashion, the priorities and emphasis designers place on

specific stages in the apparel design process could be the reason for why certain considerations

and design criteria were selected. While this current study only established the conceptual design

model, future research could answer the reasons for why the model excluded certain

considerations.

Another future research study is a continuation of this current study with regard to the

application of the conceptual model. While the research has established and sought validation

for the considerations and criteria involved in a slow fashion apparel design process, the process

is still conceptual. To seek out the accuracy of this specialized design process, future research

can be conducted to apply and implement the conceptual design model and process with the

intent of creating a slow fashion apparel collection. As with all scholarly knowledge, research is

not linear. Results from the collection development could lead to additional research dimensions

for the conceptual model and design process. That would require revisiting the proposed

conceptual model and design process to seek further information on the considerations and

criteria involved in the design process. The benefits of the findings in future research could

provide definitive measures to guide not only slow fashion design but also other sustainable

efforts. These efforts could include the creation of standardized criteria to assist in the

certification of slow fashion and sustainable apparel goods. This certification could be handled

by governmental, fashion industry, or other parties interested in furthering the sustainable

processes of the apparel industry.

Research within the discipline of textiles, apparel design, and merchandising has

supported the importance of knowledge on the intent of certain consumer behaviors. The same

can be correlated to slow fashion.

You know with slow food and organic people had to educate themselves about that. And

have advocate for slow food movements through blogs and social media and newsletter

and we need the same corollary in the textile and apparel industry so then you can take

consumer or key consumers that can then become advocates for slow fashion.

(Participant 4)

And when you think about the aesthetics of the slow food, it is very simple ingredients, it

is a small amount of ingredients, but it is also very fresh. So I think that with the slow

fashion you kind of have that freshness in mind when you purchase that original garment

from a consumer’s perspective that yes this cotton just came from down the street, it was

milled and it was made here, it was made with this and we take our time to create

something of high quality.

(Participant 1)

As these participants indicated, the consumer’s lack of knowledge or correlation to pre-existing

slow movements can impede the connection in understanding and consumption of slow fashion.

In order to determine the support for consuming slow fashion apparel, future research must be

done to seek out information on how to educate consumers and increase public knowledge

regarding slow fashion. Additionally, interview participants indicated the importance of

marketing the slow fashion movement. Research founded in consumer’s knowledge could reveal

information regarding consumer behavior that can support the creation of advocacy for and

consumer consumption of slow fashion apparel.

Future of the Slow Fashion Movement

Just as with any other concept of sustainability, educating the public and raising awareness

are key to increasing support for environmental consciousness and the efforts to decreasing the

negative impact on the environment caused by various industries. With slow fashion, the

movement behind it is a novel if not entirely foreign idea to most within the industry and

academic arenas. With the lack of informed advocacy agents, the effort to disseminate

information can be thwarted simply due to the lack of numbers. In academia, educators are at the

forefront in providing student information and skill sets to enable their success as industry

professionals. Subsequently, information and skills students gain while in the educational setting

provides the opportunity for dissemination into industry.

I think in general you need to raise awareness. I think you have niche designers for

students that know what slow fashion is and how it is different from conventional

[design].…[G]ive them a project where they actually have to produce something using a

slow fashion process like zero-waste,[or] high quality seam finishes and have them

realize how long it takes to do that. And then get them to think about the work that goes

into that product. So that when they do to design, they think about implementing some of

these slow fashion elements but it is going to jack up the price. But get them to learn

about it before the go out into the industry or start their own company so they can start to

implement some changes [in their designs]. And then also as potential consumers they

will then start to know what to look for and to advocate for slow fashion. And the flip

side is then educating the consumer on a market level about sustainability concerns with

them and the textile and apparel industry and how some of those can be answered with

slow fashion.

(Participant 4)

In dealing with the fashion industry, students acquire their knowledge on fashion and the

industry from the classroom. Techniques, subjects matter, and other educational elements

become ingrained in their minds. If a student learns about a sustainable practice in the classroom

and is given the opportunity to experiment with it, it provides them with first-hand knowledge on

the subject. One example is that of a reusable bag project one of the interview participants was

privy to during her undergraduate education. Her participation and the knowledge she gained

from the results of the research project influenced and motivated her to continue with studying

sustainability issues into her master and now doctorate education. Similarly, the knowledge

students acquire regarding sustainability, and more importantly the slow fashion movement, can

then impact the fashion industry itself from within as these student become professionals and

transfer what they learn in the classroom into action in the workplace.

Sustainability is a topic that has textiles, apparel design, and merchandising academic

professionals seeking answers to counter the negative impacts of the fashion industry. Within

the topic of sustainability, the slow fashion movement has begun to take shape as a possible

solution to make questions regarding ways in which the fashion industry can become more

environmentally responsible. Yet, although the slow fashion movement is still in stages of

infancy, research such as the current study are drawing the attention of those unversed with the

movement while also assisting dialogue within sustainability. Feedback from the survey and

interviews included interest in the direction of the research and participants’ interest in being

updated as future research is developed providing support for continued sustainable dialogue

with regard to slow fashion.

Slow Fashion Developing a Conceptual Apparel Design Process

Students also viewed