Green Practices among Fashion Manufacturers: Relationship with Cultural Innovativeness and Perceived Benefits
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Green Innovations
2.2. Company’s Cultural Innovativeness
2.3. Perceived Benefits
3. Methods
4. Results
4.1. Qualitative Data Results
4.1.1. Green Practices of Fashion Manufacturers
Controlling Inputs
“(…) organic cotton fabric dyed by GOTS standards or undyed hemp, silk and wool fabric (all nature) recycled fabrics tags printed on recycled paper.”(Id 2)
“We offer 100% certified organic cotton apparel that is made with wind power (…). We use earth friendly PVC free inks on our tees which reduce the toxic substances in products.”(Id 32)
“All products are made from SBP® sustainable biodegradable resource.”(Id 34)
“We make handbags and accessories of natural fiber materials. We need to do a better job of using renewable energy resources and using more sustainable materials in packaging.”(Id 50)
“Digital dyeing using water based GOTS 2.0 certified fabric dyes on sustainable fabrics—hemp, bamboo, organic cotton and linen.”(Id 56)
“We will be having an Earth Day product offering... We are projecting three tiers for future sustainable design and are getting ready to grow our sustainability efforts. Tier 1 includes organically grown fibers locally. Tier 2 includes organically grown and organically processed in the mill. The third tier includes organically grown and organically processed at mill and vendor level, shipping, handling, packaging, and end of product lifecycle considerations.”(Id 18)
“Some transportation efficiencies, energy efficiencies in stores (…)”(Id 46)
“(…) reduced packaging materials (…)”(Id 47)
Controlling Outputs
“Strictly in environmentally separation of trash, (…) Recycling when possible.”(Id 7)
“We recycle approx. 90% of all waste produced during the manufacturing of our garments. We have an apparel recycling program which gives the end user 25% back for recycling.”(Id 33)
“(…) if we have to print, we use at least 50% post consumer recycled paper.”(Id 43)
Integrating Environmental Technology
“Sewing by treadle machine (no electricity).”(Id 2)
“Efficient machinery.”(Id 15)
“Biomass to replace fuel oil, energy efficiency project (LED lights, etc) (…)”(Id 44)
“Renewable energy (…)”(Id 52)
Integrating Green Principles into Business Management Models
“Every decision we make is informed by the sustainability principles.”(Id 21)
“(…) social responsibility is practices throughout all manufacturing and transportation levels.”(Id 34)
“(…) waste management system, life cycle analysis, environmental policy, environmental management system, (…)”(Id 44)
4.1.2. Reasons for Practicing Green Innovations
Being Socially Responsible
“For our environment and earth.”(Id 12)
“All companies should adopt as many green innovations as possible, as quickly as they can afford to—for the sake of our planet (…)”(Id 17)
“Because we are social, ecological beings.”(Id 21)
“Because I love the planet we live on.”(Id 32)
“(…) preserve biodiversity and natural lands.”(Id 44)
“[to do] your part for a cleaner world”.(Id 47)
“(…) employees’ health issues.”(Id 7)
“I believe it is very important to reduce our impact on the earth so it will continue to be inhabitable and healthy for future generations of all forms of life.”(Id 2)
“For our future generations.”(Id 33)
“(…) being Eco friendly is just one part of being socially responsible.”(Id 43)
Gaining Competitive Advantage
“It’s important because innovation is a way to stay ahead of the competition. Green innovation helps one’s customers to see that the company cares about the future of the environment.”(Id 18)
“Applying green innovations could improve the brand image and consumers’ positive attitude toward the brand.”(Id 40)
“(…) Eventually, it will become more expensive to have harmful products and practices, so we need to get ahead of it.”(Id 46)
Reflecting Social Trends
“Green innovation is not a unique movement. It is a trend today. Based on everyone’s effort in our society, we have to pursue and apply that concept to our manufacturing for the sustainability.”(Id 26)
“The world is in a major shift to green practices…”(Id 46)
“There is no other option.... And to be taken seriously as an ethical company you have to walk the talk, and help take what’s existing to the next level through innovation and action”(Id 58)
4.1.3. Reasons for Not Practicing Green Innovations
“The green industry is not regulated by any governmental body in Textile/Apparel industry…”(Id 7)
“I think price point is very prohibitive for my company. We sell garments from $4-60, so it’s difficult to get Fair Trade Certified or organic raw materials for the price point and make a profit. There is also perception that these materials would be more expensive and little research to prove whether or not they really are.”(Id 18)
“CEO only focus[es] on the amount of sales rather than brand image or green innovations.”(Id 40)
“We do not really think about green. It is time consuming and needs to put a lot of thought and energy into it.”(Id 57)
4.2. Quantiative Data Results
5. Discussion
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Albertini, Elisabeth. 2013. Does environmental management improve financial performance? A meta-analytical review. Organization and Environment 26: 431–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amores-Salvadó, Javier, Gregorio Martín-de Castro, and José E Navas-López. 2014. Green corporate image: Moderating the connection between environmental product innovation and firm performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 83: 356–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arrigo, Elisa. 2013. Corporate responsibility management in fast fashion companies: The Gap Inc. case. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 17: 175–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banerjee, Rajabrata, Kartick Gupta, and Ron McIver. 2019. What matters most to firm-level environmentally sustainable practices: Firm–specific or country–level factors? Journal of Cleaner Production 218: 225–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernauer, Thomas, Stephanie Engel, Daniel Kammerer, and Jazmin Sejas Nogareda. 2006. Explaining green innovation: Ten years after Porter’s win-win proposition: How to study the effects of regulation on corporate environmental innovation? Center for Comparative and International Studies 17: 1–17. [Google Scholar]
- Carrillo-Hermosilla, Javier, Pablo Río del González, and Totti Könnölä. 2009. What is eco-innovation? In Eco-Innovation. New York: Springer, pp. 6–27. [Google Scholar]
