Enhancing Fast Fashion Brands Through Environmentally Sustainable Efforts
An explorative study on Generation Z’s perceptions towards circular economy initiatives and its impact on Customer-Based Brand Equity
Linnéa Blomberg Julia Furman
Business and Economics, master's level 2021
Luleå University of Technology
Department of Social Sciences, Technology and Arts
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This master thesis is the final part of our master’s degree in Business and Economics with specialization in Marketing at Luleå University of Technology. Therefore, we would like to express our gratitude to everyone who has been involved in the development of this study.
Firstly, a sincere thanks to our supervisor Jeandri Robertson who has provided us with truly valuable feedback and supported us throughout the process. Also, we would like to thank all the interviewees for taking their time and providing us with valuable input that enabled the creation of this thesis. Lastly, we thank our opponents and course members for their support and valuable advice to our report during the journey.
Luleå, 14 June 2021
Linnéa Blomberg Julia Furman
ABSTRACT
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to explore how environmentally sustainable efforts, in terms of circular economy (CE) initiatives, are affecting the customer-based brand equity (CBBE) of fast fashion brands. By considering the attitudes of Generation Z, fashion companies can build brands that respond to the environmental requirements of future decision-makers. Therefore, the following research questions are derived: What are Generation Z’s self-disclosed perceptions of fast fashion brands conducting circular economy initiatives? and How do the perceptions of Generation Z regarding circular economy initiatives impact the CBBE of fast fashion brands?
Method – This master thesis is an exploratory study with an inductive approach. In total, 12 qualitative interviews are conducted, consisting of consumers of fast fashion within Generation Z and currently living in Sweden. The interviews follow a semi-structured approach and in order to analyze the empirical findings, a thematic analysis was executed.
Findings – The main findings of this study consist of three overarching themes in terms of Generation Z’s perceptions towards fast fashion brands conducting CE initiatives and its impact on CBBE. The emerging perceptions describe different segments within Generation Z, which have been defined as Positive: Creates Value, Negative: Hypocritical, and Indifferent: Not relevant.
Moreover, the results show that a positive perception towards CE initiatives can strengthen the CBBE of fast fashion brands. In contrast, a negative perception causes a small impact on CBBE and may even weaken the brand, whereas an indifferent perception towards CE initiatives has no noticeable impact on the CBBE.
Theoretical and practical contributions – The study provides insights into Generation Z's different perceptions regarding CE initiatives and how macro-environmental factors can impact the brand equity of fast fashion brands, and consumer perception of these brands. The main findings can assist brand managers to address the different consumer segments and their needs by successfully implementing sustainability activities into business operations of fast fashion brands.
Keywords – Circular Economy; Brand Equity; CBBE model; Fast Fashion; Generation Z
SAMMANFATTNING
Syfte – Syftet med studien är att utforska hur ekologiskt hållbara insatser i form av cirkulära initiativ påverkar kundbaserat varumärkeskapital av fast fashion varumärken. Genom att beakta Generation Zs attityder kan företag bygga varumärken som svarar på de framtida beslutsfattarnas hållbarhetskrav. Forskningsfrågorna är därför följande: Vad är Generation Zs självupplevda uppfattning av fast fashion varumärken som utför cirkulära initiativ? samt Hur påverkar Generation Zs uppfattning om cirkulär ekonomi fast fashion varumärkens kundbaserade varumärkeskapital?
Metod – Denna uppsats är en utforskande studie med en induktiv forskningsansats. Totalt har 12 intervjuer genomförts där respondenterna består av konsumenter av fast fashion som tillhör Generation Z och bor i Sverige. Semistrukturerade intervjuer genomfördes och den insamlande data undersöktes genom en tematisk analys.
Resultat – De viktigaste resultaten består av tre huvudteman i form av uppfattningar och dess inverkan på kundbaserat varumärkeskapital hos fast fashion varumärken som genomför cirkulära initiativ. Uppfattningarna skildrar olika segment inom Generation Z, vilka har definierats till Positiv: Värdeskapande, Negativ: Skenhelig samt Indifferent: Inte relevant och har olika inverkan på kundbaserat varumärkeskapital. Dessutom visar studiens resultat att en positiv uppfattning gentemot cirkulära initiativ kan stärka varumärkeskapitalet för fast fashion varumärken. En negativ uppfattning har en begränsad till negativ inverkan, medan en indifferent uppfattning av cirkulära initiativ inte har någon märkbar inverkan på det kundbaserade varumärkeskapitalet.
Teoretiska och praktiska bidrag – Denna studie ger insikter om Generation Zs olika uppfattningar gentemot cirkulära initiativ och hur makromiljö-faktorer kan ge inverkan på det kundbaserade varumärkeskapitalet hos fast fashion varumärken. Studiens resultat kan vägleda varumärkeschefer att adressera de olika segmentens behov och framgångsrikt implementera hållbarhetsaktiviteter i verksamheten hos fast fashion varumärken.
Nyckelord – Cirkulär ekonomi; Varumärkeskapital; CBBE modellen; Fast fashion; Generation Z
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION... 1
1.1 Background ... 1
1.2 Problem Discussion ... 3
1.3 Purpose ... 5
1.4 Delimitations ... 5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ... 6
2.1 Circular Economy ... 6
2.1.1 Circular Economy Within Fast Fashion Industries... 8
2.1.2 Younger Consumers’ Perceptions Towards Circular Economy ... 10
2.1.3 Challenges Posed by the Circular Economy... 11
2.2 Brand Equity ... 12
2.2.1 Customer-Based Brand Equity ... 13
2.2.2 CBBE Model ... 14
2.2.3 CBBE Model in the Fashion Context ... 17
2.3 Frame of Reference ... 18
3. METHODOLOGY ... 22
3.1 Research Purpose ... 22
3.2 Research Approach ... 23
3.3 Research Strategy ... 23
3.4 Data Collection ... 25
3.5 Sample Selection ... 26
3.6 Data Analysis ... 27
3.7 Quality Standards ... 30
3.7.1 Reliability ... 30
3.7.2 Validity ... 32
4. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ... 33
4.1 Perceptions Towards CE Initiatives ... 33
4.1.1 Positive Perception: Creates Value... 34
4.1.2 Negative Perception: Hypocritical... 36
4.1.3 Indifferent perception: Not relevant ... 40
4.2 The Perceptions’ Impact on CBBE ... 42
4.2.1 Positive Perceptions’ Impact on the CBBE ... 42
4.2.2 Negative Perceptions’ Impact on the CBBE ... 44
4.2.3 Indifferent Perceptions’ Impact on the CBBE ... 47
4.3 Summary of the Findings ... 50
5. DISCUSSION ... 51
5.1 Discussion and Conclusions ... 51
5.2 Theoretical Contributions ... 54
5.3 Practical Contributions ... 55
5.4 Limitations ... 56
5.5 Future Research ... 57
REFERENCES ... 58
APPENDIX ... 66
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The concept of 3R principle ... 7
Figure 2. Fashion brands’ take back strategies ... 9
Figure 3. Customer-Based Brand Equity Model... 15
Figure 4. Thematic map of the perceptions towards CE initiatives ... 33
Figure 5. Thematic map of positive perceptions’ impact on CBBE components ... 42
Figure 6. Thematic map of negative perceptions’ impact on CBBE components ... 45
Figure 7. Thematic map of indifferent perceptions’ impact on CBBE components ... 47
Figure 8. Characteristics of the segments and the impact on CBBE ... 50
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Frame of Reference ... 20Table 2. Relevant Situations for Different Research Strategies ... 24
Table 3. Interview Respondents ... 27
Table 4. Overarching Theme 1 ... 34
Table 5. Overarching Theme 2 ... 37
Table 6. Overarching Theme 3 ... 40
1
1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter will introduce the foundation of this study’s research area. The chapter contains a problem discussion, followed by the purpose of the study along with the research questions. Lastly, the chapter ends with a presentation of the delimitations of the study.
