The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1361-2026.htm

Consumer
The consumption side of eco-fashion
sustainable fashion supply chain consumption
Understanding fashion consumer eco-fashion
consumption decision 193
Ting-yan Chan and Christina W.Y. Wong
Business Division, Institute of Textiles and Clothing,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong,
People’s Republic of China

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationships between product- and
store-related attributes of eco-fashion and fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decisions; and
if such relationships are subject to the price premium level of eco-fashion.
Design/methodology/approach – A survey was conducted with consumers in Hong Kong: in total,
216 consumers participated in the survey. A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to check the
validity and reliability of the scales. Hypotheses were tested using multiple regression analysis.
Findings – The findings showed that only store-related attributes of eco-fashion positively influence
consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision, yet, such relationship can be weakened by the price
premium level of eco-fashion.
Research limitations/implications – Fashion consumers’ response to product- and store-related
attributes of eco-fashion is still important in predicting fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption
decision. Fashion consumer environmental attitudes can predict fashion consumers’ eco-fashion
consumption decision better than fashion consumers’ attitude towards eco-fashion.
Practical implications – It is not enough for fashion companies to manufacture fashion clothing in
an ethical production system and develop and design fashion clothing with sustainable and recyclable
materials. They must also improve store-related attributes of eco-fashion to better satisfy fashion
consumer needs, and should be cautious in the direct and moderating effect of price premium level of
eco-fashion when determining the price premium level of eco-fashion.
Originality/value – The paper contributes to research by advancing understanding on how
consumers make ethical consumption decisions in purchasing fashion, and provides retailers with
managerial insights into devising marketing plans to promote eco-fashion consumption, which
facilitate fashion companies’ development of a sustainable fashion supply chain. Limitations and
directions for future research are also presented in the paper.
Keywords Hong Kong, Consumer behaviour, Ethics, Fashion, Eco-fashion,
Sustainable consumption, Product-related attributes, Store-related attributes, Price premium,
Eco-fashion consumption decision, Sustainable development, Fashion supply chain
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Due to the adverse environmental impacts of the present clothing consumption behavior,
there is a rising concern on sustainability issues on the consumption side of the fashion
supply chain (FSC) (Fineman, 2001; Jackson, 2004; Birtwistle and Moore, 2007; Carter and Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management
Vol. 16 No. 2, 2012
The authors would like to thank the Editor-in-Chief, Editors, and the three anonymous referees pp. 193-215
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
for their helpful comments on the earlier version of the paper, This research was supported by 1361-2026
the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong Special Administration Region (PolyU 5015-PPR-10). DOI 10.1108/13612021211222824
JFMM Rogers, 2008; Niinimäki, 2010). Fashion companies, including manufacturers and
16,2 retailers, are increasingly developing and marketing eco-fashion to promote sustainable
consumption ( Joergens, 2006; Fletcher, 2008; Wong et al., 2011a, 2012a, b). Although
fashion consumers have a positive attitude toward environmental protection, they rarely
apply such attitude into eco-fashion consumption (Solomon and Rabolt, 2004; Niinimäki,
2010). The attitude-behavior gap in fashion consumers’ environmental protection interest
194 and eco-fashion consumption disappoints fashion companies (Weller, 2008), and
motivates green marketing and eco-fashion consumption research to investigate factors
that influence fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision (ECD) (e.g. Tanner
and Kast, 2003; Jalas, 2004; Solomon and Rabolt, 2004; Sener and Hazer, 2008; Niinimäki,
2010). Among other factors, product-related attributes (PRA) of eco-fashion (e.g. product
design, quality, and price) and store-related attributes (SRA) of eco-fashion (e.g. store
design and environment, store’s ethical practices, and shop convenience) have been
argued as factors that influence ECD (Niinimäki, 2010). Prior studies revealed that fashion
consumers are interested in purchasing eco-fashion but they are not willing to sacrifice
personally, such as paying a higher price ( Joergens, 2006; Carrigan and Attala, 2001).
Following this line of thought, we argue that the relationships between PRA and SRA of
eco-fashion and ECD are subject to the price premium (PP) level of eco-fashion.
Although many studies in green marketing and eco-fashion consumption literature
have investigated the relationships between PRA, SRA, PP, and ECD (e.g. Carrigan and
Attalla, 2001; Beard, 2008; Ochoa, 2011), they are confined to a number of aspects. First,
while customer service is an important SRA that affects fashion consumers’ purchase
decision (Erdem et al., 1999; Batlas and Papastathopoulou, 2003), its impact on ECD
has been neglected in prior studies. This study considers customer service as part of
SRA and examines how customer service in addition to store design and environment,
store’s ethical practices, and shop convenience influence ECD. Second, prior studies
are confined to examine the direct effect of PP on ECD, and little is known about
the moderating role of PP. This study represents an initial study to examine the
moderating effect of PP on the relationship between PRA and SRA, and ECD,
providing insights into the condition under which the relationships of PRA, SRA, ECD
can be generalized. Lastly, the lack of theoretical explanation on the relationships
between PRA, SRA, PP, and ECD, is perhaps the most pressing issue that deserves
more research attention. Based on the consumer decision-making process (CDMP)
theory and the conventional economic theory, this study examines the relationships
among PRA, SRA, PP, and ECD.
This study contributes to academic and fashion companies in twofold. First, many
researchers have indicated that fashion consumers’ ethical consumption decision-making
process is highly complicated and is difficult to be predicted (Nordas, 2004; Sen, 2008;
Niinimäki, 2010). This study contributes by providing better understanding on how
consumers make ethical consumption decision in purchasing fashion. Second, eco-fashion
consumption is a key contributor to sustainability development of FSC by driving demand
of eco-fashion (Niinimäki, 2009, 2010; Faisal, 2010). This study provides managerial
insights into devising marketing plan to promote eco-fashion consumption, which
facilitate fashion companies’ development of a sustainable FSC (Lai and Wong, 2012).

2. Theoretical model and hypothesis

2.1 ECD
Eco-fashion is defined as the type of clothing that is designed and manufactured to
maximize benefits to people and society while minimizing adverse environmental
impacts ( Joergens, 2006; Claudio, 2007; Ochoa, 2011). Eco-fashion is produced by Consumer
taking account of its environmental impacts, which may be made with biodegradable eco-fashion
or recycled materials (e.g. organically grown cotton and corn fiber) and
environmentally responsible production processes (e.g. dyed in the natural dyes) consumption
( Joergens, 2006; Fletcher, 2008). Eco-fashion consumption refers to the consumers’
purchase behavior on eco-fashion (Niinimäki, 2010). The purchase of eco-fashion
suggests a sustainable consumption at the end of a FSC, forcing the upstream FSC 195
processes, ranging from sourcing, production, to distribution, to be environmentally
responsible in order to satisfy customer needs and expectations (Jackson, 2003, 2004;
Claudio, 2007; Young et al., 2010).
Recent studies revealed that fashion consumers’ sustainable consumption decision
is highly complicated (Niinimäki, 2010). Fashion consumers are less likely to purchase
eco-fashion despite their positive attitude toward environmental protection (Joergens,
2006; Niinimäki, 2010; Ochoa, 2011). There is an attitude-behavior gap of fashion
consumers’ environmental protection interest and ethical consumption (Niinimäki,
2010). Fashion consumers differ from consumers in other sectors when making ethical
consumption decision (Niinimäki, 2010). For example, consumers in the food sector
show more commitment in ethical consumption since food directly affects consumers’
health and their choice reflects a benefit to them ( Joergens, 2006; Ochoa, 2011). On the
contrary, consumers in the fashion sector show less commitment in sustainable
consumption because an unethical choice does not directly affect their health and
well-being ( Joergens, 2006). Therefore, many studies have dedicated to investigate the
motivations of fashion consumers for eco-fashion consumption (Birtwistle and Moore,
2007; Niinimäki, 2010; Ochoa, 2011). The motivations of purchasing eco-fashion are
mainly related to the attributes of product and retail store that are beneficial for them
to express fashion trends (Beard, 2008; Niinimäki, 2010; Ochoa, 2011).

