Fashion Practice

The Journal of Design, Creative Process & the Fashion Industry

ISSN: 1756-9370 (Print) 1756-9389 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rffp20

Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards

Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective

Marta Blazquez, Claudia E. Henninger, Bethan Alexander & Carlota

Franquesa

To cite this article: Marta Blazquez, Claudia E. Henninger, Bethan Alexander & Carlota Franquesa
(2019): Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion
Perspective, Fashion Practice, DOI: 10.1080/17569370.2019.1669326

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17569370.2019.1669326

Published online: 11 Dec 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 6

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rffp20
Fashion Practice, 2019, Volume 0, Issue 0, pp. 1–21
DOI: 10.1080/17569370.2019.1669326
# 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

Marta Blazquez,
Claudia E. Henninger,
Bethan Alexander and
Carlota Franquesa
Marta Blazquez is Lecturer in
Fashion Marketing, University of
Manchester, Manchester, UK.
marta.blazquezcano@man-
chester.ac.uk
Claudia E. Henninger is Lecturer
in Fashion Marketing
Management, University of
Manchester, Manchester, UK.
claudia.henninger@man-
chester.ac.uk
Consumers’
Knowledge and
Intentions towards
Sustainability: A
Spanish Fashion
Perspective
Abstract
This paper examines consumer intentions towards sustainable fashion
in the Spanish fashion industry. It explores consumer knowledge,
attitudes, and behavioral response to sustainable fashion. The research
was conducted using a mixed-method strategy. The quantitative ques-
tionnaire examines consumer attitudes towards sustainable fashion,
underpinned by the Theory of Planned Behavior. This was supported by
a qualitative enquiry using semi-structured interviews to explore
consumer knowledge of and attitudes towards sustainable fashion in
Spain. Consumer familiarity with sustainable fashion was found to be
2 Marta Blazquez et al.

high and broad in definition scope. Social aspects of sustainability were Bethan Alexander is Senior
predominant tangents. A disjuncture between company’s sustainable Lecturer and Course Leader, MA
communication and consumer perception was apparent as well as atti- Fashion Retail Management,
Fashion Business School,
tudes and actual purchase intentions towards sustainable fashion. London College of Fashion, UAL,
Opportunities to foster further sustainable fashion business practices London, UK.
and communication were identified. The findings highlight that fashion b.alexander@fashion.arts.ac.uk
retailers should clearly communicate the meaning of sustainability and
Carlota Franques is alumna of
their proactive response to sustainability. The development of effective MA Fashion Retail Management,
communication strategies that clearly highlights retailer’s compliance London College of Fashion, UAL,
with and efforts to becoming more sustainable is a prerequisite arising London, UK and Assistant
Buyer, Debenhams, London, UK.
from the study. This study contributes to burgeoning research on carlota.franquesa@gmail.com
sustainable fashion within mainstream marketing and management
literature. By contextualizing it to the Spanish market, it provides
a novel counter-point consumer perspective on attitudes and intentions
towards sustainable fashion.

KEYWORDS: sustainability, ethical fashion, eco-fashion, fast fashion,

purchase intention, Spain

Introduction
This paper contributes to knowledge by examining the attitude-behavior
gap towards sustainability in an under-researched context: the Spanish
fashion industry. This study is underpinned by a mixed-methods
approach that investigates consumers’ attitudes towards sustainability in
the fashion sector and their behavioral intention through a quantitative
endeavor underpinned by the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB).
Follow-up semi-structured interviews provide further insights into the
attitude-behavior gap and lead to three key managerial implications: (1)
effective, transparent communication strategies, (2) consumer education,
(3) de-stigmatization of ethical fashion.
This research focuses on Spain, the fifth largest economy within the
European Economic Area and home to the world’s leading fast fashion
retailer: Zara (Ruddick 2013; Chan 2015; Eurostat 2018). Although
Spain suffered severely in the 2008 economic recession, with annual
fashion sales volume seeing the greatest decrease in history of minus
11.02%, 2015 statistics show a historic increase in annual sales volume
to plus 5.1%, which slightly dipped again in 2018 to minus 2.2% (e.g.
Blazquez Cano and Gallo 2014; Statista 2019). The Spanish retail sector
is an economic driver, representing 13.8% of the country’s gross domes-
tic product, with total revenues of e405 million in 2015 (Modaes 2015;
Euromonitor 2016; Espana Global 2017). The Spanish fashion market
is dominated by multinational fast fashion retailers, such as Mango,
Zara, H&M, and Primark, which recently has raised ethical and
environmental concerns (e.g. Arrigo 2013; Berezhna and Martin 2018).
Although the fashion industry makes a positive contribution to the
Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 3

global and more specifically the Spanish economy this is set against a
bleak backdrop, as the fashion industry has negative impacts on both
the natural environment and society at large (e.g. Aspers and Skov
2006; Fletcher 2008; Salcedo 2014; Henninger, Alevizou, and Oates
2016; Henninger et al. 2017; Athwal et al. 2019). The impact of the
financial crisis on sustainability has been reported in extant research
(Garc
ıa-Benau, Sierra-Garcia, and Zorio 2013; Li et al. 2016). The con-
tinued increase in demand of cheap, trendy garments has led to the fast
fashion business model, in which businesses feel pressure to continu-
ously cut corners and reduce their prices (Christopher, Lowson, and
Peck 2004; Skov 2008; Henninger, Alevizou, and Oates 2016;
Henninger et al. 2017). Fast fashion (and now the newly emerging
ultra-fast fashion) is characterized by mass-production, short lead-times,
and fast inventory turnarounds, with new collections being produced bi-
monthly (Barnes and Lea-Greenwood 2006; Loeb 2015; Hendriksz
2017), which satisfies the artificially raised consumer appetite, fosters
hyper-consumption, and demand for new trend-led, cheap designs
(Sharma and Hall 2010; Salcedo 2014; Athwal et al. 2019). The emerg-
ing economies of scale provide retailers with higher profit margins and
an opportunity to expand quickly (e.g. Fletcher 2010). Yet, cutting cor-
ners and offering garments at continuously lower price points comes at
a high cost: environmental and social. Consumers are used to a fast
fashion stock turnover (BSR 2012; Pasquinelli 2012; Henninger et al.
2017), which leads to an increase in waste, particularly at landfills, as the
average consumer bins 30 kg of clothing and textiles per capita annually
(EFF 2008; WRAP 2012; Webster 2019). These environmental challenges
are further enhanced through the use of chemicals, the waste and pollu-
tion of water, and continuous demand for fossil fuels (Allwood, Laursen,
de Rodriguez, and Bocken [2006] 2015; Athwal et al. 2019). Moreover,
the fashion industry has received negative headlines due to unsocial work-
ing conditions (e.g. low wages, long working hours), the use of child
labour, and providing poor working conditions, especially in third world
production countries, where communities are based next to chemically
polluted production sites, which has a negative effect on their health (e.g.
Fletcher 2008; Salcedo 2014; Henninger et al. 2017).
The slow fashion industry has emerged as a movement counteracting
the negative effects of the fast fashion industry. The slow fashion move-
ment finds its origins in the slow food movement and thus, seeks to not
only slow down the overall production processes but also provides a
new philosophy to clothing production (Pookulangara and Shephard
2013). Slow fashion is based on aspects of sustainability and ethics and
challenges the fast fashion paradigm by breaking down existing bounda-
ries between workers, designers, and manufacturers, while at the same
time presents fashion as a choice rather than a mandate (Clark 2008;
Athwal et al. 2019). Thus, slow fashion seeks to cater for the needs of
the current generation without hindering opportunities for future ones
4 Marta Blazquez et al.