1.1 Background
Fashion encourages creativity and helps people to express themselves through clothing. However, with rapidly shifting trends that fast fashion companies respond to by frequently updating available attires in the stores, the lifetime of clothes has decreased (Zamani et al., 2017). According to Zarley et al. (2013), the phrase fast fashion refers to “a business strategy that creates an efficient supply chain in order to produce fashionable merchandise rapidly while quickly responding to consumer demand” (p. 141). Fast fashion companies, such as ZARA and H&M provide cheap and trendy clothes that are manufactured at low cost, mostly preferred by middle-class consumers (Jang et al., 2012). The traditional production process of fashion requires high levels of energy and water consumption and emits large quantities of chemicals (Lo et al., 2012; Machado et al., 2019;
Vehmas et al., 2018). These chemicals are drivers of large-scale environmental pollution (Zamani et al., 2017). Tackling this issue requires strong management from higher authorities in all parts of the fashion industry to enable brands to implement more sustainable actions (Frei et al., 2020).
In 2015, all United Nations Members established the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, including the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, n.d.a). Linked to the fashion industry, Frei et al. (2020) underline the importance of Goal 12, to ensure sustainable consumption and production. One of the underpinned defined targets to the goal is to substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reusing by 2030 (United Nations, n.d.b).
To achieve sustainable consumption and production in nine years, the 2020s needs to bring a decade of ambitious sustainable actions where fashion brands and consumers must contribute to realize the agenda for sustainable development.
2
To fulfill the 12th goal, a suggested approach is to expand the circular processes (United Nations, n.d.). The concept of circular economy (CE) embraces circular practices, which can be applied to the fashion industry. In a CE, fashion consumption slows down and encourages the extended lifetime of clothes (Pal et al., 2019). In a CE, the negative environmental impact reduces, wastage is avoided, and products are redesigned, reused, and recycled to close the loop of the supply chain (Frei et al., 2020; Vehmas et al., 2018). Manufacturers and retailers are required to promote practices that inspire customers to extend the product life cycle of clothes (Shrivastava et al., 2021).
Furthermore, the shift towards CE also requires a change in the mentality of the customers.
Individuals need to consider newly produced products equally as remanufactured ones in the journey towards a more sustainable fashion industry (Frei et al., 2020).
There has been a growing positive attitude towards sustainable fashion among consumers over the last years (Hur & Cassidy, 2019). Hur and Cassidy (2019) state that consumers who are aware of the fashion industry's negative environmental impact are even more willing to change their buying behavior. Therefore, the ability to identify and respond to new market trends is an important organisational capability for fashion companies in to survive and succeed (Pedersen et al., 2018).
The shift in attitudes requires that brands in the fashion industry must adopt strategies that respond to the consumers' changed needs in order to be an attractive brand with competitive advantages (Mithas et al., 2005). To create competitive advantages, Christodoulides and Chernatony (2010) highlight the value of brands and the importance of consumers' perceptions of the intangible asset.
In order to know how consumers perceive a fashion brand, the concept of brand equity can be used. Brand equity refers to the brand value and is determined by the attributes of a brand and the customers' perceived benefits that they receive when supporting the brand (Chen, 2010).
Companies with high brand equity have the capability to increase their prices since the customers' willingness to pay increases due to the attractiveness of the name attached to the product (Chen, 2010; Keller, 1993).
A number of studies underline the importance of building strong brand equity (Aaker, 1996;
Keller, 1993). Extant research agrees that the competition is intense and therefore it is necessary to differentiate a brand from its competitors. To analyze brand equity from the perspective of the individual consumer, the conceptual model customer-based brand equity (CBBE) is commonly
3
used in multiple industries (Keller, 1993). However, despite the considerable number of studies regarding brand equity, there is limited research on how the concept is interlinked with the perceptions towards CE initiatives, especially within the fast fashion industry. This gap in theory will be further described in the problem discussion below, especially emphasizing how CE initiatives can be used to strengthen the CBBE of fast fashion brands.
1.2 Problem Discussion
The consumption of fashion has constantly been increasing across the world. In the US alone, 15.1 million tons of textiles were discarded in 2013 compared to 7.4 million tons in 1995 and 2.5 million tons in 1980 (Iran & Schrader, 2017). According to Shrivastava et al. (2021), the fashion industry is responsible for generating ten percent of the global emissions, which makes them one of the largest polluters in the world. Shrivastava et al. (2021) explain that the negative trend of consumption in a combination of manufacturers that delivers new attires within short lead times has caused this situation. Due to the negative environmental impact, the need for sustainability initiatives is urgent to set future green directions for fashion brands (Jang et al., 2012). The fashion industry has been in the spotlight over the last few decades, criticized by the media for poor social and environmental performance (Pedersen et al., 2018). The dilemma around environmental sustainability has therefore become a key managerial issue in recent years (Caniato et al., 2012).
Despite the unfavorable publicity, the fashion industry has at the same time been “among the frontrunners when it comes to new sustainability initiatives” (Pedersen et al., 2018, p. 268).