2.2 Hypothesis development

2.2.1 PRA and SRA of eco-fashion. PRA are considered as characteristics of the
physical product, which are related to the product’s features and performance (Keller,
1993; Park and Sullivan, 2009), such as product design, quality, and price (Keller, 1993).
SRA are considered as characteristics of the store, which are related to store’s features
and store operations (Keller, 1993; Park and Sullivan, 2009). Customer service,
store design and environment, store’s ethical practices, and shop convenience are the
common SRA that fashion consumers observe. Apart from expressing the fashion
trends (Beard, 2008; Niinimäki, 2010; Ochoa, 2011), PRA and SRA benefit fashion
consumers by fulfilling their various needs (Niinimäki, 2010), such as physical needs
for protection and functionality, emotional needs of expressing their personality
(Kaiser, 1990), and psychological needs of identity building (Max-Neef, 1992;
Niinimäki, 2010). Fashion consumers tend not to compromise their needs of fashion
clothing to be environmentally friendly (Ginsberg and Bloom, 2004; Joergens, 2006).
When a fashion consumer is asked to tradeoff PRA and SRA of eco-fashion and
environmental protection, the latter is often given a lower priority (Ginsberg and
Bloom, 2004; Joergens, 2006; Brito et al., 2008). PRA and SRA are therefore argued
to be the dominant factors that influence ECD (Solomon and Rabolt, 2004; Niinimäki,
2010; Bhaduri and Ha-Brookshire, 2011; Ochoa, 2011).
CDMP theory (Engel et al., 1986) conjectures that when a fashion consumer
recognizes a need of eco-fashion, they evaluate various PRA and SRA before making a
final purchase decision. CDMP theory suggests that various PRA and SRA have
JFMM different importance in fashion consumers’ mind, and their final purchase decision is
16,2 influenced by the evaluation of various PRA and SRA collectively. Table I summarizes
the seminal studies in green marketing and eco-fashion consumption literature that
focussed on different PRA and SRA and their findings about the effects of different PRA
and SRA on ECD.
2.2.1.1 PRA of eco-fashion and fashion consumers’ ECD. PRA, attributed by product
196 design, quality, and price, are critical in affecting ECD (Butler and Francis, 1997; Solomon
and Rabolt, 2004; Bhaduri and Ha-Brookshire, 2011). Eco-fashion product design
determines fashion consumers’ first impression of the garment, and communicates the
advantages for fashion consumers (Bloch, 1995; Creusen and Schoormans, 2005). Eco-
fashion product design presents value of a piece of fashion as fashion consumers prefer
fashion clothing that appears esthetically pleasant ( Joergens, 2006; Beard, 2008). When
fashion consumers are asked to choose between two pieces of fashion clothing that are at
the same price and provide the same function, they tend to purchase fashion clothing
that appears esthetically appealing (Bloch, 1995; Creusen and Schoormans, 2005).
Fashion consumers will also not buy eco-fashion that they consider are overpriced (Lloyd
et al., 1993; Carrigan and Attalla, 2001; Joergens, 2006). Fashion consumers are
discouraged to buy eco-fashion due to poor quality, such as scratchy hand feel and
uncomfortable materials (Carrigan and Attalla, 2001; Joergens, 2006; Niinimäki, 2010).
Fashion consumers indicated that they will purchase eco-fashion only if there is no
compromise on quality (Carrigan and Attalla, 2001). Therefore, we conjecture that:
H1. PRA is positively associated with ECD.
2.2.1.2 SRA of eco-fashion and fashion consumers’ ECD. SRA, attributed by customer
service, store design and environment, store’s ethical practices, and shop convenience,
are also critical in influencing ECD (Erdem et al., 1999; Batlas and Papastathopoulou,
2003). SRA creates value by enhancing fashion consumer shopping experience (Baker
et al., 2002; Grewal et al., 2003; Kassinis and Soteriou, 2003; Olivia and Kallenberg,
2003). When fashion consumers perceive a higher level of customer service quality,
they are more satisfied with the retail store and its product and/or service offerings,
which subsequently may lead to their purchase (Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Zeitaml et al.,
1996). A pleasant store environment is also useful to stimulate fashion consumers’
purchase (Baker et al., 2002). Store’s atmospheric factors, such as ambient factor (e.g.
lighting and music) and social factors (e.g. friendliness of employees), can also
influence fashion consumers’ purchase decision (Grewal et al., 2003).
On the other hand, retail stores are now increasingly integrating ethical practices into
their operations to be responsible to the environment (Creyer, 1997; Carrigan
and Attalla, 2001). Store’s ethical practices, such as offering recycling service and
recyclable products, can enhance fashion consumers’ perceived effectiveness of
environmental protection (Roberts and Bacon, 1997). Fashion consumers perceived
that purchase at a store that implements environmental management practices can
indirectly help protect the environment (Creyer, 1997; Carrigan and Attalla, 2001; Calvin
and Lewis, 2005). Therefore, fashion consumers consider environmentally responsible
SRA as important criterion when making purchase decision (Creyer, 1997; Carrigan and
Attalla, 2001). Moreover, shop convenience allows fashion consumers to access eco-
fashion easily, and is likely to drive purchase of eco-fashion (Clarkson et al., 1996; Clarke
et al., 1997; Batlas and Papastathopoulou, 2003). We therefore hypothesize that:
H2. SRA is positively associated with ECD.
 Scope of PRA
and SRA
References examined Findings

Beard (2008) PRA: It is not enough that the clothes are only produced ethically but they also have to be fashionable and suit the consumer’s esthetic
PD needs
Environmental aspects have to be combined with good design and fashion to produce more desirable eco-fashion
Bratt (1999) PRA: People might not be willing to practice environmentally friendly behavior, which required less sacrifice or could be achieved at
P lower cost
Butler and Francis (2007) PRA: Ultimately, an eco-fashion item is a fashion item, which implies price and style as determinant choice criteria
PD
P
Carrigan and Attalla (2001) PRA: Ethical purchasing will take place only if there are no costs to the consumer in terms of higher price, loss quality, and discomfort
P in shopping
Q Despite consumers caring about the ethical behavior of companies, this care does not translate into consumption choices that
SRA: favor ethical companies and punish unethical enterprises
SDE
SEP
Crane and Clarke (1994) PRA: There would be more consumers willing to practice environmental consumption or to switch brand when the price of the green
P products and the non-green products was equal
Creyer (1997) SRA: The ethicality of a firm’s behavior is an important consideration during the purchase decision
SEP Consumers will reward ethical behavior by a willingness to pay higher prices for that firm’s product. Although they may buy
from an unethical firm, they want to do so at a lower price, which in effect, punishes the unethical act
Dickson and Littrell (1997) PRA: The attributes such as price, quality, and product design might affect behavioral change
PD
Q
P
Joergens (2006) PRA: Consumer does not actually have real opportunity to choose ethical clothing because almost all garments are produced in cheap
PD Asian countries, prices are not comparable in ethical clothing, and the design and appearance of eco-clothing are unfashionable
Q and unattractive or do not suit the consumer’s wardrobe needs or his/her personal style
P
Kim and Damhorst (1998) PRA: The attributes such as price, quality, and product design and function might affect attitudinal and behavioral change
PD

(continued)
consumption
eco-fashion
Consumer

between ECD and

to the relationships

different PRA and SRA

197

Table I.
Review of topics related
 16,2

198

Table I.
JFMM

Scope of PRA
and SRA
References examined Findings

Q
P
Lloyd et al. (1993) PRA: Customers who were used to paying US$10 for a t-shirt might not be willing to pay US$20 for an environmentally clean t-shirt
P
MDF (1998) PRA: Consumers comment that environmental clothing was not fashionable and materials were uncomfortable and scratchy
PD
Q
Niinimäki (2010) PRA: When purchasing clothes, consumers do not think about sustainability. Price and style are more dominant factors when they buy
P fashion able items. In fashion, the desire to renew one’s appearance according to changing fashions and identities is in
PD contradiction with sustainable consumption
Ochoa (2011) PRA: The attributes for buying eco-fashion enhance my quality of life. “Softness and higher quality of cotton” and “To support the
PD protection of the environment” are very important to most fashion consumers
Q The two main barriers for buying eco-fashion are “not stylish” and “expensive”
P Price is a sensitive factor for potential eco-fashion customers regardless of their organic food intake
Roberts (1996) PRA: The attributes such as price, quality, and product design might affect behavioral change
PD Consumers were not actually willing to spend more green products when they found that the products were too expensive
Q
P
Roberts and Bacon (1997) PRA: Ecological consideration was less important than price, quality, and convenience in influencing consumers’ choices of products
Q
P
SRA:
SC
Speer (1997) PRA: Price, design, and quality were the major buying criteria. Only 6 percent of consumers considered environmental impact to be
PD their primary buying criteria
Q
P