to fulfill their needs (Ertekin and Atik 2015). Although the notion of
sustainability within the fashion industry is not a new phenomenon per
se, as aspects of sustainability can be observed as far back as the 1970s
when consumers became increasingly conscious of the impact the
fashion industry had on the natural environment, it has thus far, not
made it into the mainstream marketing and management literature (e.g.
Henninger, Alevizou, and Oates 2016).
The Spanish fashion industry provides an interesting context for our
research, as it is dominated by fast fashion retailers and thus far, lacks
behind its European counterparts in terms of implementing sustainability
in the industry landscape (Flotats 2014). While extant research indicates
that British and German consumers are concerned about issues of
sustainability (BoF 2015; Henninger, Alevizou, and Oates 2016) Spanish
consumers’ attitudes towards sustainability remains under-researched.
However, understanding behavioral and attitudinal intentions
of consumers are vital for fashion retailers in order to implement
sustainability strategies that determine sustainable purchasing behavior
(e.g. Karaosman et al. 2015).

Literature Review
Sustainability and the fashion industry
Issues of sustainability in the fashion industry have emerged as early as
the 1970s; with headlines about the Rana Plaza factory collapse
(Parveen 2014) putting a renewed spotlight on social issues, such as
poor working conditions and unsafe working environments. The slow
fashion movement is a response to unsustainable behavior in the indus-
try and seeks to challenge the fast fashion paradigm (Clark 2008;
Henninger et al. 2017). As a consequence, a new terminology emerged
to describe garments that form part of the slow fashion movement: eco-,
ethical-, green-, sustainable, and slow fashion. Each of these terms
describes garments that predominantly focus on either environmental
and/or social aspects of sustainability (e.g. Joergens 2006; Niinim€aki
2010; Shen, Richards, and Liu 2013; Henninger 2015; Henninger,
Alevizou, and Oates 2016). Although existing research often uses these
terms interchangeably, they can be clearly distinguished:

Eco-fashion is associated with bio and/or organic material,

thus eco-, bio-, environmentally friendly and organic-fashion are
often used interchangeably. Companies pursuing to produce
eco-fashion seek to reduce the environmental impact their cloth-
ing has on the natural environment. The emphasis within their
production process is to actively reduce the use of chemicals and
CO2 emissions. Processes are in place to properly dispose of
waste materials, measures are taken to ensure that water is
Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 5

neither polluted nor wasted, and resources used are either

renewable or biodegradable (Niinim€aki 2010).

Ethical fashion companies go beyond what eco-fashion companies
do in that they not simply look at the effects the fashion industry
has on the natural environment, but also consider social implica-
tions, such as working conditions and the well-being of both
workers and consumers in terms of their health (Joergens 2006).

Slow fashion companies change their overall infrastructure
to have a more local focus and reduce their output, by producing
smaller batch sizes, use traditional craft techniques, and local
materials. Slow fashion garments are more expensive to reflect
true ecological and social costs (Fletcher 2008). Thus, slow
fashion incorporates both eco- and ethical fashion aspects yet
extends its focus to further look at the production process and
the supply chain in its entirety.

A commonality between the three different types of sustainable fashion

is that aspects associated with them can be addressed and achieved in
different stages of the product lifecycle and/or value chain (Fletcher 2008;
Salcedo 2014; Henninger et al. 2015). In this research, however, we
focus solely on eco-fashion (environmentally friendly fashion) and ethical
fashion, as these two types seemingly dominate the Spanish market
(Amital 2011; Fashion United 2016; James and Montgomery 2017).

Consumer attitude towards sustainable fashion

Although extant research has investigated consumer attitudes towards
sustainable fashion (e.g. J€agel et al. 2012; Shen et al. 2012), there is no
agreement within the literature about consumers’ willingness to pay
a price premium for sustainable fashion. While authors (Kim and
Damhorst 1998; Shen et al. 2012) found that consumers that are
concerned with the environment are willing to buy sustainable apparel
and pay a premium price, other authors (Carrigan and Attalla 2001;
Joergens 2006; Henninger 2015) indicated the contrary. For some con-
sumers, ethical purchases will only take place if there is no perceived
real or imagined cost, in terms of added price or loss of quality, as cur-
rently there is still a perception that products, especially garments that
are more “sustainable” come at a higher cost, and thus, may no longer
be affordable (Rutter, Armstrong, and Blazquez 2017). In line with that
J€agel et al. (2012) found that a concern for the environment and society
at large were key drivers for making ethical purchasing decisions, yet
they also found that egoistic motivations such as value for money,
image, or well-being had an even bigger influence on purchasing deci-
sions, which makes it difficult to justify a high price for ethical gar-
ments. An explanation that can be provided is that consumers
predominantly associate sustainable fashion with organic raw materials
6 Marta Blazquez et al.