Initiatives to develop new sustainable business models have been introduced by several fashion companies, such as new resources and new revenue channels. Pedersen et al. (2018) explain that several fashion brands have initiated programs to take-back, resell, reuse and recycle the retailed products. These constitute circular economy initiatives that fashion brands have experimented with, in addition to their possession-based business model. Fashion companies aiming to run the business more sustainably are standing in front of a foundational change in their business model (Pedersen et al., 2018). The purpose of fast fashion is to rapidly respond to the latest fashion trends, which do not agree with the processes of CE initiatives (Zamani et al., 2017). The transition involves a movement from a traditional single financial bottom-line with focus on making money,
4
to a more sustainable model with focus on creating economic, social and environmental value for all relevant stakeholders (Joyce et al., 2016).
In contrast to the emerging environmental consciousness, some resistance to the CE transition has arisen from companies in the fashion industry (Frei et al., 2020). The companies are fearing new initiatives such as secondary markets will outcompete the first markets when consumers are buying resold and remanufactured products rather than new ones. Frei et al. (2020) point out that companies have even tried to eliminate the secondary markets. However, Frei et al. (2020) underline these actions have been severely criticized in the media. What the companies tend to forget is that “the cost of refreshing and reselling a product can be considerably lower than the cost of making a new product from new materials” (Frei et al., 2020, p. 1927). As a result of the increasing environmental consciousness, more consumers are willing to pay a higher price for environmentally sustainable products (Chen, 2010). Thereby, companies that succeed in building brand equity can benefit from the competitive advantage, enabling them to sell at higher prices with higher profit margins (Chen, 2010; Keller, 1993).
One of the emerging trends that the fashion industry has to have an eye on, is the “woke” consumer (Amed et al., 2019). According to the 2020s trend report conducted by McKinsey (Amed et al., 2019), younger consumers are severely concerned with social and environmental-related issues.
The consumer group prefers brands that are in line with their values and refrains from brands that are not. When it comes to companies and their responsibilities, nine out of ten consumers within Generation Z (born circa 1995-2014) believe the companies should address the issues related to social and environmental causes (Amed et al., 2019). Fashion companies overlooking this trend shift are taking remarkable risks, as Generation Z was expected to make up 40 percent of the global consumers by 2020 (Amed et al., 2019). This generation is therefore of high interest to study, as they are the future decision-makers and sets the rules for future consumption of fast fashion.
Additionally, Generation Z is also interesting from a consumer perspective since younger consumers are the most eager group of fast fashion consumers (Morgan & Birtwistle, 2009).
The fast fashion industry is facing a challenge of balancing between environmental- and business needs (Caniato et al., 2012). An interest in integrating corporate sustainability into conventional
5
business model thinking has emerged in recent years (Pedersen et al., 2018). The industry is demanding solutions for how to run the business in a more environmentally sustainable way, without compromising economical sustainability (Joyce et al., 2016). Giving these points, one way to succeed is to invest in strengthening brand equity. Thus, the fast fashion brands will be able to raise the prices for a branded product and create a more solid economical foundation (Farquhar, 1989). Although it may be counterintuitive to the purpose of fast fashion, which is cheap and mainly mass-produced garments, it can marginally improve the financial situation. This implies that fast fashion brands must obtain tools to know how to build, strengthen and constantly develop their brand equity. Jung and Sung (2008) explain that there are many studies on brand equity related to a wide range of industries. However, there is still limited research on how environmentally sustainable efforts can contribute to strengthening brand equity, at least in the context of the fast fashion industry (Jung & Sung, 2008). In sum, there is a lack of literature that integrates these areas and especially focusing on Generation Z, which constitutes a clear gap that this study aims to fill.
1.3 Purpose
The purpose of this study is to explore how environmentally sustainable efforts, in terms of CE initiatives, are affecting the CBBE of fast fashion brands. In order to fulfill the formulated purpose, the following two research questions are defined:
RQ1: What are Generation Z’s self-disclosed perceptions of fast fashion brands conducting circular economy initiatives?
RQ2: How do the perceptions of Generation Z regarding circular economy initiatives impact the CBBE of fast fashion brands?
1.4 Delimitations
This study revolves around the fast fashion industry and is delimited to CE initiatives that distinctly promote reducing the emissions and usage of resources, reusing products, and recycling waste materials. Furthermore, the study takes the perceptions of Generation Z into consideration, meaning that only fast fashion consumers born in 1994-2002 are included. Additionally, the study is delimited to consumers within Generation Z that currently live in Sweden.
6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter contains an overview of the literature within the research area of circular economy, fast fashion and brand equity. It holds a description of the concepts and how they are related to the fashion industry in general, and fast fashion brands in particular.
2.1 Circular Economy
To reach the 17 Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, industries have called for guidance in implementing strategies for sustainable improvements (Murray et al., 2017). To address the environmental issues the world is facing in the coming years, Murray et al. (2017) highlight the positive contribution the CE will possess. CE represents a new way to act in industrial systems of production where restoration of resources and regenerated materials replaces the traditional systems that harm the environment (Smith et al., 2017). By reusing products and materials in an economically viable way and replacing the “end-of-life” idea through recycling materials in production and consumption processes, CE opens possibilities for a more sustainable closed-loop system (Machado et al., 2019). The CE concept has received attention from multinational companies as well as policy makers in industrialized countries because it is viewed as an important approach to achieving sustainable, environmental and economic development (Korhonen et al., 2018; Schroeder et al., 2019). To successfully transit to a CE, Hazen et al. (2017) claim that cooperation and coordination across governments, business and consumers are necessary. Multiple definitions have arisen over the last ten years regarding the concept of CE (Korhonen et al., 2018;
Machado et al., 2019; Murray et al., 2017). Murray et al. (2017) define CE as:
An economic model wherein planning, resourcing, procurement, production and reprocessing are designed and managed, as both process and output, to maximize ecosystem functioning and
human well-being (p. 25).
Moreover, Blomsma and Brennan (2017), describe the concept of CE as “A general term covering all activities that reduce, reuse, and recycle materials in production, distribution, and consumption processes” (p. 606). The term therefore holds different meanings by different authors. Yet, the definitions always have one thing in common; a cyclical closed loop system (Murrat et al., 2017).