Notes: ECD, fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision; PRA, product-related attributes of eco-fashion; SRA, store-related attributes of eco-
fashion; PD, product design; Q, quality; P, price; SDE, store design and environment; SEP, store’s ethical practices; SC, shop convenience
Source: Business articles and studies in green marketing and eco-fashion consumption literature published between 1993 and 2011
2.2.2 PP level of eco-fashion and fashion consumers’ ECD. Eco-fashion currently Consumer
appears to be at a PP in the market due to the higher cost of organic raw materials eco-fashion
(Brito et al., 2008). PP refers to the pricing that is above the average price (Roberts,
1996). Environmentally responsible consumers are often assumed willing to pay a consumption
premium for eco-products to protect the environment (Ferraro et al., 2005). Table II
summarizes the seminal studies in green marketing and eco-fashion consumption
literature that focussed on PP and their findings about the effect of PP on ECD. Prior 199
studies found that only a few of these consumers are willing to pay a premium for eco-
fashion. Fashion consumers do not wish their purchase of eco-fashion to cause any
personal sacrifices (Crane and Clarke, 1994). According to the conventional economic
theory (Monroe, 1973), PP represents a monetary measure of what is sacrificed in their
purchase of eco-fashion (Dodds et al., 1991). In other words, fashion consumers are not
willing to pay a premium for eco-fashion when they consider a piece of eco-fashion is
too expensive (Roberts, 1996). Generally, fashion consumers have a price range that is
acceptable to pay for a product (Crane and Clarke, 1994; Bratt, 1999). When fashion
consumers consider the price of eco-fashion is higher than their acceptable price range,
they are likely to refrain from making the purchase. It is suggested that a 10 percent PP
would not affect fashion consumers’ willingness to purchase eco-fashion but a 25-30
percent PP is considered unacceptable by consumers (Miller, 1992).
The conventional economic theory (Monroe, 1973) suggests that when the price
level of fashion clothing is high and a fashion consumer is less familiar with the
clothing due to infrequent purchase, consumers are likely to perceive a risk of an
incorrect assessment (Dodds et al., 1991). Under such circumstance, fashion consumers
are likely to use the price as an indicator of quality. When the fashion clothing is priced
at a high level, fashion consumers tend to have a higher perceived quality of fashion
clothing or customer service, thus greater willingness to purchase fashion clothing
(Parasuraman et al., 1985; Dodds et al., 1991). In contrast, fashion consumers will be
suspicious of the quality of fashion clothing and customer service if its price is below

References Findings

Crane and Clarke Few consumers were willing to pay a 15 percent premium for environmentally
(1994) sound products even though they were highly involved in the green issues
Lloyd et al. (1993) Retailers with experience in selling green products also stated that the major
obstacle for the growth potential of green apparel was the added 10-15 percent
to the original price
Miller (1992) An additional 10 percent would not affect consumers’ willingness to pay for
environmentally correct products but an additional 25-30 percent premium was
unacceptable
Mintel (2009) Consumers do not see an environmental aspect as a value added and do not
want to pay a “green” price premium
Nakano (2007) Consumers will not pay over 10 percent more for sustainable clothes
Table II.
Ochoa (2011) The two factors for not buying organic clothing that received the highest
Review of topics related to
importance are “expensive” and “not stylish” with 45 and 48 percent,
the relationship between
respectively
fashion consumers’
Roberts (1996) Consumers were not actually willing to spend more on green products when
eco-fashion consumption
they found that the products were too expensive
decision and
Source: business articles and studies in green marketing and eco-fashion consumption literature price premium level of
published between 1992 and 2011 eco-fashion
JFMM their acceptable price range, thus discouraging them to purchase clothing
16,2 (Parasuraman et al., 1985). The price level of fashion clothing influences the effects
of the perceived quality of fashion clothing and customer service on purchase decision
(Dodds et al., 1991). The conventional economic theory conjectures that the PP level of
fashion clothing can improve or deteriorate the effects of PRA and SRA of eco-fashion
on ECD. We therefore hypothesize that:
200
H3. PP moderates the relationship between PRA and ECD.

H4. PP moderates the relationship between SRA and ECD (Figure 1).

3. Research methodology
3.1 Sample
We examined the relationship among PRA, SRA, PP, and ECD in Hong Kong for the
following reason. Similar to many cities, Hong Kong suffers from high levels of
clothing disposal and rapidly diminishing landfill space (Civic Exchange, 2007). In
comparison with other countries, fashion consumers in Hong Kong are at the stage of
environmental protection awakening (Harris, 2006; Lee, 2009). Fashion consumers in
Hong Kong have recently started to realize the seriousness of environmental pollution
and the subsequent health problems, and have therefore become more open to
environmental protection issues (Yeung, 2005). Conducting research in the context of
Hong Kong allows us to understand eco-fashion consumption and factors that
influence ECD in an international fashion city. The findings are vital for international
fashion companies to develop and market eco-fashion (Beard, 2008), and directing
fashion consumers’ purchase behavior toward sustainable consumption (Young et al.,
2010).
A random sample was selected by intercepting and inviting consumers who
shopped at different fashion clothing retail stores in a shopping mall in Hong Kong to
complete the self-administered questionnaires. A total of 250 fashion consumers were
sampled, and 216 sets of questionnaire were completed and returned. The demographic
characteristics of respondents are presented in Table III. As we collected data in the
shopping mall that is nearby one of the universities in Hong Kong, 66.2 percent of
respondents are undergraduate students in the university, with an average age of
17.9-years old. As a majority of the respondents are full-time undergraduate students
in university and work on a part-time basis, the average monthly income is HK$
3,074.37 per month.

Product-related attributes of
eco-fashion (PRA)

Price premium level of

eco-fashion (PP) Fashion consumers’ eco-fashion
consumption decision (ECD)

Store-related attributes of
eco-fashion (SRA) Control variables:
Figure 1. age
Research model of fashion gender
consumers’ ECD education level
income level
 (%) of samples
Consumer
eco-fashion
Gender (1: male) consumption
Male 25
Female 75
Age
15 or below 0 201
15-24 76.9
25-34 17.1
35-44 3.2
45-54 1.4
55 or above 1.4
Educational level
Primary or below 1.4
Secondary 4.2
Diploma 6.9
Undergraduate 66.2
Postgraduate 21.3
Income level (HKD$ per month)
Below $1,000 27.3
$1,000-$3,999 35.2
$4,000-$6,999 11.1
$7,000-$9,999 7.9 Table III.
$10,000-$12,999 12 The demographic
$13,000-$15,999 4.6 characteristics of
$16,000 or above 1.9 respondents

3.2 Measurement
Based on the literature, PRA is reflected by three indicators, namely product design,
quality, and price, which were adopted from Solomon and Rabolt (2004), Joergens
(2006), and Beard (2008). SRA consists of four elements, including customer service,
store display and environment, store’s ethical practices, and shop convenience, which
were adopted from Creyer (1997), Solomon and Rabolt (2004), Joergens (2006), and
Beard (2008). The respondents were asked to assess the level of importance of these
SRA using a five-point Likert scale, 1 ¼ very unimportant to 5 ¼ very important. The
measurement of ECD was adopted from Roberts (1996) and Roberts and Bacon (1997).
Respondents were asked to indicate the degree to which they are likely to purchase
“clothing that is durable,” “clothing with recycled content,” and “clothing that is safe to
the environment,” using a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 ¼ 0-20 to 5 ¼ 81-100
percent. Moreover, we adopted two survey measures from Miller (1992) and Lloyd et al.
(1993) to measure PP. Based on Miller’s (1992) suggestion on the PP that fashion
consumers are accepted to pay for, PP is measured by “1-10,” “11-20,” and “21-30
percent.” The measurement items for three constructs (i.e. PRA, SRA, and ECD) are
summarized in Appendix.
Chan (1999) suggested that environmentally conscious consumers tend to be better
educated, and higher in economic and income status. Some studies reported that
environmentally conscious consumers tend to be female and younger (Roberts and
Bacon, 1997; Lee, 2008, 2009). Since environmentally conscious consumers are found to
be different from the less environmentally conscious consumers in terms of
demographic variable, including age, gender, education level, and income level,
JFMM we control these variables in the analysis to indicate how general fashion consumers
16,2 make sustainable consumption decision.