(Ullasewitcz and Hethorn 2008; Cervellon and Wernerfelt 2012;

Henninger et al. 2017), yet are unaware of other aspects that may be
included in the definition of sustainable fashion (e.g. Hill and Lee 2012;
Shen, Richards, and Liu 2013; Athwal et al. 2019). It was highlighted
that there is a lack of sustainable product offerings, especially within the
fashion industry (Connell 2010; Hur and Cassidy 2019). Thus, it can be
concluded that there is a lack of education and information about sus-
tainable fashion (Shen, Richards, and Liu 2013; Hur and Cassidy 2019),
which leads to an overall lack of awareness of sustainable fashion
(Morgan and Birtwistle 2009; James and Montgomery 2017).
Gam (2011) also studied behavioral intentions’ and found that fash-
ion orientation factors and shopping orientation factors are the variables
that have the biggest impact on behavior. Thus, it is relevant to explore
the knowledge that consumers have about sustainable fashion and their
behavioral attitudes and how they affect consumer behavior. This is
addressed in this research.

The Theory of Planned Behavior

The TPB underpins our research, which measures the influence of atti-
tude and subjective norms on behavioral intention leading to behavior,
while at the same time adds a perceived behavioral control, which
reflects the consciousness of the difficulty and controllability to execute
specific behavior (Ajzen 1991). Although the TPB has been criticized
with Wegner and Wheatley (1999) denying the importance of conscious-
ness when undertaking behaviors and Greenwald and Banaji (1995)
claiming that a human’s social behavior is driven by implicit attitudes
and other unconscious mental processes (Aarts and Dijksterhuis 2000;
Uhlmann and Swanson 2004), the TPB is widely accepted and has
proved its validity in regard to sustainable behaviors (Harland, Staats,
and Wilke 1999).
Cowan and Kinley (2014) define attitude as environmental know-
ledge, environmental concern and attitudes towards environmentally
friendly fashion. The subjective norm component, in this case, is meas-
ured as the environmental guilt. Moreover, perceived behavioral control
considers previous behavior, convenience and willingness to pay. The
research shows that all variables defined do have an impact on purchase
intentions. Furthermore, the study concludes that the strongest predic-
tors of environmentally friendly fashion are previous purchases, atti-
tudes, and social pressure.
Kang, Liu, and Kim (2013) focused their study on young consumers’
attitudes towards environmentally friendly apparel products. The
research was carried out among university students in the USA, South
Korea, and China. The authors added the variable “knowledge” to
Azjen’s (1991) TPB. Again, the study showed that knowledge, and all
TPB’s variables, has an effect on intentions for environmentally
 Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 7

sustainable textiles and apparel. This research adopts and extends Kang,
Liu, and Kim’s (2013) model.

Methodology
This research adopts a pragmatic philosophy underpinned by a sequen-
tial mixed methods research strategy, a consumer survey (Study 1) was
followed up with qualitative interviews (Study 2). The quantitative
enquiry involved the development of a questionnaire based on the TPB
(Ajzen 1991) and Kang, Liu, and Kim’s (2013) research framework
(Figure 1). In order to achieve a broader perspective on sustainable fash-
ion, both ethical and environmentally friendly fashion dimensions have
been included using the same constructs. The questionnaire was devel-
oped in English first, and then back-translated to Spanish. Convenience
sampling was utilized to identify the target sample, which consisted of
Spanish fast fashion consumers from different age ranges in order to
have a broad view of the topic. A total of 175 valid responses were col-
lected. Appendix 1 provides a summary of the sample demographics.
The quantitative study is supported by qualitative enquiry through
in-depth semi-structured consumer interviews with the objective of
exploring the knowledge and attitudes of Spanish consumers towards
sustainable fashion (Study 2). Interview participants were selected using
a convenience sampling method (Silverman 2014) with a sample of eight
Spanish consumers with varied occupations and ages, ranging from 23
to 56 years old (Appendix 2). The sample aims to represent a wide range
of population in order to address different attitudes and perceptions
towards sustainable fashion. The qualitative data were collected to fur-
ther explore the relationships tested in Figure 1. A thematic analysis was
utilized to depict themes from the qualitative data set. The authors first
coded parts of the data set individually before discussing the emerging
themes; discrepancies were re-viewed and re-coded carefully, in order to
ensure intercoder reliability. The qualitative data set was then fully

Attitude (AT)
H1a H2a
H3a H4a

Consumer H3b H1b Subjective norm H2b H4b Behavioural

knowledge (CK) (SN) intention (BI)
H5 H6
H3c H4c
H1c H2c
Figure 1
Sustainable attitudes and behaviors Behavioural
conceptual framework. control (BC)
Source: Authors’ own.
8 Marta Blazquez et al.

coded by one author, in order to ensure consistency (Easterby-Smith,

Thorpe, and Jackson 2008).
Based on the literature reviewed, the following hypotheses were
developed and tested for the specific research context (Spanish market):

H1: Consumer knowledge affects attitude (a), subjective norm (b)

and perceived behavioral control (c) towards environmentally
friendly fashion consumption.

H2: Attitude (a), subjective norm (b) and perceived behavioral

control (c) affect behavioral intention towards environmentally
friendly fashion consumption.

H3: Consumer knowledge affects attitude (a), subjective norm (b) and
perceived behavioral control (c) towards ethical fashion consumption.

H4: Attitude (a), subjective norm (b) and perceived behavioral control
(c) affect behavioral intention towards ethical fashion consumption.

H5: Consumer knowledge for environmentally friendly fashion is

significantly different than consumer knowledge for ethical fashion.

H6: Behavioral intention for environmentally friendly fashion is

significantly different than behavioral intention for ethical fashion.

The hypotheses tested are summarized in Figure 1.

Analysis of quantitative results (Study 1)

The internal consistency of the scales has been assessed through
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. All scales applied, with the exception of
subjective norm, present a Cronbach’s alpha >0.7 as recommended by
DeVellis (2012) to ensure consistency. Table 1 details Cronbach’s alpha
coefficients for the different scales used for both environmental and
ethical sustainability. Subjective norm was finally calculated as
a function of a respondent’s beliefs regarding what others think about
their buying behavior of ethical and/or environmentally friendly fashion
(SNA and SNB) and their motivation to comply with others in general
fashion decision-making (SN).
For hypotheses testing, AT, SN and BC were grouped into
MediatorA for environmentally friendly fashion and MediatorB for
ethical fashion. Linear regression analysis was performed to test H1 to
H4. First, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to test the
statistical significance of the model. Then, correlation coefficients (r)
and unstandardized coefficients (</>0) are reported to inform about
the positive or negative relationship between variables (DeVellis 2012).
 Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 9

Table 1. Cronbach’s alpha measures to test internal consistency.