To provide clarity regarding the concept of CE, Kirchherr et al. (2017) gathered an extensive set
7
of over hundred CE definitions and analyzed them against a coding framework. After analysis, Kirchherr et al. (2017) developed a definition of CE:
An economic system that replaces the end-of-life concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling and recovering materials in production/distribution and consumption processes. It operates at the micro level (products, companies, consumers), meso level (eco-industrial parks)
and macro level (city, region, nation and beyond), with the aim to accomplish sustainable development, which implies creating environmental quality, economic prosperity and social
equity, to the benefit of current and future generations (p. 224).
The central practices of CE are based on the 3R principle, standing for reducing, reusing, and recycling. The principles focus on the circulation of materials and maximizing their use and simultaneously minimizing waste and pollution (Ranta et al., 2018; Patwa et al., 2021). The reduce principle mainly focuses on reducing the use of resources and energy during the manufacturing stages along with reducing emission and waste during the using stages. The reuse principle refers to extending the product to a new life cycle by reusing products as a whole or their components.
Lastly, recycling involves transforming waste materials into new materials and products, both for its original purpose or new intentions (Jawahir & Bradley, 2016; Ranta et al., 2017). The concept of 3R principle is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1. The concept of 3R principle Source: Authors own construct
8
Several studies highlight the extended life of products when implementing CE practices (Frei et al., 2020; Machado et al., 2019; Ranta et al., 2018). However, worth noting when executing CE activities is that manufacturers are not required to provide local repair services in all corners or demand consumers to return the products to the manufacturer for repairs (Frei et al., 2020). Further, Frei et al. (2020) suggest manufacturers endorse a network of repair shops that opens opportunities to execute sustainable, economically, and convenient repair offerings to consumers.
2.1.1 Circular Economy Within Fast Fashion Industries
The fast fashion industry consumes considerable amounts of natural resources to produce low- price clothes which are worn by consumers for a short time and afterwards discarded (Brydges, 2021). To address the material waste, Hvass and Pedersen (2019) exemplify in their study that 62 percent of Swedes discard clothes in the garbage because they don't want to use them, and 21 percent of the Swedes dispose of their clothes because they are tired of them. Furthermore, the material waste is one of the biggest challenges of CE within the fashion industry due to the increasing quantity of discarded and incinerated textiles ending up in landfills (Hvass & Pedersen, 2019). To reduce the development of climate change, sustainable consumption and production are important elements in retaining the world's limited natural resources (Vehmas et al., 2018). Since the textile industry claims to be one of the most polluted industries (Vehmans et al., 2018), conversations about CE and how to make the fashion industry more sustainable have dominated among policymakers and academics (Brydges, 2021).
A keyway forward in the transition to a more sustainable fashion industry is adapting CE practices (Brygdes, 2021; Machado et al., 2019). This transition includes replacing the fast fashion of trendy, low-cost clothing, into restorative thinking that aims to streamline the use of resources along with minimizing waste (Brydges, 2021). According to Smith et al. (2017) there is an increasing awareness of the requirement for new textile initiatives that can be linked with the concept of CE.
Waste management strategies that focus on the 3R principle of CE have become a well-known approach to responding to the textile industry waste (Hvass & Pedersen, 2019). There are several studies explaining how fashion brands are working toward reducing textile disposal. Hvass and Pedersen (2019) describes examples of brands working with decreased production volumes and extending clothes life by introducing better care practices to build a long-lasting relationship with
9
their clothes. Weber et al. (2017) claim that many retailers have begun offering take-back programs that offer consumers to return clothes which are no longer considered useful.
In order to implement principles that aim to achieve a focused CE, Hvass and Pedersen (2019) present a model with an overview of fashion brands’ take-back strategies. An overview of these end-of-life-strategies can be seen in Figure 2 below. Hvass and Pedersen (2019) examine two main CE strategies that link product-specific and material-specific resource loops. The product-specific loop concentrates on reuse and extending products life and the material-specific loop focuses on recycling of materials. Furthermore, Hvass and Pedersen (2019) illustrate the most common activities to implement take-back programs; independent in-store collection, partnership with a charity, or partnership with a professional collector/service provider. Next, the activities develop operationally differently based on which CE-specific loop the take-back program concern (Hvass
& Pedersen, 2019).
Figure 2. Fashion brands’ take back strategies Source: Adopted from Hvass & Pedersen (2019)
10
Stål and Corvellec (2018) conducted a study of Swedish apparel companies that were collecting used clothes as a form of take-back-program aiming toward circular business models. The study showed that financial incentives, in forms of vouchers or discounts, were commonly used by brands to reward the consumers. Furthermore, evidence showed that fashion companies' motivation for conducting waste-related CE activities were based on strengthening brand image, creating customer loyalty and simultaneously reducing the environmental impact. This implies that fashion brands are implementing the 3R principles not only for environmental reasons, but also to improve its brand image as a responsible business and for financial reasons (Stål & Corvellec, 2018).
2.1.2 Younger Consumers’ Perceptions Towards Circular Economy
Sustainable fashion business models that focus on reducing resource use and waste have consumers as primary partners and suppliers (Machado et al., 2019). According to Sijtsema et al.
(2020) “consumers have roles in a CE as purchasers, maintainers, repairers, sellers, sharers, collaborators, and waste discarders” (p. 1). Thus, in the context of CE, it is meaningful to understand their perceptions and what factors affect them towards sustainable fashion consumption. Thereby it is easier to find possible entry points to stimulate consumers interest and involvement in fashion businesses (Sijtsema et al., 2020). Moreover, the interest in sustainable products and ethical behavior have risen among younger consumers, in particular Millennials and Generation Z (Kim et al., 2021). According to Kim et al. (2021), younger consumers are willing to pay an additional 10 percent on green, ethical, durable and repairable products. However, to successfully meet the consumers' needs, fashion brands are required to investigate their perceptions towards circular fashion.
Several studies show multiple factors that have an impact on consumers' perceptions and behaviors. Camacho-Otero et al. (2018) explain that consumers' acceptance is influencing the perceptions towards CE. The authors describe that personality traits, values, and ideologies, in turn, are influencing consumer perceptions. In line with Camacho-Otero et al. (2018), Kim et al.
(2021) agree and further describes that consumers' attitudes regarding sustainable products are affected positively by emotional values such as feeling joy and pleasure when purchasing.
Furthermore, Kim et al. (2021) presented that customer consider it risky to buy second hand or
11
recycled clothes made of discarded materials. The circular clothes were not considered to be hygienic and thereby, negatively influenced their perceptions (Kim et al., 2021). Therefore, it is important apparel brands underline the benefaction deed the consumers contribute to when purchasing circular fashion. Moreover, to reduce the consumers perceived hygiene risk, Kim et al.