3.3 Measurement validation

We employed confirmatory factor analysis with AMOS 18.0 to validate the
measurement model.
202 The correlations of variables are statistically significant at po0.05 level, suggesting
the correlations between PRA, SRA, and ECD are statistically significant non-zero
correlations at the 95 percent confidence level. All constructs have AVE of 40.5,
suggesting the convergent validity and at least 50 percent of variance in all constructs
is due to the hypothesized underlying trait. The validity of all constructs and the
individual variables are high (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The square root of AVE for
PRA and SRA are greater than the correlation of these two constructs, suggesting
discriminant validity (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
The Cronbach’s a coefficients of all constructs are above 0.6, suggesting internal
consistency. Despite abundant studies actively debating on the threshold of the
Cronbach’s a coefficient (Peterson, 1994), prior studies such as Park and Kim (2003)
considered Cronbach’s a of 0.6 as an acceptable threshold (Davis, 1964; Hair et al., 1998).
Regarding the composite reliability; the coefficients for all constructs are above 0.6,
indicating good internal consistency (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). The descriptive statistics
and correlations of different variables are shown in Table IV, and the results of
reliability and validity analysis are summarized in Table V.

3.4 Common method variance

We conducted Harman’s single-factor test to test the risk of having common method
bias (Chang et al., 2010). The Harman’s single-factor test finds three factors accounted
for the majority of variance of 12 indicators, accounting for 14.50, 13.49, and 11.83
percent of variance of the 12 indicators accordingly. As the result indicates more than
one general factor accounted for the majority of the covariance between the measures,
thus, common method bias does not seem to be a problem in this study (Podsakoff et al.,
2003; Straub et al., 2004; Chang et al., 2010).

3.5 Data analysis and results

We tested the hypotheses in three regression models through multiple regression
analysis with SPSS 17.0. Figures 2-4 depict the three regression models, while the
following are the three regression equations:
ECD ¼ a1 þ b1A þ b2G þ b3EL þ b4IL ð1Þ

Variables Mean SD PRA SRA CPD

PRA 3.985 0.521 0.787

SRA 3.289 0.572 0.329** 0.748
ECD 3.467 0.518 0.171* 0.197** 0.748
Table IV. Notes: PRA, product-related attributes of eco-fashion; SRA, store-related attributes of eco-fashion;
Mean, standard deviation ECD, fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision. Diagonal elements are square root of AVE;
(SD), and correlations of off-diagonal elements are correlations. *Correlations are significant at po0.05 (two-tailed);
the constructs **correlations are significant at po0.001 (two-tailed)
 Standardized Reliability
Consumer
regression of Composite Cronbach’s eco-fashion
Construct/indicator weight indicator AVE reliability a consumption
Product-related attributes of eco-fashion (PRA)
Product design 0.61 0.49 0.62 0.75 0.65
Quality 0.59 0.46 203
Price 0.65 0.55
Store-related attributes of eco-fashion (SRA)
Customer service 0.66 0.56 0.56 0.77 0.64
Store design and environment 0.52 0.36
Store’s environmental practices 0.53 0.37
Shop convenience 0.51 0.35
Fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision (ECD)
I will buy clothing that is durable in
the future 0.25 0.08 0.56 0.68 0.68
I will buy clothing with recycled
content in the future 0.69 0.61 Table V.
I will buy clothing that is safe to the Construct reliability and
environment 0.74 0.68 validity analysis

Age

Gender Figure 2.
Fashion consumers’ eco-fashion
consumption decision (ECD) Regression model 1: the
Education level main effects of
demographic variables on
Income level
ECD

Age

Gender

Education level

Income level
Fashion consumers’ eco-
The importance of product-related fashion consumption
attributes of eco-fashion in fashion decision (ECD)
consumers’ mind (PRA) Figure 3.
Regression model 2: the
The importance of store-related main effects of PRA and
attributes of eco-fashion in fashion SRA on ECD
consumers’ mind (SRA)

ECD ¼ a2 þ b5A þ b6G þ b7EL þ b8IL þ b9PRA þ b10SRA ð2Þ

ECD ¼ a3 þ b11A þ b12G þ b13EL þ b14IL þ b15PRA þ b16SRA ð3Þ

JFMM Age

16,2 Gender

Education level

Income level

204 The importance of product-related

attributes of eco-fashion in fashion
consumers’ mind (PRA)
Fashion consumers’ eco-
fashion consumption
Figure 4. Moderated by the price premium decision (ECD)
Regression model 3: the level of eco-fashion (PP)
main effect of PP and the
moderating effect of PP on
the relationships between The importance of store-related
attributes of eco-fashion in fashion
PRA, SRA, and ECD
consumers’ mind (SRA)

where ECD is the fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision; a1-a3 the
intercept term; b1-b16 the regression coefficients; A the age; G the gender; EL the
education level; IL the income level; PRA the product-related attributes of eco-fashion;
SRA the store-related attributes of eco-fashion; PP the price premium level of
eco-fashion; PRA  PP the interaction term of product-related attributes and price
premium level of eco-fashion; SRA  PP the interaction term of store-related attributes
and price premium level of eco-fashion.
As shown in Table VI, regression model 1 showed that the control variable, i.e. age,
gender, education level, and income level account for 1.1 percent of the variance of ECD.

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

R2 0.011 0.063 0.146

R2 change 0.011 0.052 (0.004)* 0.082 (0.000)**
Adjusted R2 0.008 0.036 0.107
Age 0.074 (0.891) 0.071 (0.196) 0.058 (0.275)
Gender 0.012 (0.185) 0.029 (0.732) 0.039 (0.626)
Educational level 0.043 (0.396) 0.053 (0.286) 0.012 (0.809)
Income level 0.004 (0.870) 0.011 (0.680) 0.009 (0.716)
PRA 0.123 (0.730) 0.098 (0.549)
SRA 0.139 (0.034)* 0.654 (0.000)**
PP 0.856 (0.028)*
PRA  PP 0.037 (0.717)
SRA  PP 0.310 (0.000)**
Notes: ECD, fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision; PRA, product-related attributes of
eco-fashion; SRA, store-related attributes of eco-fashion; PP, price premium level of eco-fashion;
PRA  PP, the interaction of product-related attributes of eco-fashion and price premium level of
Table VI. eco-fashion; SRA  PP, the interaction of store-related attributes of eco-fashion and price premium
Predicting fashion level of eco-fashion. Italicized elements are unstandardized coefficient for variable; elements in bracket
consumers’ eco-fashion are p-value of variable. *Statistically significant at the po0.05 level; **statistically significant at the
consumption decision po0.001 level
According to the result in regression model 2, PRA is statistically insignificant at the Consumer
po0.05 level, lending rejection of H1. Yet, SRA is positively associated with ECD, eco-fashion
lending support for H2. The results in regression model 3 suggest that the coefficients
for PRA and PRA  PP are statistically insignificant at po0.05 level, lending rejection consumption
of H3. The coefficients for SRA, PP, SRA  PP are statistically significant at po0.05
level, lending support for H4. PP negatively moderates the relationship between SRA
and ECD (Table VII). 205
Based on the results of three regression models analysis, the main effects of the
demographic variables on ECD is summarized in Equation (4). The main effects of
PRA and SRA on ECD are summarized in Equation (5). The main effect of PP and the
interaction effects of PP  PRA and PP  SRA on ECD are summarized in Equation (6).
ECE ¼ 3:112 þ 0:074A þ 0:012G þ 0:043EL  0:004IL ð4Þ

ECE ¼ 2:202 þ 0:071A þ 0:029G þ 0:053EL  0:011IL þ 0:123PRA

þ 0:139SRA ð5Þ

ECE ¼ 0:854 þ 0:058A  0:039G þ 0:012EL  0:009IL þ 0:098PRA

þ 0:654SRA þ 0:856PP  0:037PRAPP  0:31SRAPP ð6Þ

where ECD is the fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision; A the age;
G the gender; EL the education level; IL the income level; PRA the product-related
attributes of eco-fashion; SRA the store-related attributes of eco-fashion; PP the price
premium level of eco-fashion; PRA  PP the interaction term of product-related
attributes of eco-fashion and price premium level of eco-fashion; SRA  PP the
interaction term of store-related attributes of eco-fashion and price premium level of
eco-fashion.