Cronbach’s alpha Cronbach’s alpha
Construct (Environmental) (Ethical)
Consumer Knowledge (CK) 0.885 0.917
Attitude (AT) 0.822 0.848
Subjective Norm (SN) 0.470 0.472
Behavioral Control (BC) 0.886 0.910
Behavioral Intention (BI) 0.860 0.866
Source: Authors’ own.

H1 and H2: environmentally friendly fashion

For H1, ANOVA analysis demonstrates the statistical significance of the
model, p ¼ 0.000 (<0.05), R value (r ¼ 0.350) and unstandardized coef-
ficient (0.260 > 0) demonstrates a positive relationship between the vari-
ables. Therefore, the higher the consumer knowledge is, the stronger the
mediator. Thus, H1 is accepted.
Similarly, for H2, ANOVA significance is p ¼ 0.000 (<0.05) while
the relation between the variables is also positive (r ¼ 0.475, unstandar-
dized coefficient, 0.851 > 0). Thus, H2 is accepted.

H3 and H4: ethical fashion

Following the same procedure, for both H3 and H4, the ANOVA ana-
lysis shows a significance p ¼ 0.000 (<0.05), which implies that both
regression models are significant. For H3, R value (r ¼ 0.349) and
unstandardized coefficient (0.244 > 0) support a positive relationship
between variables.
Similarly, for H4, R value (r ¼ 0.459) and unstandardized coefficient
(0.763 > 0) confirms the positive relationship between the variables.
Thus, both hypotheses are accepted.

H5 and H6: environmentally friendly versus ethical fashion

For testing H5 and H6, a paired sample t-test was used to compare
means of different variables within the sample. For consumer knowledge
(H5), the test shows that consumer knowledge of environmentally
friendly fashion (CKA, M ¼ 2.47, SE ¼ 0.094) is not significantly lower
than consumer knowledge of ethical fashion (CKB, M ¼ 2.49, SE ¼
0.106), t ¼ 0.329, p (0.742) > 0.05. This implies that H5 is rejected.
For behavioral intention (H6), the test shows that behavioral
intention of environmentally friendly fashion (BIA, M ¼ 4.34, SE ¼
0.125) is significantly lower than behavioral intention of ethical fashion
(BIB, M ¼ 4.48, SE ¼ 0.124, t ¼ 2.721, p (0.007) < 0.05). Therefore,
H6 is supported. Thus, it can be said that behavioral intention for eth-
ical fashion is higher than for environmentally friendly fashion. Table 2
summarizes the results of hypotheses testing.
10 Marta Blazquez et al.

Table 2. Summary of the test results of the hypothesis.

Hypothesis number Hypothesis Test result
Hypothesis 1 Consumer knowledge affects attitude (a), subjective norm Supported
(b), and perceived behavioral control (c) towards
environmentally friendly fashion consumption.
Hypothesis 2 Attitude (a), subjective norm (b), and perceived behavioral Supported
control (c) affect behavioral intention towards
environmentally friendly fashion consumption.
Hypothesis 3 Consumer knowledge affects attitude (a), subjective norm Supported
(b), and perceived behavioral control (c) towards ethical
fashion consumption.
Hypothesis 4 Attitude (a), subjective norm (b), and perceived behavioral Supported
control (c) affect behavioral intention towards ethical
fashion consumption.
Hypothesis 5 Consumer knowledge is different for environmentally Rejected
friendly fashion and for ethical fashion.
Hypothesis 6 Behavioral intention is different for environmentally Supported
friendly fashion and for ethical fashion.
Source: Authors’ own.

The test of hypotheses shows significant results. First, H5 and H6

consider the differences between environmentally friendly fashion and
ethical fashion for Spanish consumers. According to the findings, it
seems that consumers have a similar knowledge about both types of sus-
tainable fashion categories, which contradicts previous research about
the predominant association of sustainable fashion with organic materi-
als (e.g. Cervellon and Wernerfelt 2012). However, results are consistent
with J€agel et al.’s (2012) findings concerning British consumers’ percep-
tions, which shows minimal cross-cultural differences in terms of con-
sumer knowledge between the UK and Spain (Henninger, Alevizou, and
Oates 2016). However, in terms of behavioral intention, there is a sig-
nificant difference between the preference of respondents for ethical
fashion (higher) compared to environmentally friendly fashion, which
gives credence to Joergens’ (2006) focus on social and environmen-
tal concerns.
For both environmentally friendly fashion and ethical fashion, con-
sumer knowledge affects their attitude, subjective norm and perceived
behavioral control towards sustainability. And subsequently, attitudes,
subjective norm, and behavioral control affect the ultimate behavioral
intention. Consequently, the more information and education the con-
sumer receives about sustainability in fashion, the more influence their
actual behavior and purchase intention of sustainable products has.
Results are consistent with Cowan and Kinley (2014) and Kang, Liu,
and Kim (2013) research, and extend their theories to the context of
ethical fashion. Overall, this quantitative research contributes to validate
a framework to measure consumers’ intentions towards sustainability
and highlights some issues that will be fully explored and discussed
through the qualitative inquiry next.
Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 11

Qualitative findings and discussion (Study 2)