(2021) suggest marketers emphasize that the clothes have gone through cleaning processes when extending the products to new life cycles.
Chang and Watchravesringkan (2018) explain that money and environmental knowledge are important factors affecting the perceptions towards sustainable consumption. Consumers who consider being environmentally oriented perceive sustainable fashion positively. Moreover, the authors claim that clothes made from recycled materials are generally associated with higher prices. Therefore, it is important to encourage consumers to perceive more value in the products compared to their actual price (Chang & Watchravesringkan, 2018). Thus, the perception and attitudes towards CE initiatives can be strengthened.
2.1.3 Challenges Posed by the Circular Economy
The transition from business models based on the “End-of-life” idea into CE's central practices of reduce, reuse and recycling, raises not only opportunities, but also challenges for the fast fashion industry. Several studies stress the implementation process of CE to be challenging (Brydges, 2021; Camacho-Otero et al., 2018; Sauvé et al., 2016). Further, Sauvé et al. (2016) specifically underline the novelty and complexity CE entails. It is stated that economic benefits must be generated when implementing CE activities that closes the loop and products are reintegrated into take-back programs (Sauve et al., 2016). However, this can be challenging because the costs to manufacture sustainable long-lasting products is generally higher than producing disposable versions (Sauvé et al., 2016). Brydges (2021) found that fast fashion brands experienced it challenging toward designing for circularity. Fast fashion brands characteristically produce trend- driven, low-price clothes at short lead-times to the customers. Moving beyond those practices into designing seasonless collections that appeal to the consumers and inspire them to extend the lifetime of clothes is a difficulty, especially for the consumers that consider style more important than sustainability (Brydges, 2021). These findings are in line with the ones proposed by
12
Shrivastava et al. (2021) who add that individual fashion goals and price-consciousness take priority over environmental consciousness which is another aspect that needs to be reviewed.
Since clothes are a part of human life, implementation activities of CE can bring several changes to everyday life (Camacho-Otero et al., 2018). With references to such changes, consumer acceptance has been highlighted as a substantial aspect hindering the 3R strategies of CE to reduce, reuse and recycle (Frei et al., 2020). Acceptance to transit and chance consumers mentality and consumption behavior where ownership of newly produced clothes is associated with prestige (Frei et al., 2020; Hvass & Pedersen, 2019; Shrivastava et al., 2021). Moreover, Shrivastava et al.
(2021) specify that consumers experience a social barrier talking about shopping experiences regarding second hand, because it is not equally socially accepted as buying new clothes.
To succeed with the implementation and communication of CE activities in the fast fashion industry, several studies highlight information transparency as a mean to avoid being associated with greenwashing (Aakko & Koskennurmi-Sivonen, 2013; Niinimäki, 2015). The rising interest in environmental and sustainability issues has induced companies to start using this as a selling point to increase sales, which consumers at times can perceive as a “marketing-ploy” (Niinimäki, 2015). The term greenwashing refers to brands that spend sizable money on convincing the consumers to be eco-friendly by greenwashing products to look more sustainable than they actually are (Aakko & Koskennurmi-Sivonen, 2013). The global manufacturing processes in the fashion industry are complex. Therefore, it is necessary to present a complete picture of information throughout the entire value chain to avoid misleading labels and “greenwash”-attitudes from the consumers (Niinimäki, 2015). Further, Niinimäki (2015) clarifies that the sustainability efforts that fashion companies are conducting should be communicated with a holistic and transparent approach to send positive messages to the consumers and thereby build trust.
2.2 Brand Equity
The concept of brand equity has been debated by researchers and there is no consensus on the definition in the literature (Buil et al., 2013; Su & Chang, 2018). Farquhar (1989) defines brand equity as the “added value” that a given brand provides a product. In contrast, Simon and Sullivan (1993) define it from a financial perspective, considering brand equity as the increased cash flows
13
that branded products provide over unbranded products. Atilgan et al. (2005) have discussed the different perspectives of brand equity; it can be viewed from the perspective of the manufacturer, the retailer, or the consumer. According to Atilgan et al. (2005), marketing practitioners often refer to brand description or brand strength, from the customer perspective, when using the term “brand equity”. This is in line with Farquhar (1989), who states that brand equity, from the perspective of an individual consumer, reflects the increase in attitude strength towards a product using the brand.
The consumer-originated perspective on brand equity is referred to as customer-based brand equity (CBBE), stated by Farquhar (1989).
2.2.1 Customer-Based Brand Equity
Researchers have argued in favor of the consumer-based perspective (Su & Chang, 2018). If the brand has no value to the consumer, none of the other perspectives or definitions are relevant (Atilgan et al., 2005; Keller, 1993). Consequently, the authority of the brand is derived from the customer's experiences of the brand; what the consumers have learned, seen, heard, and felt about the brand over time (Keller, 2003). Therefore, Keller (2003) defines CBBE as “the differential effect that brand knowledge has on consumer response to the marketing of that brand” (Keller, 2003, p. 60). By contrast, Aaker (1991), viewed CBBE as “a set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol, that add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s customers” (p.15). Although some time has passed since the definitions were coined, the definition established by Aaker (1991) is one of the most generally accepted (Atilgan et al., 2005). Therefore, this study will mainly be based on the definition by Aaker (1991).
The concept of brand equity can, more in-depth, be explained as the different effects that brand knowledge has on consumers' response to the marketing of a brand (Keller, 1993). Further, Keller (1993) argues that if a product or service was retailed without its brand, it would not have the same value as if it was sold with its brand. Shaping the consumers’ perceptions of a product or service into a positive experience is the core of brand equity (Farjam & Hongyi, 2015). Three different perspectives can be applied in order to measure brand equity; a financial, employee, or consumer perspective (Tsai et al., 2013). As this study aims to capture and measure the consumers’
perceptions, a consumer-based perspective will be applied.
14
2.2.2 CBBE Model
To understand brand equity from a consumer perspective, the CBBE model has become the most accepted one among academics and practitioners because of the central role the consumer holds (Farjam & Hongyi, 2015). This is in line with Çifci et al. (2016), who argue that CBBE is essential for a brand in order to develop customer value, differentiate from other brands, and gain a competitive advantage in the market. Keller (2013) argues that CBBE is measured by examination of the customer's thoughts, beliefs, perceptions, images, and emotions linked to a brand. That is similar to the view of Aaker’s (1996), stating that CBBE can be measured by four dimensions of brand equity; loyalty, awareness, associations, and perceived quality.