4. Discussion
Our findings show that PRA is not related to ECD. Such may be due to respondents’
ECD being less likely to be stimulated by their physical needs for protection and
functionality, emotional needs of expressing their personality, and psychological needs
of identity building. The insignificant relationship between PRA and ECD may also be
explained by the respondents perceiving less importance of PRA than SRA when
making purchase decision on ECD. As shown in the results, SRA positively influences
ECD. In line with our theorization, this suggests that SRA plays an important role in
respondents’ eco-fashion purchase decision making although it only has some positive
effect on ECD.

Hypotheses Comments

H1 PRA is positively associated with ECD Rejected

H2 SRA is positively associated with ECD Supported Table VII.
H3 PP moderates the relationship between PRA and ECD Rejected Results of
H4 PP moderates the relationship between SRA and ECD Supported hypotheses testing
JFMM On the other hand, our findings are in line with prior studies (e.g. Lloyd et al., 1993;
16,2 Roberts, 1996) that PP is associated with ECD. Prior studies reported that high
PP discourages ECD as fashion consumers have a tight budget (Dodds et al., 1991;
Bratt, 1999) or do not want eco-fashion consumption to cause any sacrifice (Bratt, 1999)
or inconvenience (Carrigan and Attalla, 2001; Joergens, 2006). Our findings suggest
that respondents are open to environmental protection, and thus more willing to pay
206 a premium for eco-fashion to protect the environment (Yeung, 2005; Harris, 2006;
Lee, 2009).
Moreover, our findings show the moderating effect of PP on the relationship
between SRA and ECD, but have no significant moderating effect on the relationship
between PRA and ECD. Such may be due to SRA, such as customer service and stores’
ethical practices, which are relatively intangible and less visible to respondents
(Carrigan and Attalla, 2001; Olivia and Kallenberg, 2003). Respondents may find
difficulties in evaluating SRA (Carrigan and Attalla, 2001; Olivia and Kallenberg,
2003), and therefore use PP level of eco-fashion that is relatively tangible and
more visible to them to evaluate SRA when making purchase decision (Monroe and
Krishnan, 1985). In contrast, PRA, such as product design and quality, are relatively
tangible and more visible to fashion consumers for evaluation (Monroe and Krishnan,
1985; Creusen and Schoormans, 2005). Respondents can evaluate PRA subjectively
based on their needs and perception. More specifically, our findings show that PP
negatively moderates the relationship between SRA and ECD. Such may be because
respondents have an unfavorable perception on SRA due to the PP level of eco-fashion.
Respondents may think they have to pay a premium to support fashion companies’
improvement in their SRA, such as refurbishing their stores to retain and attract
fashion consumers, providing training about customer service to salespersons,
adopting environmentally management practices to mitigate environmental impacts of
their operations (Parasuraman et al., 1985; Zeitaml et al., 1996; Kandampully and
Bulter, 2001). Respondents therefore are discouraged by SRA to purchase eco-fashion.
As a result, the PP level of eco-fashion deteriorates the effect of SRA on ECD.

4.1 Research implications

This study provides a number of research implications. Despite the literature indicated
that fashion consumer environmental attitudes can predict ECD better than fashion
consumers’ attitude toward eco-fashion (Wilson et al., 1975; Engel et al., 1986), our
findings show that fashion consumers’ response to PRA and SRA is still important in
predicting ECD. More specifically, SRA is recognized as one factor that influences ECD,
suggesting the relationship between fashion consumers’ environmental attitude and
ECD depends on SRA. Besides, our findings show that the main effect of PP and the
interaction effects between PP and PRA and SRA of eco-fashion can explain more
variance in ECD, suggesting researchers should not underestimate the main effect of
PP and the moderating effect of PP on the relationships between PRA and SRA of
eco-fashion and ECD.
This study contributes to the CDMP theory and conventional economic theory by
providing empirical evidence to explain the effects of PRA, SRA, and PP on ECD.
Our findings provide researchers’ with insights into how fashion consumers make
ECD, which was commented as a highly complicated decision-making process (Nordas,
2004; Sen, 2008; Niinimäki, 2010). As suggested by CDMP theory, we examined how
PRA and SRA collectively influence ECD. Our findings show that PRA, such as
product design, quality, and price collectively does not have an impact on ECD, yet,
prior studies indicated that product design, quality, and price individually do have an Consumer
impact on ECD, suggesting PRA has influence on ECD only when they are examined eco-fashion
separately. On the other hand, our study provides researchers with better understanding
on the effect of SRA on ECD. Our study represents an initial study to consider customer consumption
service as part of SRA and examined how customer service in addition to store design
and environment, store’s ethical practices, and shop convenience influence ECD. Our
findings suggest SRA remains a critical role in affecting ECD. 207
Moreover, as suggested by the conventional economic theory, we examined how PP
influences ECD and moderates the relationship between PRA and SRA of eco-fashion
and ECD. Our findings revealed that PP not only has direct effect on ECD, but also has
moderating effect on the relationship between SRA and ECD, providing researchers’
the boundary condition for generalizing relationships between SRA and ECD. In a
situation where researchers seek to find generalizability of the causal relationship
between SRA and ECD, the ideal outcome is no moderating effect is found on the casual
relationship between SRA and ECD (Aguinis, 2004). Our findings show PP negatively
moderates the relationship between SRA and ECD, suggesting the casual relationship
between SRA and ECD is varied by PP. Researchers should be cautious in the
moderating effect of PP when generalizing the causal relationship between SRA
and ECD.