The semi-structured interviews provide insights into consumers’ attitudes
towards sustainable fashion. The initial interview questions aim to
explore the “consumer knowledge” construct asking participants about
sustainable fashion in a broader sense to explore whether they are more
familiar with ethical or environmentally friendly fashion. Results show
that participants are familiar with the different types of sustainability
identified in the literature review: “In a very broad and general way it is
a type of fashion that respects the natural and social environment in
which it is produced” (P2). This statement indicates that the participant
perceives sustainable fashion as falling in line with the definition of eth-
ical fashion (Joergens 2006), thereby relating social and environmental
impacts to fashion products. On the other hand, P4 states that sustain-
able fashion refers to “clothes made of natural or recycled materials”,
which aligns with the environmentally friendly (eco-) fashion definition
(Niinim€aki 2010). Interestingly, the majority of interviewees—con-
sciously or unconsciously—defined sustainable fashion in accordance
with the slow fashion definition: “clothes, accessories, etc. that have
been made with ecological materials and following processes that don’t
pollute. Also, no labour exploitation” (P3), or “I think it involves a lot
of dimensions, like made with recycled materials, locally made, fair
working conditions, no slavery, etc.” (P1).
Although fast fashion retailers, such as Zara, Mango or H&M pro-
mote and communicate sustainability (e.g. H&M 2017; Mango 2017;
Inditex 2019), the participants unanimously agree that “they (H&M,
Mango, Zara) are definitely not ethical, they might say they are eco-
logical but no one believes that” (P7). While P6 acknowledges that “I
think that they have ranges (that are sustainable), but I don’t think they
(as a company) are sustainable”. This finding was surprising, as the
Spanish retail market is dominated by these fashion retailers promoting
predominantly ethical and/or environmentally friendly fashion (e.g.
Amital 2011; Fashion United 2016, 2018). This indicates that there is a
disconnection between the companies’ communication and intended
image and the consumers’ perceptions (e.g. Aras and Crowther 2016;
Jitmaneeroj 2016). This further links to aspects of availability, as con-
sumers indicate that “I don’t think it’s everywhere available, or at least
you don’t see it very often” (P1) and it is “scarce” (P2). This supports
Connell (2010), who pointed out that there is only limited availability
of sustainable fashion.
In terms of “attitudes”, although all participants claimed to be con-
cerned about sustainability and social rights, in general, this was neither
translated into their actual decision-making process nor perceived as a
major concern. This aligns with existing scholarly studies on the ethical
behavior gap with regard to fashion clothing (Joergens 2006; Joy et al.
2012; McNeill and Moore 2015). When asked about sustainable fashion
dimensions (Shen, Richards, and Liu 2013) (vintage and recycled/fair
12 Marta Blazquez et al.

trade and made locally/organic or vegan/handmade), all, except for one

participant, said that fair trade and made locally was the most import-
ant dimension. This finding is interesting as it highlights predominantly
the social aspect of sustainability, rather than environmental. As indi-
cated in the literature review, “behavioral control” construct refers to
the barriers that consumer might find when purchasing sustainable
products (e.g. high price or unappealing style). The majority agreed on
the fact that sustainable fashion is more expensive than the rest. In fact,
one participant said “it tends to be more expensive compared to average
fashion, and not so attractive due to design and trends. Big companies
can better afford great designers and better marketers which probably,
small sustainable retailers can’t afford” (P8). This quote links to an
aspect that Henninger (2015) raised, in that small retailers, especially
micro-organizations may lack the financial capability to fully capitalize
on aspects of sustainability. Moreover, there was a general agreement
on the poor situation of the sustainable fashion market in Spain. All
participants were extremely pertinent “It’s really bad, actually, it is
pathetic” (P7); “We still have a long way to go” (P3); “ … there is still
much to be done especially at an awareness level” (P4); “Fashion com-
panies don’t do much about it. I believe low cost is the king nowadays,
along with design” (P5). This highlights that Spanish consumers believe
that there is a lot scope to develop sustainable fashion within the mar-
ket. The interviewees imply that there is a general lack of awareness of
what sustainability is and where sustainable fashion products can be
purchased, which confirms extant research (McNeill and Moore 2015;
Henninger, Alevizou, and Oates 2016). This raises a key implication for
fashion retailers, in that their communication strategies need to clearly
communicate what is meant by sustainability and how their fashion col-
lections fulfill sustainability requirements (social, environmental and/or
economic). Thus, it is vital to develop a communication strategy that
clearly highlights the retailer’s compliance with and efforts to becoming
more sustainable.
Surprisingly, the analysis of qualitative results reveals a lack of
“behavioral intention” among the participants in terms of purchasing
sustainable fashion. Although interviewees state that they demand more
sustainable fashion by making them more readily available, none of the
participants had knowingly purchased sustainable fashion “I don’t think
so. Well, at least not intentionally or that I am aware of” (P1). At the
same time, P8 states “I think I haven’t and if I have, sustainability was
not a decisive factor”. A contradiction emerges: although consumers feel
sustainability is important and should be integrated better into everyday
fashion purchases, sustainability itself is not a deciding factor in the
decision-making process (e.g. Henninger 2015). This highlights a key
challenge in that the current fashion industry fosters hyper-consumption
and a throw-away culture (e.g. J€agel et al. 2012; Joy et al. 2012), which
is based on fast fashion turnarounds and trendy designs. Consumers
Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 13

have been “raised” to develop a fashion appetite and expect new gar-
ments regularly. Thus, if sustainability is to become commonplace
within the fashion industry, it is vital to tackle the problem at its roots.
This implies that fashion retailers need to not only communicate more
effectively with their consumers on what it is they are doing in terms of
sustainability, but also emphasize that the current fast fashion business
model is not sustainable. While this finding is not new per se (e.g.
Prothero, McDonagh, and Dobscha 2010), as existing research has
pointed out that fast fashion cannot be sustained, this research clearly
indicates that communication is vital. More specifically, our data indi-
cate that ethical fashion seems to be more appealing for consumers than
environmental or eco-fashion, which is often described as unfashion-
able—this confirms extant research (e.g. Henninger 2015).

Conclusion
Our research provides an overview of sustainable fashion perceptions
and attitudes in the Spanish market. The quantitative and qualitative
studies provide different angles into this reality. The quantitative study
aims to test the influence of sustainable knowledge (both environmental
and ethical) on consumers’ attitude, behavioral control, and subjective
norm and ultimately, on behavioral intention. On the other side, the
qualitative study provides insight and understanding about these
relationships.
Both studies are consistent in different aspects. First, they demon-
strate that Spanish consumers associate sustainable fashion to both eth-
ical and environmentally friendly fashion. And both support the fact
that Spaniards show a higher behavioral intention for ethical fashion
compared to environmentally friendly fashion.
The research found that the majority of participants are aware of
what sustainable fashion entails, yet these factors do not seem to play a
key role in the final decision-making process. Overall, consumers appear
to seek more sustainable fashion options, yet are unable to find these
easily within the retail environment. Key managerial implications
brought forward in this research are: (1) there is a need for clear com-
munication in terms of messages broadcast from fast fashion retailers to
consumers regarding their sustainability practices. Although various fast
fashion retailers have sustainability policies on their websites and clearly
indicate how they are tackling the twenty-first-century challenge, this
does not yet manifest within their communication practices. (2)
Consumers need to be further educated on what sustainability means.
While our research indicates that consumers generally have a good
understanding of the term sustainability, our results show that there is
no common definition on what constitutes sustainability. (3) Ethical
fashion seems to foster higher behavioral intention than environmentally
friendly fashion, which indicates that marketing messages could further
capitalize on the ethical fashion terminology.
14 Marta Blazquez et al.