The four dimensions are constituting the CBBE model (Aaker, 1996), which is shown in Figure 3.
The model also includes the dimension of Proprietary brand assets which includes patents and other assets linked to the brand (Aaker, 1991). However, Lee et al. (2014) argue that there are no valid measurements and as it is indirectly linked to the customer. Consequently, the component is not relevant to include in this study. The concepts can be measured by The Brand Equity Ten, a set of measures linked to each dimension of the CBBE model (Aaker, 1996), that are described in the following sections. Aaker (1996) explains that two of the measures belong to the concept of market behavior measures and are not obtained directly from the customers. Therefore, those measures are not applicable in this study. The concept of Brand loyalty, Brand awareness, Brand associations, and Perceived quality will be presented separately in the following sections.
15
Figure 3. Customer-Based Brand Equity Model Source: Adopted from Aaker (1991)
2.2.2.1 Brand Loyalty
Brand loyalty is the core element of brand equity and can be explained as the customer’s affection and trust in a brand (Aaker, 1996; Pappu et al., 2005). The concept of brand loyalty means that customers hold a commitment to rebuy a product or service from the same brand, regardless of influence from other brands (Oliver, 1997). Consequently, a brand-loyal customer is willing to pay a higher price for the product in comparison with a non-brand-loyal customer (Yoo et al., 2000).
Researchers are still of different opinions when it comes to the coherence of brand loyalty. Keller (2003) considers brand equity to be the outcome of brand loyalty. On the contrary, Aaker (1996) argues that brand equity is the source to brand loyalty. According to Aaker (1996), brand loyalty can be measured through the customer’s willingness to pay a premium price in comparison with other equivalent brands as well as through the customer’s satisfaction of a product or service.
16
2.2.2.2 Brand Awareness
Brand awareness is “the ability for a buyer to recognize or recall that a brand is a member of a particular product category” (Aaker, 1991, p. 61). Further, Aaker (1991) states that brand awareness is about the brand’s presence in the customer’s minds, meaning that individuals become aware of, and remember, the brand’s attributes and name. Furthermore, consumers are more likely to prefer a known brand over an unknown brand in the market (Buil et al., 2013). Therefore, a brand recognized by the consumer has a higher probability to be purchased than an unknown or non-branded product. Brand awareness can be measured by the customer’s awareness of a certain brand and how the brand is perceived to be differentiated from competing brands (Aaker, 1996).
2.2.2.3 Brand Association
Brand association is described as “anything linked in memory to a brand” (Aaker, 1991, p. 109).
Consequently, the customer’s awareness of a brand is the foundation to brand associations (Buil et al., 2013). The brand association is increasing the probability to remember a brand and its attributes, which can further impact a customers’ future decisions (Keller, 2003). Moreover, there are different dimensions of brand associations that all are linked to the overall brand experience.
These are linked to the value (brand-as-product), brand personality (brand-as-person), and organization associations (brand-as-organization) discussed by Aaker (1996). The strength of brand associations lies in the ability to create a unique value proposition and a competitive advantage within the market (Keller, 1993). According to Aaker (1996), brand associations are measured by the customer’s perception of value, brand personality, and the organizational associations. The key measurements usually include several image dimensions that are perceived as unique to a product or brand (Aaker, 1996).
2.2.2.4 Perceived Quality
The perceived quality is one of the key dimensions of brand equity (Aaker, 1996), and is described as the consumer’s subjective perception of the overall quality of a product or service (Buil et al., 2013). The concept differs from objective quality since it is related to the production and manufacturing attributes of a product (Lee at al., 2014; Pappu et al., 2005). However, perceived quality is about the consumer’s recognition of quality, evaluated by a certain product and its added value, and attributes (Pappu et al, 2005). Furthermore, perceived quality provides the brand with an advantage over competing brands, helping to create differentiation of a product to the consumer
17
(Aaker, 1991). The dimension of perceived quality is measured by several factors, including the customer’s perception of the quality of a certain product and the position in the market compared to other brands. Aaker (1996) suggests that a scale stretching from inferior quality to high quality can evaluate the customer’s perception of a brand when compared to alternative brands. By examining the perception of a brand’s emerging popularity, innovations, and leadership in the market, the perceived quality can be defined (Aaker, 1996).
2.2.3 CBBE Model in the Fashion Context
With the CBBE-model in mind, Su and Chang (2018) have examined the relationship between young consumers’ attitudes towards fast fashion brands and brand loyalty. Su and Chang (2018) highlight the factors leading to success for global fast fashion retailers, which includes development of a strategic proposition with unique concepts and brand power. In addition, the proposition includes unique capabilities to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage. Within the fast fashion industry, companies are able to create an extremely powerful brand based on its business model of fashion and quality at the best possible price (Su & Chang, 2018). However, when it comes to creating brand equity, different dimensions contribute to CBBE in different ways.
More specifically, the study showed that for US college students, not all brand equity dimensions have the same influence in generating consumer loyalty toward a brand. Brand awareness, perceived value, brand uniqueness, and organizational associations are the contributing dimensions of brand equity to building consumer brand loyalty (Su & Chang, 2018).
Because of the multifaceted interactions among consumers and fashion brands, Kim (2012) argues that the fashion-brand experience “may synchronize cognitive processes that are more subconscious and private in nature with affective processes during which emotions become an important substrate of consumption” (Kim, 2012, p. 421). Furthermore, if a fashion brand stimulates the senses, causes the customers to feel good, and engages the resonance behavior, brand experience makes customers more subject to the most profitable behavioral outcomes, such as loyalty and price premium (Kim, 2012).
18
2.3 Frame of Reference
The frame of reference aims to bring clarity to the research purpose and questions of the thesis and is built upon the previous literature presented throughout the chapter. The frame of reference illustrates how the central elements of the study are connected to each other. The following sections will address how consumers' perceptions of CE initiatives are interlinked with the CBBE-model in this study. It has been found in previous literature that the interest in sustainable products and ethical behavior has increased among younger consumers. However, the scarcely previous investigation of Generation Z's perceptions towards CE within the fast fashion industry has resulted in the first part of the emerged frame of reference.