4.2 Implications for fashion companies

Eco-fashion consumption is a key contributor of sustainable development of FSC by
driving demand of eco-fashion (Niinimäki, 2010). While fashion companies are
increasingly urged by their stakeholders, such as the government, their customers and
the public groups, to mitigate environmental impacts and build a sustainable FSC (Lai
et al., 2010, 2012; Lai and Wong, 2012; Wong et al., 2011a), it is important for fashion
companies to devise marketing plan to promote eco-fashion consumption, and thus
facilitating the development of sustainable FSC (Gurau and Ranchhod, 2005). This
study provides implications on the approaches to motivate eco-fashion consumption
and pricing eco-fashion, which will be useful for fashion companies to devise
marketing plan to promote eco-fashion consumption, and thus facilitating the
development of sustainable FSC.
Whether fashion companies can influence fashion consumers’ purchase behavior
depends on their ability to fulfill fashion consumer needs (Solomon and Rabolt, 2004).
Besides, fashion consumers are motivated by the specific attributes of product and
retail store that are beneficial for them, such as expressing fashion trends (Beard, 2008;
Niinimäki, 2010; Ochoa, 2011). Our findings show that SRA positively influences ECD,
suggesting fashion companies can motivate fashion consumers to purchase
eco-fashion by using SRA to fulfill fashion consumer needs and to provide benefits
to fashion consumers. Our findings also suggest that it is not enough for fashion
companies to manufacture fashion clothing in an ethical production system and
develop and design fashion clothing with sustainable and recyclable materials, but
also to improve SRA to better satisfy fashion consumer needs. Generally, fashion
consumers have three various needs, including physical needs, emotional needs, and
psychological needs (Solomon and Rabolt, 2004; Niinimäki, 2010). Fashion companies
are suggested to use or improve SRA to better satisfy fashion consumers’ physical
needs, emotional needs, and psychological needs as marketing strategy to promote
eco-fashion consumption, and thus facilitating their development of sustainable FSC
(Lai et al., 2012).
JFMM First of all, fashion consumers have indicated that they are unaware of the
16,2 availability of eco-fashion and only able to access limited information about eco-fashion
( Joergens, 2006), yet they have physical needs of easy access to eco-fashion and the
information about eco-fashion. Fashion companies are suggested to satisfy fashion
consumers’ physical needs of easy access to eco-fashion by designing store layout that
is easy for fashion consumers to find eco-fashion to enhance shop convenience. Fashion
208 companies can use more signage to indicate where the eco-fashion is placed in the
store, providing benefit to fashion consumers in terms of time saving for finding the
eco-fashion they want and speeding up their purchasing process. Besides, fashion
companies are suggested to develop e-tailing in addition to their existing physical
stores to improve the ease of accessing eco-fashion and the information about eco-
fashion (Chiang and Dholakia, 2003; Monsuwé et al., 2004). E-tailing provides a
platform for fashion companies to disseminate more up-to-date information about
eco-fashion to fashion consumers, such as the price of eco-fashion and the style of
eco-fashion, providing fashion consumers with benefit to search and evaluate more
information about eco-fashion when making purchase decision on eco-fashion.
Moreover, e-tailing allows fashion consumers to purchase eco-fashion whenever they
want through electronic payment (Chiang and Dholakia, 2003; Monsuwé et al., 2004),
providing fashion consumers benefit to purchase eco-fashion whenever they want
without time restriction and save time and costs to travel to the store for purchasing
eco-fashion.
Second, fashion consumers have indicated that they have emotional needs of feeling
good, energetic, and stimulated (Niinimäki, 2010). Fashion companies can better satisfy
fashion consumers’ emotional needs through two approaches. On one hand, fashion
companies can apply various environmental stimuli, such as music, store layout, and
color, to fulfill fashion consumers’ emotional needs since various environmental stimuli
can affect fashion consumers’ emotional states of pleasure (i.e. the extent to which a
fashion consumer feels good in the environment) and arousal (i.e. the extent to which a
fashion consumer feels excited or stimulated) (Grewal et al., 2003). For example,
playing soft music instead of rock music in the store can create favorable emotional
responses in fashion consumers. Designing store layout that is spacious for fashion
consumers can increase their pleasure. Using warm-colored walls instead of cool-
colored walls in the store lead fashion consumers to react emotionally. Moreover,
applying various environmental stimuli to create store environment can enhance
fashion consumers’ shopping experience. However, emotional states of pleasure and
arousal can affect fashion consumers’ purchase behavior (Grewal et al., 2003). Fashion
companies should be cautious in determining a set of various environmental stimuli
applied to fulfill fashion consumers’ emotional needs.
On the other hand, fashion companies can use services to fulfill fashion consumers’
emotional needs. Fashion companies can provide services, such as providing
information about eco-fashion, promoting the benefits of eco-fashion consumption, and
raising fashion consumer’s confidence level in eco-fashion, to stimulate fashion
consumer’s purchase decision. Besides, fashion companies are suggested to provide
services, such as providing greeting to fashion consumers, paying attention to fashion
consumer needs, and resolving fashion consumer’s problems related to eco-fashion,
which can show their sincerity to consumers and thus make their consumers feel good.
Providing services not only can better satisfy fashion consumers’ emotional needs of
stimulation and feeling good, but can also add value for fashion consumers. For
example, delivering products to fashion consumer’s home can add value for fashion
consumers and providing gift wrapping services can add value for fashion consumers. Consumer
If services are perceived as high quality by fashion consumers, fashion consumers will eco-fashion
have greater satisfaction of the fashion company and its product and/or service
offerings, and thus be more willing to purchase from the fashion company (Olivia and consumption
Kallenberg, 2003). Since services are delivered through the salesperson of the fashion
companies to the consumers (Dabholkar et al., 1996; Olivia and Kallenberg, 2003),
fashion companies are suggested to provide training about customer service to their 209
salesperson to enhance service quality to better satisfy fashion consumers.
Third, fashion consumers have psychological needs of ethical identify building
(Niinimäki, 2010). Fashion consumers indicated that they will have symbolic feeling of
advantage that links to a socially responsible lifestyle and can express their personal
ethical identity through purchasing from a store that behaves in an ethical ways
(Niinimäki, 2010). Therefore, fashion companies are suggested to adopt ethical
practices, such as integrating environmental management systems into operations
(Morrow and Rondinelli, 2002; Lai and Wong, 2012), providing a healthy and safe
working environment and training on environmental management practices to
employees (Robson et al., 2007; Lai and Wong, 2012; Wong et al., 2012b), offering
products that can be recycled (Lai et al., 2012; Wong et al., 2011a, b; Lai and Wong,
2012), and collecting customers’ returned packaging waste or products for recycling
(Wong et al., 2011a, b; Lai and Wong, 2012), which can fulfill fashion consumers’
psychological needs of ethical identity building (Campbell, 2007).
Besides, our findings show that PP positively influences SRA and negatively
moderates the relationship between SRA and ECD. Fashion companies should be
cautious in the direct and moderating effect of PP when determining the PP level of
eco-fashion. Our findings suggest that high PP can lead fashion consumers to have
negative impact on the ECD of SRA. Despite that fashion companies spend millions of
dollars to develop e-tailing, create a pleasant store environment, provide training to
salespersons to enhance service quality, integrate ethical practices into store operations
to motivate fashion consumers purchase decision, these efforts can be deteriorated by
high PP.

5. Limitations and future research

Similar to other studies, this study has a number of limitations, which are suggested to
be areas of future inquiry. First, having most respondents at the younger age is one of
the limitations of this study. Young fashion consumers, aged between 15 and 24, are
highly different in many ways from children or adults in other age groups (Lee, 2009).
For instance, young fashion consumers are highly susceptible to emotional appeals
(Joergens, 2006; Niinimäki, 2010). Researchers should be cautious in generalizing the
findings of this study to other age groups. Second, the sample size of our study is
relatively small (n ¼ 216) with limitations on a young age group, thus the findings may
not be able to generalize to other age groups. Third, all variables, including PRA, SRA,
and ECD, were measured self-reportedly. The reliance on self-reported measures may
run the risk of social desirability effect. Further study should examine the potential
impact of subjects’ social desirability bias on their response or include objective
assessments of these variables, such as using behavior measurement to measure
fashion consumers’ purchase behavior on eco-fashion. Fourth, this study used seven
common attributes that fashion consumers apply in evaluating eco-fashion (i.e. product
design, quality, price, customer service, store design and environment, store’s ethical
practices, and shop convenience) to examine the relationships among PRA and SRA of
JFMM eco-fashion, PP level of eco-fashion, and ECD. Future studies may consider examining
16,2 other PRA of eco-fashion, such as workmanship and durability (Abraham and Littrell,
1995) and SRA of eco-fashion, such as store name and store’s promotional activities
(Kumar and Leone, 1988; Krishna et al., 1991).