Future Research/Limitations
The findings presented are limited to the Spanish market. This research
is exploratory in nature and provides an initial enquiry into an under
researched field of study. Although the sample size for both the qualita-
tive and quantitative parts is relatively small, the data provide an insight
into underlying issues that need to be explored further. In order to
address the role of cross-cultural differences in terms of sustainable per-
ception, the study could be replicated in different countries in order to
compare consumers’ intentions towards sustainability. Also, considering
that most fast fashion retailers mentioned in this research are present in
many different countries, it should be relevant to measure consumers’
perceptions about their specific sustainability communication campaigns
and initiatives.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References

Aarts, H., and A. Dijksterhuis. 2000. “Habits as Knowledge Structures:

Automaticity in Goal-Directed Behaviour.” Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 78(1): 53. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.53.
Ajzen, I. 1991. “The Theory of Planned Behaviour.” Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2): 179–211. doi:
10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
Allwood, J. M., S. E. Laursen, C. M. de Rodriguez, and N. M. Bocken.
[2006] 2015. “Well Dressed? The Present and Future Sustainability of
Clothing and Textiles in the United Kingdom.” Journal of the Home
Economics Institute of Australia 22(1): 42.
Amital, M. C. 2011. Ethical Fashion Europe: An Overview. EFF
(online). Accessed November 1, 2016. http://source.ethicalfashionfo-
rum.com/article/ethical-fashion-europe-an-overview
Aras, G., and D. Crowther. 2016. Global Perspectives on Corporate
Governance and CSR. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Arrigo, E. 2013. “Corporate Responsibility Management in Fast
Fashion Companies: The Gap Inc. case.” Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management: An International Journal 17(2):
175–189. doi:10.1108/JFMM-10-2011-0074.
Aspers, P., and L. Skov. 2006. “Encounters in the Global Fashion
Business.” Current Sociology 54(5): 745–763.
Athwal, N., V. Wells, M. Carrigan, and C. E. Henninger. 2019.
“Sustainable Luxury Marketing: A Synthesis and Research Agenda.”
International Journal of Management Review.
Barnes, L., and G. Lea-Greenwood. 2006. “Fast Fashioning the Supply
Chain: Shaping the Research Agenda.” Journal of Fashion Marketing
Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 15

and Management: An International Journal 10(3): 259–271. doi:

10.1108/13612020610679259.
Berezhna, V., and G. Martin. 2018. Spain and Portugal Reboot the
Iberian Fashion Market. BoF (online). Accessed March 26, 2019.
https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/global-currents/spain-and-
portugal-reboot-the-iberian-fashion-market
Bl
azquez Cano, M., and P. Gallo. 2014. “The Importance of the
Shopping Experience in Times of Recession: An Analysis from the
Perspective of the Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Values.” ESIC
Market Economics and Business Journal 45(2): 273–298. doi:
10.7200/esicm.148.0452.3.
BoF (Business of fashion). 2015. How Can We Safeguard the People
Who Make Our Clothing? BoF (online). Accessed May 1, 2016.
http://www.businessoffashion.com/community/voices/discussions/how-
can-we-safeguard-the-people-who-make-our-clothing/
BSR (Business of a Better World). 2012. Sustainable Fashion Design:
Oxymoron No More? BSR (online). Accessed July 5, 2013. http://
www.bsr.org/reports/BSR_Sustainable_Fashion_Design.pdf
Carrigan, M., and A. Attalla. 2001. “The Myth of the Ethical Consumer
– Do Ethics Matter in Purchase Behaviour?”Journal of Consumer
Marketing 18(7): 560–578. doi:10.1108/07363760110410263.
Cervellon, M., and A. Wernerfelt. 2012. “Knowledge Sharing among Green
Fashion Communities Online: Lessons for the Sustainable Supply Chain.”
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal
16(2): 176–192. doi:10.1108/13612021211222860.
Chan, S. P. 2015. “Spanish Economy Races Ahead with Fastest Growth
since Financial Crisis.” The Guardian (online). Accessed October 28,
2016. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11772500/Spanish-
economy-races-ahead-with-fastest-growth-since-financial-crisis.html
Christopher, M., R. Lowson, and H. Peck. 2004. “Creating Agile
Supply Chains in the Fashion Industry.” International Journal of
Retail & Distribution Management 32(8): 367–376. doi:10.1108/
09590550410546188.
Clark, H. 2008. “Slow Fashion: An Oxymoron or a Promise for the
Future … ?” Fashion Theory 12(4): 427–446. doi:10.2752/
175174108X346922.
Connell, K. H. 2010. “Internal and External Barriers to Eco-Conscious
Apparel Acquisition.” International Journal of Consumer Studies
34(3): 279–286. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2010.00865.x.
Cowan, K., and T. Kinley. 2014. “Green Spirit: Consumer Empathies
for Green Apparel.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 38(5):
493–499. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12125.
DeVellis, R. F. 2012. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. 3rd
ed. London: Sage.
Easterby-Smith, M., R. Thorpe, and P. Jackson. 2008. Management
Research. 3rd ed. London: Sage.
16 Marta Blazquez et al.