The first elements are related to the first research question (RQ1) of the study: What are Generation Z’s self-disclosed perceptions of fast fashion brands conducting circular economy initiatives? To begin with, the interest in sustainable products has arisen among younger consumers and their willingness to pay for the products is strong (Kim et al., 2021). Moreover, it has been presented that a consumer can experience both perceived risks and value creation regarding clothes that fall within the 3R concept. Perceived risks of unhygienic reasons in recycled clothes are negatively affecting Generation Z's perceptions of CE initiatives (Kim et al., 2021).
Contrariwise, perceived values and environmental knowledge are positively affecting the perceptions. When younger consumers purchase clothes that are manufactured sustainably, joyful feelings are evoked when they positively contribute to the climate (Chang & Watchravesringkan., 2018; Kim et al., 2021). These influential aspects are important to consider in this study as they create a foundation for understanding the perceptions of Generation Z.
The following part of the frame of reference is concerned with research question two (RQ2): How do the perceptions of Generation Z regarding circular economy initiatives impact the CBBE of fast fashion brands? In the frame of reference, the theory on CBBE is recapped, based on the model originated by Aaker (1991). CBBE includes the essential components: brand loyalty, brand awareness, brand association, and perceived quality. The model is complemented by the measures of The Brand Equity Ten, which as previously mentioned are a set of measures linked to each dimension of the CBBE model. Each component of the CBBE model demonstrates the power of a customer's attitude towards a brand, and how it can result in the success or failure of a brand
19
(Aaker, 1996). Further, the model emphasizes creating a positive attitude towards a brand, in the consumer’s mind, can build a strong foundation.
Although researchers have found support for brand awareness, brand associations, and perceived quality has a positive effect on brand equity, brand loyalty is seen as the core dimension of brand equity (Buil et al., 2013). In this study, brand loyalty refers to a customer’s affection or trust in a brand (Aaker, 1996). Further, brand awareness reflects the recognition of a brand in the customer’s mind while brand association is about the values and personalities associated with a brand within the mind of a customer. Perceived quality is linked with the consumer’s subjective perception of the overall quality of a product or service, with reference to other alternatives (Aaker, 1996). Fast fashion brands need to be aware of the perceptions of young consumers to gain insights into how these perceptions can impact the CBBE model. To draw the strands together, all the above- mentioned parts are summarized in a frame of reference that includes all components needed to answer the research questions. The complete conceptual framework is presented in Table 1.
20
Table 1. Frame of Reference
Conceptual Area Concept Conceptual Definition Operational Definition Source
Circular Economy
Reduce Reducing the use of resources and energy during the manufacturing stages along with reducing emission and waste during the using stages
The consumer’s perception of brands reducing the use of resources and energy during the manufacturing stages along with reducing emission and waste during the using stages
Frei et al., 2020
Reuse Extending the product to a new life cycle by reusing products as a whole or their components
The consumer’s perception of brands extending the product to a new life cycle by reusing products as a whole or their components
Frei et al., 2020
Recycle Transforming waste materials into new materials and products, both for its original purpose or for new intentions
The consumer’s perception of brands transforming waste materials into new materials and products, both for its original purpose or for new intentions
Frei et al., 2020
Customer-Based Brand Equity
Brand Loyalty
The attachment that a customer has to a brand
Price Premium: The customer’s willingness to pay a premium price in
comparison with other equivalent brands Satisfaction/loyalty: the customer’s satisfaction of a product or service
Aaker, 1991, p.39; Aaker, 1996; Keller, 2003
Brand Awareness
The ability of a potential buyer to recognize or recall that a brand is a member of a certain product category
Awareness: The customer’s awareness of a certain brand and how the brand is
perceived to be differentiated from competing brands
Aaker, 1991, p.61; Aaker, 1996
Brand Association
Anything linked to the memory of a brand
Perceived Value:
If the brand brings good value for the money and if there are motives to buy this brand over competing brands Brand Personality:
Reflects the existence of a strong personality
(interesting, clear target group associated with the brand) Organizational
Associations: How customers associate the brand (trust, credibility, high quality etc.)
Aaker, 1991, p.109; Aaker, 1996
21 Perceived
Quality
The consumer's judgment about a product's
overall excellence or superiority
Quality: Scale stretching from inferior- to high quality can evaluate the customer’s perception of a brand compared to alternative brands
Leadership: The perception of a brand’s emerging popularity and if it’s first with advances in products or services
Aaker, 1991, p.85; Aaker, 1996
The comprehensive frame of reference is based on the literature regarding consumer’s perception of CE initiatives and theory on CBBE. Moreover, the framework illustrates how the theory connects to each research question. The perceptions include opinions and beliefs on CE initiatives that are held by younger groups consuming fast fashion. Subsequently, the perceptions are connected to CBBE as this study wants to explore how these perceptions impact the brand equity of fast fashion brands. The element of CBBE is based on Aaker’s (1991) model and is added to the model to illustrate the components that contribute to a strong brand based on the consumer’s perception of it. As Keller (2003) and Aaker (1991) described, the brand is worth nothing if it has no value to the consumer. Hence, the value that environmentally sustainable actions bring to the consumer is crucial for fast fashion brands to understand.
22
3. METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the methodology and research design of the study. The chapter will cover the research purpose, approach, and strategy with its underlying concepts. Moreover, the collection of data, sample selection, and analysis of data is thoroughly described. The chapter concludes with an explanation of how reliability and validity have been taken into account.
3.1 Research Purpose
The research purpose of a study can be determined based on the aim of the research questions. The classification of a study's purpose can either be exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory (Saunders et al., 2012). An exploratory study is especially useful if the study aims to gain a deeper understanding of a problem where there is limited previous research. According to Saunders et al.
(2012), exploratory research tends to have a broad focus where open questions are valuable to become aware of the overall environment. Exploratory studies seek to answer questions such as what or how (David & Sutton, 2016). Moreover, as the study progresses and new insights appear, the exploratory approach allows to shift directions since the purpose is to gain insights during the development of the study (Saunders et al., 2012).
Descriptive studies are used to provide an accurate profile of happenings, situations, or people and aim to answer questions such as when, where, what and to whom (Saunders et al., 2012). Lastly, explanatory research seeks to explain the nature of the cause between variables when studying a situation or problem. Explanatory studies require a descriptive examination first in order to analyze and get a clearer picture of the variables’ correlation (Saunders et al., 2012). This study was conducted according to the exploratory method since the purpose of the study was to gain insights into how fashion companies can create brand equity with environmentally sustainable efforts.
Additionally, there is scarcely previous research on this area which implies that the exploratory study is considered to be the most appropriate method to utilize.