References
210 Abraham, M.L. and Littrell, M.A. (1995), “Consumers’ conceptualization of apparel attributes”,
Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 65-74.
Aguinis, H. (2004), Regression Analysis for Categorical Moderators, Guilford Publications
Incorporation, New York, NY.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Cognition
Emotion, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 1-26.
Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D. and Voss, G.B. (2002), “The influence of multiple store
environment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions”, The Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 66 No. 2, pp. 120-41.
Batlas, G. and Papastathopoulou, P. (2003), “Shopper characteristics, product and store choice
criteria: a survey in the Greek grocery sector”, International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 498-507.
Beard, N. (2008), “The branding of ethical fashion and the consumer: a luxury niche or mass-
market reality?”, Fashion Theory, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 447-68.
Bhaduri, G. and Ha-Brookshire, J.E. (2011), “Do transparent business practices pay? Exploration
of transparency and consumer purchase intention”, Clothing and Textile Research Journal,
Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 135-49.
Birtwistle, G. and Moore, C.M. (2007), “Fashion clothing – where does it all end up?”,
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 210-6.
Bloch, P.H. (1995), “Seeking the ideal form: product design and consumer response”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 16-29.
Bratt, C. (1999), “Consumers’ environmental behavior: generalized, sector-based or
consumption?”, Environmental and Behavior, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 28-44.
Brito, M.P., Carbone, V. and Blanquart, C.M. (2008), “Towards a sustainable fashion retail supply
chain in Europe: organization and performance”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 114 No. 2, pp. 534-53.
Butler, S.M. and Francis, S. (1997), “The effects of environmental attitudes on apparel purchasing
behavior”, Clothing and Textiles research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 76-85.
Calvin, B. and Lewis, A. (2005), “Focus groups on consumers’ ethical beliefs”, in Harrison, R.,
Newholm, T. and Shaw, D. (Eds), The Ethical Consumer, Sage, London, pp. 173-88.
Campbell, J.L. (2007), “Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An
institutional theory of corporate social responsibility”, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 946-67.
Carrigan, M. and Attalla, A. (2001), “The myth of ethical consumer: do ethics matter in purchase
behavior?”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 560-77.
Carter, C.R. and Rogers, D.S. (2008), “A framework of sustainable supply chain management:
moving toward new theory”, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics
Management, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 360-87.
Chan, K. (1999), “Market segmentation of green consumers in Hong Kong”, Journal of
International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 7-24.
Chang, S.J., Witteloostuijn, A.V. and Eden, L. (2010), “Common method variance in international
business research”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 178-84.
Chiang, K.P. and Dholakia, R.R. (2003), “Factors driving consumer intention to shop online: an Consumer
empirical investigation”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 13 Nos 1-2, pp. 177-83.
eco-fashion
Civic Exchange (2007), Idling Engine Hong Kong’s Environmental Policy in a Ten-Year Stall
1997-2007, Civic Exchange, Hong Kong. consumption
Clarke, I., Bennison, D. and Pal, J. (1997), “Towards a contemporary perspective of retail location”,
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 59-69.
Clarkson, R.M., Clarke-Hill, C.M. and Robinson, T. (1996), “UK supermarket location assessment”, 211
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 24 No. 26, pp. 22-33.
Claudio, L. (2007), “Waste couture: environmental impact of the clothing industry”, available at:
http://ecn.ecology.com/ecn-now/2010/11/02/waste-couture-environmental-impact-of-the-
clothing-industry/ (accessed January 9, 2011).
Crane, F.G. and Clarke, T.K. (1994), Consumer Behavior in Canada: Theory and Practice, 2nd ed.,
Dryden, Ontario.
Creusen, M.E.H. and Schoormans, J.P.L. (2005), “The different roles of product appearance in
consumer choice”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 63-81.
Creyer, E.H. (1997), “The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: do consumers really
care about business ethics?”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 421-9.
Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. (1992), “Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 55-68.
Dabholkar, P.A., Thorpe, D.I. and Rentz, J.O. (1996), “A measure of service quality for retail stores: scale
development and validation”, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 3-16.
Davis, F.B. (1964), Educational Measurements and Their Interpretation, Belmont, Wadsworth, CA.
Dickson, M.A. and Littrell, M.A. (1997), “Consumers of clothing from alternative trading
organizations: societal attitudes and purchase of evaluative criteria”, Clothing and Textiles
Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 20-33.
Dodds, W.B., Monroe, K.B. and Grewal, D. (1991), “Effects of price, brand and store information
on buyers’ product evaluations”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 307-19.
Engel, J., Blackwell, R. and Miniard, P. (1986), Consumer Behavior, The Dryden Press, New York, NY.
Erdem, O., Oumlil, A.B. and Tuncalp, S. (1999), “Consumer values and the importance of store
attributes”, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 137-44.
Faisal, M.N. (2010), “Faisal, sustainable supply chains: a study of interaction among the
enablers”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 508-29.
Ferraro, P.J., Uchida, T. and Conrad, J.M. (2005), “Are ‘green’ markets the best way to protect
endangered ecosystems?”, Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 419-38.
Fineman, S. (2001), “Fashioning the environment”, Organization, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 17-31.
Fletcher, K. (2008), “Sustainable fashion and clothing”, Design Journeys, Earthscan, Malta.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobserved
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Ginsberg, J.M. and Bloom, J. (2004), “Choosing the right green marketing strategy”, MIT Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 79-84.
Grewal, D., Baker, J., Levy, M. and Voss, G.B. (2003), “The effects of wait expectations and store
atmosphere evaluations on patronage intentions in service-intensive retail stores”, Journal
of Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 259-68.
Gurau, C. and Ranchhod, A. (2005), “International green marketing: a comparative study of
British and Romanian firms”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 541-61.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis,
5th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
JFMM Harris, P.G. (2006), “Environmental perspectives and behavior in China: synopsis and
bibliography”, Environmental and Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 5-21.
16,2
Jackson, T. (2003), Policies for Sustainable Consumption. Sustainable Development Commission,
Environmental Change Institute, Oxford University, Oxford.
Jackson, T. (2004), Models of Mammon: A Cross-Disciplinary Survey in Pursuit of the “Sustainable
Consumer”, University of Surrey, Surrey.
212 Jalas, M. (2004), “Consumers as subjects and participants of environmental management”, in
Heiskanen, E. (Ed.), Environmental and Business – Everyday Practices and Critical
Questions, Gaudeamus, Yliopistokustannus Oy, Tampere, pp. 211-26.
Joergens, C. (2006), “Ethical fashion: myth or future trend?”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 360-71.
Kaiser, S. (1990), The Social Psychology of Clothing: Symbolic Appearances in Context, 2nd ed.,
Macmillan, New York, NY.
Kandampully, J. and Bulter, L. (2001), “Service guarantees: a strategic mechanism to minimize
customers’ perceived risk in service organization”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp. 112-21.
Kassinis, G. and Soteriou, A. (2003), “Greening the service profit chain: the impact of
environmental management practices”, Production and Operations Management Society,
Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 386-402.
Keller, K.L. (1993), “Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Kim, H.S. and Damhorst, M.L. (1998), “Environmental concern and apparel consumption”,
Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 126-33.
Krishna, A., Currim, I.S. and Shoemaker, R.W. (1991), “Consumer perceptions of promotional
activity”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 4-16.
Kumar, V. and Leone, R.P. (1988), “Measuring the effect of retail store promotions on brand and
store substitution”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 178-85.
Lai, K.H., Cheng, T.C.E. and Tang, K.Y. (2010), “Green retailing: factors for success”, California
Management Review, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 6-31.
Lai, K.H. and Wong, C.W.Y. (2012), “Green logistics management and performance: some
empirical evidence from Chinese manufacturing exporters”, Omega – International Journal
of Management Science, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 267-82.
Lai, K.H., Wong, C.W.Y. and Cheng, T.C.E. (2012), “Ecological modernization forces and
performance implications of green logistics management”, Technological Forecasting and
Social Change, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 766-70.
Lee, K. (2008), “Opportunities for green marketing: young consumers”, Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 573-86.
Lee, K. (2009), “Gender differences in Hong Kong adolescent consumers’ green purchasing
behavior”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 87-96.
Lloyd, B., Nelson, A. and Sharoff, R. (1993), “‘Green’ apparel not quite ripe yet: higher prices stunt
growth, stores say”, Daily News Record, 18 June, p. 1.
Max-Neef, M. (1992), “Development and human needs”, in Ekins, P. and Max-Leef, M. (Eds),
Real-life Economics, Routledge, London, pp. 197-214.
MDF (1998), “Another go at ‘eco-fashion’”, Catalog Age, June, p. 78.
Miller, C. (1992), “Levi’s Esprit spin new cotton into eco-friendly clothes”, Marketing News,
27 April, p. 11.
Mintel, O. (2009), Ethical and Green Retailing-UK, Mintel International Group Limited, Chicago, IL.
Monroe, K.B. (1973), “Buyers’ subjective perceptions of price”, Journal of Marketing Research, Consumer
Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 70-80.
eco-fashion
Monroe, K.B. and Krishnan, R. (1985), “The effect of price on subjective product evaluations”, in
Jacoby, J. and Olson, J.C. (Eds), Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and consumption
Merchandise, Lexington, MA, pp. 209-32.
Monsuwé, T.P., Dellaert, B.G.C. and Ruyter, K. (2004), “What drives consumers to shop online?
A literature review”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, 213
pp. 102-21.
Morrow, D. and Rondinelli, D. (2002), “Adopting corporate environmental management systems:
motivations and results of 1SO 14001 and EMAS”, European Management Journal, Vol. 20
No. 2, pp. 159-71.
Nakano, Y. (2007), “Perceptions towards clothes with recycled content and environmental
awareness: the development of end markets”, in Miraftab, M., Horrocks, A.R., and Raton, B.
(Eds), Ecotextiles: The Way Forward for Sustainable Development in Textiles, Meta Press
Books, Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, MA, pp. 3-14.
Niinimäki, K. (2009), “Consumer values and eco-fashion in the future”, in Koskela, J. and Vinnari, M.
(Ed.), Future of the Consumer Society, Writers and Finland Futures Research Center, Turku
School of Economics, Tampere, pp. 125-34.
Niinimäki, K. (2010), “Eco-clothing, consumer identity and ideology”, Sustainable Development,
Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 150-62.
Nordas, H.K. (2004), “The global textile and clothing industry post the agreement on textiles and
clothing”, available at: www.tno.it/tecno_it/fashion4_2_05/documenti/WTO%20Discussion
%20Paper%20TExtile%20and%20Clothing%20after%202005.pdf (accessed March 1, 2011).
Ochoa, L.M.C. (2011), “Will ‘Eco-Fashion’ take off? A survey of potential customers of organic
cotton clothes in London”, available at: http://publicaciones.eafit.edu.co/index.php/
administer/article/view/188 (accessed October 10, 2011).
Olivia, R.L. and Kallenberg, R. (2003), “Managing the transition from products to services”,
International Journal of Service, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 160-72.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1985), “Understanding customer expectations of
service”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 39-48.
Park, C.H. and Kim, Y.G. (2003), “Indentifying key factors affecting consumer purchase behavior
in an online shopping context”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 16-29.
Park, H.H. and Sullivan, P. (2009), “Market-segmentation with respect to university students’
clothing benefits sought: shopping orientation, clothing attributes evaluation, and brand
repatronage”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 37 No. 2,
pp. 182-201.
Peterson, R.A. (1994), “A meta-analysis of Cronbach’s coefficient alpha”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 381-91.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-84.
Roberts, J.A. (1996), “Green consumers in the 1990s: profile and implications for adverting”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 217-32.
Roberts, J.A. and Bacon, D.R. (1997), “Exploring the subtle relationships between environmental
concern and ecologically conscious consumer behavior”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 79-89.
JFMM Robson, L.S., Clarke, J.A., Cullen, K., Bielecky, A., Seberin, C., Bigelow, P.L., Irvin, E., Culyer, A.
and Mahood, Q. (2007), “The effectiveness of occupational health and safety management
16,2 system interventions: a systematic review”, Safety Science, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 329-53.
Sen, A. (2008), “The US fashion industry: a supply chain review”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 114 No. 2, pp. 571-93.
Sener, A. and Hazer, O. (2008), “Values and sustainable consumption behavior of women: a
214 Turkish sample”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 291-300.
Solomon, M. and Rabolt, N. (2004), Consumer Behavior in Fashion, Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
Speer, T.L. (1997), “Growing the green market”, American Demographics, Vol. 19 No. 8,
pp. 45-9.
Straub, D., Boudreau, M.C. and Gefen, D. (2004), “Validation guidelines for IS positivist research,
communications of the association for information systems”, available at:
www.cis.gsu.edu/Bdstraub/Papers/Straub%20et%20al.%202004%20working%20paper
%20version.pdf (accessed January 20, 2011).
Tanner, C. and Kast, S.W. (2003), “Promoting sustainable consumption: determinants
of green purchases by Swiss consumers”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 10,
pp. 883-902.
Weller, I. (2008), “Ecology and fashion: development lines and prospects”, available at:
www.inter-disciplinary.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/sabwalterpaper.pdf (accessed
January 7, 2011).
Wilson, D.T., Mathew, H.L. and Harvey, J.W. (1975), “An empirical test of the Fishbein behavioral
intention model”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 39-48.
Wong, C.W.Y., Lai, K.H. and Cheng, T.C.E. (2012a), “Value of information integration to supply
chain management: roles of internal and external contingencies”, Journal of Management
Information Systems, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 161-200.
Wong, C.W.Y., Lai, K.H., Cheng, T.C.E. and Lun, V.Y.H (2012b), “The roles of stakeholder support
and procedure-oriented management on asset recovery”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 135 No. 2, pp. 584-94.
Wong, C.W.Y., Lai, K.H., Shang, K.C. and Lu, C.S. (2011a), “Green operations and the moderating
role of environmental management capability of suppliers on manufacturing firm
performance”, International Journal of Production Economics, doi: 10.1016/
ijpe.2011.08.031.
Wong, C.Y., Boon-itt, S. and Wong, C.W.Y. (2011b), “The contingency effects of environmental
uncertainty in the relationship between supply chain integration and operational
performance”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 604-15.
Yeung, S.P. (2005), “Teaching approaches in geography and students’ environmental attitudes”,
The Environmentalist, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 101-17.
Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S. and Oates, C.J. (2010), “Sustainable consumption: green
consumer behavior when purchasing products”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 18 No. 1,
pp. 20-31.
Zeitaml, V.A., Berry, L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), “The behavioral consequences of service
quality”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 31-46.