EFF (Ethical Fashion Forum). 2008. Fast Fashion, Cheap Fashion. EFF
(online). Accessed June 17, 2012. http://www.ethicalfashionforum.
com/the-issues/fast-fashion-cheap-fashion
Ertekin, Z. O., and D. Atik. 2015. “Sustainable Markets Motivating
Factors, Barriers, and Remedies for Mobilization of Slow Fashion.”
Journal of Macromarketing 35(1): 53–69. doi:10.1177/
0276146714535932.
Espana Global. 2017. Spanish Fashion Industry: More Than 400
Million Euro. Espana Global (online). Accessed March 26, 2019.
https://espanaglobal.gob.es/en/current-news/business/spanish-fashion-
industry-more-400-million-euro
Euromonitor. 2016. Apparel and Footwear in Spain. Euromonitor
(online). Accessed October 28, 2016. http://www.euromonitor.com/
apparel?and?footwear?in?spain/report
Eurostat. 2018. Which Member States Have the Largest Share of EU’s
GDP? Eurostat (online). Accessed March 26, 2019. https://ec.europa.
eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/DDN-20180511-
1?inheritRedirect=true
Fashion United. 2016. 5000th Store: Inditex Embraces Eco-Fashion.
Fashion United (online). Accessed November 1, 2016. https://www.
fashionunited.com/fashion-news/fashion/5000th-zara-store:-inditex-
embraces-eco-fashion-20101312486610
Fashion United. 2018. Mango’s Journey towards Sustainable Fashion.
Fashion United (online). Accessed March 28, 2019. https://fashion-
united.uk/news/retail/mango-s-journey-towards-sustainable-fashion/
2018052429815
Fletcher, K. 2008. Sustainable Fashion and Textiles Design Journeys.
London: Earthscan.
Fletcher, K. 2010. “Slow Fashion: An Invitation for Systems Change.
Fashion Practice.” Fashion Practice 2(2): 259–266. doi:10.2752/
175693810X12774625387594.
Flotats, S. 2014. Gema G
omez of Slow Fashion Spain. Eco Fashion
World (online). Accessed October 28, 2016. http://www.ecofashion-
world.com/Interview/Gema-Gomez-of-Slow-Fashion-Spain.html
Gam, H. 2011. “Are Fashion Conscious Consumers More Likely to
Adopt Eco-Friendly Clothing?” Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management 15(2): 178–193.
Garc
ıa-Benau, M., L. Sierra-Garcia, and A. Zorio. 2013. “Financial
Crisis Impact on Sustainability Reporting.” Management Decision
51(7): 1528–1542. doi:10.1108/MD-03-2013-0102.
Greenwald, A. G., and M. R. Banaji. 1995. “Implicit Social Cognition:
Attitudes, Self-Esteem, and Stereotypes.” Psychological Review
102(1): 4. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4.
H&M. 2017. Sustainability Report 2017. H&M (online). Accessed
March 28, 2019. https://about.hm.com/en/media/news/general-news-
2018/hm-sustainability-report-2017.html.
Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 17

Harland, P., H. Staats, and H. Wilke. 1999. “Explaining Pro-

Environmental Intention and Behaviour by Personal Norms and the
Theory of Planned Behaviour.”Journal of Applied Social Psychology
29(12): 2505–2528. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb00123.x.
Hendriksz, V. 2017. Boohoo, ASOS and Missguided Pave the Way for
‘Ultrafast fashion’. Fashion United (online). Accessed March 26,
2019. https://fashionunited.uk/news/fashion/boohoo-asos-missguided-
pave-the-way-for-ultrafast-fashion/2017052424625.
Henninger, C. E. 2015. “Traceability the New Eco-Label in the Slow
Fashion Industry?” Sustainability 7(5): 6011–6032. doi:10.3390/
su7056011.
Henninger, C. E., P. J. Alevizou, C. J. Oates, and R. Cheng. 2015.
“Sustainable Supply Chain Management in the Slow-Fashion
Industry.” In Sustainable Fashion Supply Chain Management, edited
by T.-M. Choi and E. Cheng, 129–154. London: Springer.
Henninger, C. E., P. J. Alevizou, and C. J. Oates. 2016. “What Is
Sustainable Fashion?” Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management: An International Journal 20(4): 400–416. doi:10.1108/
JFMM-07-2015-0052.
Henninger, C. E., P. J. Alevizou, H. Goworek, and D. Ryding, eds.
2017. Sustainability in Fashion: A Cradle to Upcycle Approach.
Heidelberg: Springer.
Hill, J., and H. H. Lee. 2012. “Young Generation Y Consumers’
Perceptions of Sustainability in the Apparel Industry.” Journal of
Fashion Marketing and Management 16(4): 471–491.
Hur, E., and T. Cassidy. 2019. “Perceptions and Attitudes towards
Sustainable Fashion Design.” International Journal of Fashion
Design, Technology, and Education 12 (2): 208–217.
Inditex. 2019. Sustainability Strategy. Inditex (online). Accessed March
28, 2019. http://static.inditex.com/annual_report_2016/en/sustainable-
strategy/sustainable-strategy.
J€agel, T., K. Keeling, A. Reppel, and G. Thorsten. 2012. “Individual
Values and Motivational Complexities in Ethical! Clothing
Consumption: A Means-End Approach.” Journal of Marketing
Management 28(3–4): 373–396. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2012.
659280.
James, A. M., and B. Montgomery. 2017. “Making the Change: The
Consumer Adoption of Sustainable Fashion.” In Detox Fashion.
Textile Science and Clothing Technology, edited by S. S. Muthu,
47–84. Singapore: Springer.
Jitmaneeroj, B. 2016. “Reform Priorities for Corporate
Sustainability.” Management Decision 54(6): 1497–1521. doi:
10.1108/MD-11-2015-0505.
Joergens, C. 2006. “Ethical Fashion: Myth or Future Trend?” Journal
of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal
10(3): 360–371. doi:10.1108/13612020610679321.
18 Marta Blazquez et al.

Joy, A., J. F. Sherry, A. Venkatesh, J. Wang, and R. Chan. 2012.