- Chatzidakis, Andreas, Sally Hibbert, Darryn Mittusis, and Andrew Smith. 2004. Virtue in consumption? Journal of Marketing Management 20: 526–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Yu-Shan, Shyh-Bao Lai, and Chao-Tung Wen. 2006. The influence of green innovation performance on corporate advantage in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics 67: 331–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Lujie, Xiande Zhao, Ou Tang, Lydia Price, Shanshan Zhang, and Wenwen Zhu. 2017. Supply chain collaboration for sustainability: A literature review and future research agenda. International Journal of Production Economics 194: 73–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faucheux, Sylvie, and Isabelle Nicolai. 1998. Environmental technological change and governance in sustainable development policy. Ecological Economics 27: 243–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foster, Chris, and Ken Green. 2000. Greening the innovation process. Business Strategy and the Environment 9: 287–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ha-Brookshire, Jung E., and Pamela S. Norum. 2011. Willingness to pay for socially responsible products: Case of cotton apparel. Journal of Consumer Marketing 28: 344–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hart, Stuart L. 1995. A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review 20: 986–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hemmelskamp, Jens. 1997. Environmental policy instruments and their effects on innovation. European Planning Studies 5: 177–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henriques, Irene, and Perry Sadorsky. 1996. The determinants of an environmentally responsive firm: An empirical approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30: 381–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hurley, Robert F., and Tomas M. Hult. 1998. Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: An integration and empirical examination. The Journal of Marketing 62: 42–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnstone, Micael-Lee, and Lay Peng Tan. 2015. Exploring the gap between consumers’ green rhetoric and purchasing behaviour. Journal of Business Ethics 132: 311–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kemp, René. 1997. Environmental Policy and Technical Change. Cheltenham and Brookfield: Edward Elgar Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Kemp, Rene. 2008. Measuring Eco-Innovation. Maastricht: United Nations University. [Google Scholar]
- Market Watch. 2019. Fashion Industry Moving to Improve Sustainability Footprint. Available online: https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/fashion-industry-moving-to-improve-sustainability-footprint-2019-02-14 (accessed on 15 February 2019).
- McDonough, William, and Michael Braungart. 2002. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. New York: North Point Press. [Google Scholar]
- McFarlan, Franklin Warren. 1981. Portfolio approach to information-systems. Harvard Business Review 59: 142–50. [Google Scholar]
- McPherson, Susan. 2018. 8 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Trends To Look For In 2018. Available online: https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanmcpherson/2018/01/12/8-corporate-social-responsibility-csr-trends-to-look-for-in-2018/#313aa0ab40ce (accessed on 15 February 2019).
- McWilliams, Abagail, and Donald Siegel. 2001. Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review 26: 117–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murphy, Joseph, and Andrew Gouldson. 2000. Environmental policy and industrial innovation: Integrating environment and economy through ecological modernisation. Geoforum 31: 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Newman, Rocky W., and Mark D. Hanna. 1996. An empirical exploration of the relationship between manufacturing strategy and environmental management: Two complementary models. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 16: 148–65. [Google Scholar]
- Nidumolu, Ram, Coimbatore K. Prahalad, and Madhavan R. Rangaswami. 2009. Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation. Harvard Business Review 87: 56–64. [Google Scholar]
- Noci, Giuliano, and Roberto Verganti. 1999. Managing ‘green’ product innovation in small firms. R&D Management 29: 3–15. [Google Scholar]
- Oltra, Vanessa, and Maïder Saint Jean. 2009. Sectoral systems of environmental innovation: An application to the French automotive industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 76: 567–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peattie, Ken, and Martin Charter. 2003. Green marketing. In The Marketing Book, 5th ed. Edited by Baker J. Michael. Woburn: Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 726–55. [Google Scholar]
- Perry, Anna, and Telin Chung. 2016. Understand attitude-behavior gaps and benefit-behavior connections in Eco-Apparel. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 20: 105–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pickett-Baker, Josephine, and Ritsuko Ozaki. 2008. Pro-environmental products: Marketing influence on consumer purchase decision. Journal of Consumer Marketing 25: 281–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Porter, Michael, and Claas van der Linde. 1995. Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review 33: 120–34. [Google Scholar]
- Rennings, Klaus. 2000. Redefining innovation—Eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics. Ecological Eonomics 32: 319–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roberts, James A. 1995. Profiling levels of socially responsible consumer behavior: A cluster analytic approach and its implications for marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 3: 97–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogers, Everett M. 2003. The Diffusion of Innovation, 5th ed. New York: Free Press. [Google Scholar]
- Rusinko, Cathy A. 2007. Green manufacturing: An evaluation of environmentally sustainable manufacturing practices and their impact on competitive outcomes. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 54: 445–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, Sanjay, and Harrie Vredenburg. 1998. Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal 19: 729–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheehy, Benedict. 2015. Defining CSR: Problems and solutions. Journal of Business Ethics 131: 625–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrivastava, Paul. 1995. Environmental technologies and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal 16: 183–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strong, Carolyn. 1996. Features contributing to the growth of ethical consumerism—A preliminary investigation. Marketing Intelligence and Planning 14: 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sullivan, Lisa M., and Ralph B. D’Agostino. 2003. Robustness and power of analysis of covariance applied to ordinal scaled data as arising in randomized controlled trials. Statistics in Medicine 22: 1317–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2018. Available online: https://www.bls.gov (accessed on 15 February 2019).