23
3.2 Research Approach
This study aimed to have an explorative focus, which can be executed with a qualitative or quantitative approach (David & Sutton, 2016). While a quantitative study is more focused on the measurement of numbers and variables, a qualitative approach is characterized by words and open- ended questions. However, the distinction between them is not entirely clear and therefore a study tends to be more qualitative than quantitative or the other way around (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
As this study strived to explore and understand the meaning of individuals and groups assigned to a social problem, in terms of consumers’ perception of CE initiatives, a more qualitative approach was most suitable (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
According to Creswell and Creswell (2018), the process of qualitative research involves “emerging questions and procedures, data typically collected in the participant’s setting, data analysis inductively building from particulars to general themes, and the researcher making interpretations of the meaning of the data” (p. 43). This is in line with David and Sutton (2016), stating that qualitative research is often associated with inductive methods. Inductive methods are more explorative and focus on the individual meaning and addressing the complexity of a situation (Creswell & Creswell, 2016). The aim is to build explanations from the collected data, which does not require measurements and calculation methods in advance (David & Sutton, 2016). Since research on young consumers’ perception of CE initiatives is limited, the inductive method was beneficial for this study (Creswell & Creswell, 2016).
3.3 Research Strategy
Following the research approach, it is of importance to decide an appropriate strategy that sets a plan for how the researcher will proceed to answer the proposed research questions. Saunders et al. (2012) explain that the study's research questions, existing knowledge, timeframe, and access to participants are important elements to consider and should therefore guide the selection of research strategy. There are a number of different strategies to employ for researchers and they can both be used mutually exclusively and incorporated together, for example combining a case study within a survey or vice versa. According to Yin (2009), there are five different strategies for researchers to consider: experiment, survey, archival analysis, history, and case study. Saunders et
24
al. (2012) underline that certain research strategies suit qualitative research better in contrast to others that are more appropriate for quantitative studies. Further, Saunders et al. (2012) explain how experiments and surveys are generally linked with quantitative research strategies and archival analysis is often associated with a qualitative research approach. Yin (2009) states three different conditions that determine what kind of research strategy that should be conducted:
1. The nature of the research questions
2. The extent of control the researcher has over the actual behavioral event 3. The degree of focus on contemporary events in the research
In Table 2 below, the relationship between each research strategy together with the three conditions is presented.
Table 2. Relevant Situations for Different Research Strategies Method Form of Research
Question
Requires Control of Behavioral Events?
Focus on Contemporary Events?
Experiment How, why? Yes Yes
Survey Who, what, where, how many, how much?
No Yes
Archival Analysis
Who, what, where, how many, how much?
No Yes/No
History How, why? No No
Case Study How, why? No Yes
Source:Yin (2009)
The core of finding the most suitable research strategy that has an overall methodological fit is that all the elements in the methodology section have a high level of coherence which will enable the researcher to answer the research questions (Edmondson & McManus, 2007; Saunders et al., 2012). According to Edmondson and McManus (2017), “the key to good research lies not in choosing the right method, but rather in asking the right question and picking the most powerful method for answering that particular question” (p. 1157). Therefore, it is vital to choose a strategy that enables the researchers to ask questions that can help achieve answers to what the study aims at. Thus, if none of the earlier mentioned strategies reinforce the study, it is more meaningful to
25
find a strategy that is better aligned with the purpose of the study and its research questions (Edmondson & McManus, 2007).
This study aimed to gain insights into how fashion companies can create brand equity with environmentally sustainable efforts. Previous research in this field is limited and the novelty of CE makes in-depth interviews a suitable research strategy to adopt. By interviewing the respondents with open questions, new insights emerged during the process and the researchers developed a greater understanding of the field, which suits exploratory studies appropriately (Edmondson &
McManus, 2007). Moreover, this study seeks to gain overall insights into consumers' perception towards CE initiatives without preconceived assumptions, which was made possible by conducting in-depth interviews.
3.4 Data Collection
To collect data within a qualitative research approach, David and Sutton (2016) argue that various types of interviews are common methods. This study has acquired primary data through in-depth interviews, which is a suitable method for qualitative research (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The purpose was to fully understand the opinions and beliefs among the group of Generation Z.
Qualitative interviews are usually conducted face-to-face or through telephone (Creswell &
Creswell, 2016). Additionally, these interviews involve unstructured and generally open-ended questions. Unstructured interviews are characterized by a few numbers of questions adjusted to the specific situation in order to give the respondent the ability to express themselves more openly.
Thus, the questions asked and the order of them can vary on different occasions (Creswell &
Creswell, 2016).
On the other end of the spectrum, qualitative interviews can be structured. This means that the interview process is standardized, including equal questions arrayed in the same order throughout all occasions. This study includes a semi-structured approach, meaning the interviews were conducted with a combination of both approaches. As a result, the interviewees were asked unstructured to partly structured questions during the interviews which enabled them to answer and discuss a question or subject within a certain frame (David & Sutton, 2016; Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). All interviews took place on digital platforms such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams
26
due to the circumstances of COVID-19. The interviewee was provided with information and instructions before the interview took place in order to build trust (David & Sutton, 2016).
Additionally, the interviewee was asked for consent to record the interview in order to enable transcription. The interviews followed an interview guide that was developed based on existing literature in the field (see Appendix for complete interview guide). Thus, the interview questions related to RQ2 were based on Aaker’s (1996) measurements The Brand Equity Ten, to strengthen the validity. The interview guide provided a structure for the interview but contained opportunities to ask supplementary questions.
3.5 Sample Selection
The selection of respondents to this study was based on the intention to understand the problem and properly answer the research questions, which is in line with the idea of qualitative research (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). To fulfill the purpose of the study, the target population was defined as consumers of fast fashion within Generation Z (born 1994-2002) and currently living in Sweden.
As mentioned, studies have shown that the interest in sustainable products has increased among younger consumers (Kim et al., 2021). Generation Z is also the future’s mass consumers, which makes the population interesting to study. The age range was defined with consideration to existing guidelines on research aimed at young people in Sweden (Socialstyrelsen, 2015). Therefore, this study only included consumers over the years of 18. Within the population, it was important to have a spread between the different ages, and diversity regarding gender, self-disclosed environmental consciousness, and consumption of fast fashion. To be able to appropriately answer the interview questions, the interviewee was required to purchase from a fast fashion brand at least once a year. Information about the interviews is listed in Table 3.