“Fast Fashion, Sustainability, and the Ethical Appeal of Luxury
Brands.” Fashion Theory 16(3): 273–296. doi:10.2752/
175174112X13340749707123.
Kang, J., C. Liu, and S. Kim. 2013. “Environmentally Sustainable
Textile and Apparel Consumption: The Role of Consumer
Knowledge, Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Perceived Personal
Relevance.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 37(4):
442–452. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12013.
Karaosman, H., A. G. Morales, M. Grijalvo, and A. Brun. 2015. “The
Impact of Ethical Fashion on Spanish Consumers.” Direcci
on y
Organizaci
on (57): 63–73.
Kim, H., and M. R. Damhorst. 1998. “Environmental Concern and
Apparel Consumption.” Clothing and Textiles Research Journal
16(3): 126–133. doi:10.1177/0887302X9801600303.
Li, W. Y., P. S. Chow, T. M. Choi, and H. L. Chan. 2016. “Supplier
Integration, Green Sustainability Programs, and Financial
Performance of Fashion Enterprises under Global Financial Crisis.”
Journal of Cleaner Production 135: 57–70. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.
2016.06.048.
Loeb, W. 2015. Zara Leads in Fast Fashion. Forbes (online). Accessed
November 1, 2016. http://www.forbes.com/sites/walterloeb/2015/03/
30/zara-leads-in-fast-fashion/#4dee76361d79.
Mango. 2017. Sustainability Report 2017. Mango (online). Accessed
March 28, 2019. https://st.mngbcn.com/web/oi/servicios/rsc/pdf/IN/
mem/mem2017.pdf.
McNeill, L., and R. Moore. 2015. “Sustainable Fashion Consumption
and the Fast Fashion Conundrum: Fashionable Consumers and
Attitudes to Sustainability in Clothing Choice.” International Journal
of Consumer Studies 39(3): 212–222. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12169.
Modaes. 2015. Informe Economico de la Moda en Espa~ na 2015
(Economic Fashion Report 2015). Modaes (online). Accessed October
28, 2016. http://www.modaes.es/publicaciones/informe-economico-de-
la-moda-en-espana/informe.html.
Morgan, L. R., and G. Birtwistle. 2009. “An Investigation of Young
Fashion Consumers’ Disposal Habits.” International Journal of
Consumer Studies 33(2): 190–205. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.
00756.x.
Niinim€aki, K. 2010. “Eco-Clothing, Consumer Identity and Ideology.”
Sustainable Development 18(3): 150–162. doi:10.1002/sd.455.
Parveen, S. 2014. Rana Plaza Factory Collapse Survivors Struggle One
Year on. BBC (online). Accessed August 6, 2014. http://www.bbc.co.
uk/news/world-asia-27107860.
Pasquinelli, I. 2012. “Could Small Be the New Big for the Fashion
Industry?” The Guardian (online). Accessed January 25, 2014. http://
Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 19

www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/fashion-industry-trends-
innovation-small-business.
Pookulangara, S., and A. Shephard. 2013. “Slow Fashion Movement:
Understanding Consumer Perceptions – An Exploratory Study.”
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 20(2): 200–206. doi:10.
1016/j.jretconser.2012.12.002.
Prothero, A., P. McDonagh, and S. Dobscha. 2010. “Is Green the New
Black? Reflections on a Green Commodity Discourse.” Journal of
Macromarketing 30(2): 147–159. doi:10.1177/0276146710361922.
Ruddick, G. 2013. “Spain’s leader in fast fashion has much to teach its
British rivals.” The Telegraph (online). Accessed October 28, 2016.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/9931336/Spains-leader-in-
fast-fashion-has-much-to-teach-its-British-rivals.html.
Rutter, C., K. Armstrong, and M. Blazquez. 2017. “The Epiphanic
Sustainable Fast Fashion Epoch: A New Fashion Ethical Mandate.”
In Sustainable Fashion a Cradle to Upcycle Approach. Chapter 2,
edited by C. E. Henninger, P. J. Alevizou, H. Goworek, and D.
Ryding, 11–30. Heidelberg: Springer.
Salcedo, E. 2014. Moda
etica Para un future sostenible (Ethical Fashion
for a Sustainable Future). Madrid: Editorial Gustavo Gili.
Sharma, T. D., and C. Hall. 2010. “Green PLM for Fashion & Apparel.”
White Paper, Infosys [online]. Accessed February 1, 2018. http://www.
infosys.com/inustries/retail/white-papers/Documents/pdf.
Shen, G., J. Richards, and F. Liu. 2013. “Consumers’ Awareness
of Sustainable Fashion.” Marketing Management Journal 6(9):
134–147.
Shen, B., Y. Wang, C. Lo, and M. Shum. 2012. “The Impact of
Ethical Fashion on Consumer Purchase Behavior.” Journal of
Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 16(2):
234–245. doi:10.1108/13612021211222842.
Silverman, D. 2014. Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and
Practice. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
Skov, L. 2008. Creativity at Work: Ethics and the Fashion Industry in
West Europe. Creative Encounters (online). Accessed October 25,
2011. http://www.researchnest.com/all_reports/13100175651ethics%
20and%20the%20fashion%20industry%20in%20west%20europe.pdf.
Statista. 2019. Year-on-Year Growth Rate of the Sales Volume of the
Fashion Industry in Spain from 2008 to 2018. Statista (online).
Accessed March 26, 2019. https://www.statista.com/statistics/463832/
fashion-industry-year-on-year-sales-growth-spain/.
Uhlmann, E., and J. Swanson. 2004. “Exposure to Violent Video Games
Increases Automatic Aggressiveness.” Journal of Adolescence 27(1):
41–52. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2003.10.004.
Ullasewitcz, C., and J. Hethorn. 2008. Fashion, Marketing and Eco
Savvy Shopper, Sustainable Fashion: Why Now? A Conversation
about Issues, Practices and Possibilities. New York: Fairchild Books.
20 Marta Blazquez et al.

Webster, B. 2019. “Tax on All Clothing to Cut Fashion Waste.” The

Times (online). Accessed March 26, 2019. https://www.thetimes.co.
uk/article/tax-on-all-clothing-to-cut-fashion-waste-shf00hmxw.
Wegner, D. M., and T. Wheatley. 1999. “Apparent Mental Causation:
Sources of the Experience of Will.” American Psychologist 54(7):
480–492. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.54.7.480.
WRAP (Waste & Resources Action Programme). 2012. Valuing Our
Clothes: The True Cost of How We Design, Use and Dispose of
Clothing in the UK. WRAP (online). Accessed July 15, 2013. http://
www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/VoC%20FINAL%20online%202012%
2007%2011.pdf.

Appendix 1
Summary of quantitative sample demographics

Demographic variables n %
Gender
Female 124 70.9
Male 51 29.1
Academic rank
Secondary school 4 2.3
High school 16 9.1
Higher education 21 12
Bachelor’s degree 88 50.3
þ Master’s degree 40 22.9
PhD 6 3.4
Total valid responses 175
Age group n %
20–29 33 20
30–39 15 9
40–49 31 19
50–59 67 41
60þ 18 11
 Consumers’ Knowledge and Intentions towards Sustainability: A Spanish Fashion Perspective 21

Appendix 2
Summary of qualitative sample demographics

Participant code Sex Age Education level Occupation

P1 F 23 Bachelor Marketing Assistant
P2 F 56 Master Hospital Administrator
P3 F 40 Bachelor Organic Bakery Owner
P4 F 40 Bachelor Store Manager
P5 F 50 Bachelor IT Consultant
P6 F 24 Bachelor Finance Consultant
P7 F 24 Bachelor Primary School Teacher
P8 M 23 Bachelor Journalism Student