- Van Wassenhove, Luk, and Charles Corbett. 1991. How Green is Your Manufacturing Strategy?: Exploring the Impact of Environmental Issues on Manufacturing Strategy. Paris: INSEAD. [Google Scholar]
1 | Oeko-tex is a certificated label issued when components of a product satisfy the requirements of the criteria catalogue from Oeko-Tex® standard 100 created by the International Oeko-Tex® Association, a group of 15 textile research and test institutes in Europe and Japan. |
2 | Sustainable Biodegradable Products (SBP) is a label for biodegradable products that informs the customer about how the products are made, from the raw materials used to the labor conditions involved, created by the SBP® Project Team at EnviroTextiles LLC, a developer of hemp and hemp blend textiles. |
Variable | N | % |
---|---|---|
Job Title | ||
Owner/President/Vice president | 13 | 44.83% |
Designer | 8 | 27.59% |
Manager | 4 | 13.79% |
CSR Specialist | 1 | 3.45% |
Accountant | 1 | 3.45% |
Merchandiser | 1 | 3.45% |
Production | 1 | 3.45% |
Total | 29 | 100.00% |
Country | ||
USA | 18 | 62.07% |
Canada | 5 | 17.24% |
Korea | 5 | 17.24% |
Sweden | 1 | 3.45% |
Total | 29 | 100.00% |
Constructs | Items | Cronbach’s Alphas |
---|---|---|
Green product innovation | In product development or design, my company chooses product materials that produce the least amount of pollution. | 0.95 |
(Chen et al. 2006) | In product development or design, my company chooses product materials that consume the least amount of energy and resources. | |
In product development or design, my company uses the fewest amount of materials to comprise the product. | ||
In product development or design, my company would consider whether the product is easy to recycle, reuse, and decompose. | ||
Green process innovation (Chen et al. 2006) | The manufacturing process of my company reduces the emission of dangerous waste or substances. The manufacturing process of my company recycles reusable waste and emission. The manufacturing process of my company reduces the consumption of water, electricity, coal, or oil. The manufacturing process of my company reduces the use of raw materials. | 0.89 |
Cooperate cultural innovativeness (Hurley and Hult 1998) | Management seeks innovative ideas. Innovation is accepted in programs/projects. Technical innovation is accepted. | 0.78 |
Perceived benefits of adopting green innovation (McFarlan 1981) | In the fashion industry, green innovation can be used to generate new products. In the fashion industry, green innovation can change the basis of competition. In the fashion industry, green innovation can change the balance of power in business relationships. | 0.71 |
Cluster 1: High Level of Green Innovations (n = 18) | Cluster 2: Low Level of Green Innovations (n = 11) | t(27) | |
---|---|---|---|
Green product innovations | 4.76 (0.38) | 2.02 (0.87) | 11.78 *** |
Green process innovations | 4.64 (0.51) | 2.66 (0.81) | 8.13 *** |
Cultural innovativeness | 4.63 (0.64) | 3.85 (0.86) | 2.81 ** |
Perceived benefits of adopting green innovations | 4.31 (0.83) | 3.88 (0.90) | 1.33 |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. Green product innovation | 1.00 | |||
2. Green process innovation | 0.88 *** | 1.00 | ||
3. Cooperate cultural innovativeness | 0.63 *** | 0.54 ** | 1.00 | |
4. Perceived benefits of adopting green innovation | 0.13 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 1.00 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Choi, D.; Han, T.-I. Green Practices among Fashion Manufacturers: Relationship with Cultural Innovativeness and Perceived Benefits. Soc. Sci. 2019, 8, 138. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8050138
Choi D, Han T-I. Green Practices among Fashion Manufacturers: Relationship with Cultural Innovativeness and Perceived Benefits. Social Sciences. 2019; 8(5):138. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8050138
Chicago/Turabian StyleChoi, Dooyoung, and Tae-Im Han. 2019. "Green Practices among Fashion Manufacturers: Relationship with Cultural Innovativeness and Perceived Benefits" Social Sciences 8, no. 5: 138. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8050138