Further reading
Baker, J., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman, A. (1994), “The influence of store environment on quality
inferences and store image”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22 No. 4,
pp. 328-39.
Appendix. The operationalization of all purposed latent constructs Consumer
Product-related attributes of eco-fashion (PRA)
eco-fashion
Q1: Please rate the importance of the following product-related attributes in your mind when making consumption
purchase decision on eco-fashion. (“1” ¼ very unimportant; “5” ¼ very important)
Q1a: Product design
Q1b: Quality
Q1c: Price 215
Store-related attributes of eco-fashion (SRA)
Q2: Please rate the importance of the following store-related attributes in your mind when making
purchase decision on eco-fashion. (“1” ¼ very unimportant; “5” ¼ very important)
Q2a: Customer service
Q2b: Store design and environment
Q2c: Store’s ethical practices
Q2d: Shop convenience
Price premium level of eco-fashion
Q3: Do you think eco-fashion is priced above the average price of generic fashion clothing? (“1”: Yes;
“2”: No)
Q4: Please indicate the extent to which eco-fashion is priced above the average price of generic fashion
clothing. (“1” ¼ 1-10 percent; “2” ¼ 11-20 percent; “3” ¼ 21-30 percent)
Fashion consumers’ eco-fashion consumption decision
Q5: Please indicate the degree to which you are likely to purchase the following types of clothing in the
future. (“1” ¼ 0-20 percent; “5” ¼ 81-100 percent)
Q5a: I will buy clothing that is durable in the future
Q5b: I will buy clothing with recycled content in the future
Q5c: I will buy clothing that is safe to the environment in the future

About the authors

Ting-yan Chan is a Doctoral student in the Business Division of Institute of Textiles and
Clothing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
Christina W.Y. Wong is an Assistant Professor in the Business Division of Institute of Textiles
and Clothing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Her work has been published in Asia
Design Journal, European Journal of Marketing, Resources, Conservation, and Recycling, Journal
of Operations Management, Information & Management, Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, Omega and others. Christina W.Y. Wong is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: tcchris@inet.polyu.edu.hk

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints