1. Introduction

The global fashion industry is worth in excess of $1.5 trillion of global trade per year and employs more than 250 million people within its supply chains, which extend from the cotton fields of Africa and India to the garment factories of Bangladesh and Vietnam and ultimately to the mostly middle class consumers ingrained in the culture of consumption.

This globalised trade is associated with well-documented negative impacts on the environment and local communities. The consumption of energy, the use of highly toxic chemicals, the degradation of water supplies, poor pay, gender inequality and forced labour are just some of the issues associated with fashion production. The impact of these issues is being amplified by the increasing popularity of fast fashion, a trend that is also increasing the generation of clothing waste. However, as these environmental and social issues become more visible to the consumer, there is a growth in consumer concerns about the impacts of fashion brands and their supply chains. The perception is that ethical consumerism is gaining momentum and is seen as backlash to the ethical issues created by the industry’s over-production and conspicuous consumption.

Ethical consumerism can be described as proactive action consumers take to change their purchasing behaviour to reduce their consumption and/or to buy products that are described as sustainable, ethical or “green.” Many responsible brands have invested heavily in the development of sustainable products to meet the demands of ethical consumers. For some niche brands, catering to the ethical consumer has proved to be very successful, but for many brands connecting with ethical consumers has been far from easy. Regular dialogue with mainstream fashion brands has exposed the reality where the predicted growth in ethical consumerism has not been reflected in a change in consumer behaviour at the cash register; there is a significant gap between reported consumer intentions to be ethical and their actual purchasing behaviour.

The Rana Plaza disaster provides a provocative backdrop to the discussion about the gap between intention and ethical behaviour. That terrible disaster on 24 April 2013, where the factory collapse led to the deaths of more than 1,100 people, was seen by many as the catalyst for structural changes in the way the fashion industry managed its responsibilities. Since the disaster there have been significant changes across the industry: brands, suppliers, factory owners, unions and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have worked hard to improve the industry. Yet it appears the improvements in the industry have not been reflected in significant changes in consumer behaviour. The UK fast fashion brand most closely associated with the Rana Plaza disaster posted its financial results 6 months after the disaster and disclosed a double-digit percentage growth in profits. Consumers had actually increased their spending at the brand most closely associated with 1,100 deaths; consumer behaviour didn’t match their ethical intentions.

Interviews with numerous mainstream brands has uncovered a degree of frustration with the predicted growth of the ethical market; brand after brand has stated the “mainstream green consumer” simply does not exist. This apparent gap between consumer intention and consumer behaviour has led some to suggest that being ethical is unlikely to lead to brands being more profitable (Vogel, 2005).

2. Predicting behaviour

The growth of ethical consumerism has been predicted through numerous market research surveys and consumer questionnaires. However, it is well known that these surveys are a weak tool for predicting behaviour. Survey participants tend to either consciously or unconsciously attempt to align their views with the current social norms associated with the survey subject; they tend to declare ethical intentions to ensure they fit in with their group (Gastersleben, Steg, & Vlek, 2002). Associated with this, participants also tend to self-edit their personal beliefs to present themselves in a positive light and to protect their social status; they don’t want to appear out of step with their peers and so apply an internal filter to their responses (Devinney, Auger, & Eckhardt, 2014, p. 37). Many surveys also rely on self-reporting by the participants, but these are inherently poor for identifying real behaviours. Respondents tend to report their perception about their own behaviour rather than give an accurate assessment of actual behaviour (Gastersleben et al., 2002).

Surveys also suffer from a lack of context; they ask consumers about their behaviour in the absence of the realities of the situation. This is problematic, as situational and emotional factors play an important role in determining behaviours, and these factors are very difficult to authentically reproduce in surveys (Devinney et al., 2014, p. 56). Exploring consumer behaviour without the context of the excitement and theatre created when shopping in modern malls or the emotional context of making an important fashion purchase with your friends has limited value in predicting behaviour.

Surveys are poor for eliciting insights into and predicting behaviour of consumers, but there may be fundamental challenges to the actual concept of ethical consumption. By exploring human psychology and how our species makes decisions, we can start to understand why there is a gap between what we say we are going to do, intention, and what we actual do, our behaviour. By also analysing the motivation for fashion we can show how biogenic and utilitarian needs have been supplanted by hedonistic and psychogenic desires, driving behaviour that is more focused on individual benefit rather than a wider socially responsible ethical view. Finally, the influence of the culture of consumption is important as individual behaviours are a product of culture, as well as culture being a product of individual behaviours (Kasser, Ryan, Couchman, & Sheldon, 2003). The combination of human psychology, fashion desires and the culture of consumption may create an environment where the ethical consumer is a delusion for the mainstream market.

3. Values, beliefs, attitudes

Many models have been developed to explain the complexity of consumer behaviour. These models show factors such as values, beliefs, individual attitudes, social norms, context, habit and our personal capability to process and act on information play important roles in determining our behaviour (Bamberg et al., 2003; Biel, Dahlstrand, & Grankvist, 2005; Cialdini, Reno, & Kallgren, 1990; Kraus, 1995; Stern, 2000). These factors do not operate in isolation from each other. Beliefs are often held by individuals, but individuals are influenced by the social norms of the group they are part of. Attitudes are not fixed; they can be moderated by contextual or situational factors, and they can also change over time. This partly accounts for the contextual deficiencies of surveys to predict behaviour. Also, the values we hold can be challenged not just by context, but also by the persona being exhibited by the individual at the time of valuation; values have salience at specific times and situations (Jackson, 2005). At the core of many models is the idea that consumer behaviour arises from the influence of three types of value orientations: self-enhancement, self-transcendent and biogenic valuations.

Self-enhancement values are focused on self-regard, where the personal costs and benefits to the individual of making a decision and acting out a particular behaviour drive behavioural decision making (Steg, Perlaviciute, van der Werff, & Lurvink, 2014). An individual with self-enhancing values may act in an ethical way if they perceive the benefits outweigh the perceived costs of their ethical behaviour. Self-enhancement valuations align closely with the idea of egoistic values, which are also driven by a focus on individual costs and benefits, but are related to concerns about threats to one’s health or threats to the individual’s status (Steg et al., 2014; Hansla, Garling, & Biel, 2013). An individual may act ethically as long as the consequence of the behaviour does not compromise their wealth, power or status within their social group. If the behaviour has a negative impact on these aspects of their life, then individuals with a self-enhancement or egoistical valuation are less likely to display that behaviour; they are less likely to be ethical consumers (Steg et al., 2014). The communication of wealth, status and power is an important function of fashion.

Self-transcendence values implies there is a focus on others and is aligned with the concept of altruistic motives, where the concern is about threats to other people’s health (Hansla, et al., 2013). Altruistic values develop from awareness of the negative impacts behaviour can have, and on the recognition of personal responsibility for the consequences of an individual’s behaviour (Heberlein, 1972). Self-transcendence valuations have a positive association with ethical behaviours, because to act so, individuals must focus beyond themselves and be concerned with the others, society and the global environment (Jackson, 2005; Allen & Ferrard, 1999).

Biospheric valuations are concerned with the quality of nature for its own sake, without a link to human welfare or benefits, and are aligned with intrinsic valuations of nature. Here the motives are driven by concerns or threats to nature (Hansla et al., 2013), and so there is a clear link to positive ethical behaviours.

However, behaviour is not driven purely by these values. These values are moderated and influenced by other factors such as context, habitual responses and what is salient at the time of decision making, and the combination of these factors creates the resultant consumer behaviour. Behaviour is less about a given individual always being egoistical, altruistic or biospheric, but is more about an individual demonstrating one of these valuation motivations at the time of the behavioural choice. Consider the purchase behaviour at the time of buying an outfit for an important first date. The consumer does not want their status or position to be eroded by a poor fashion choice; they wish to appear stylish, wealthy or sexually attractive – a valuation driven by egoistic motives. They are likely to be less concerned with the pollution to drinking water caused by the process used to dye the fabric for their clothes in an unknown Chinese factory – an altruistic motivation. The context and salience of factors at the time of making the consumer choice has influenced the behaviour. Choice is never straightforward and situational conditions interfere with values and the resultant behaviour, which is why an individual can demonstrate different valuation personas dependent on internal and external factors.

An additional factor that moderates behaviour is the cognitive effort needed to make a decision. Cognitive effort can influence how much conscious control the individual has over their decision making or how much unconscious automation directs their behaviour. Cognitive effort is affected by three factors; involvement, constraint and complexity (Allen & Ferrard, 1999).

When an individual is involved or has an inherent interest in a decision and the consequences of that decision, then the individual has a greater the degree of conscious control of their behaviour. However, as involvement in the decision or the consequences of that decision decreases, then the behavioural control becomes more automated or habitual. Constraint refers to the difficulty of making a decision, and where there is minimal constraint, conscious control is more likely, but increased constraint leads to a reliance on habitual behavioural choices. Automated or habitual control is also more likely if prediction of the consequences arising from a decision is too complex to understand, as this increases the demand on cognitive processing.

Automation or habit can have a very powerful influence on behaviour. Habitual behavioural control can be defined as decisions that have become automatic to such an extent that they occur without conscious self-instruction (Jackson, 2005). When decisions require increased cognitive effort, the likelihood of habitual behaviour also increases and we become less aware of the consequences of our behaviour (Bamberg et al., 2003). Habits tend to develop in message-dense environments when cognitive effort to make decisions is compromised, all of which links habits to another valuation concept: hedonism (Jackson, 2005). Hedonic values are about pleasure and a focus on improving ones’ feelings and reducing effort and can be aligned with the ideas of self-enhancement (Steg et al., 2014). Thus increased cognitive effort can lead to habitual behaviours, which are generally behaviours aligned with hedonism and self-enhancement; these valuations are not positively associated with ethical behaviour.

4. The influence of fashion

The influence of context, salience and cognitive effort all have an impact on how values are moderated and translated into behaviours, and the influence of these factors determines which behaviour an individual demonstrates. The process of negotiating the fashion world is context heavy, relies on cognitive effort, and decisions have salience, thus fashion decisions are driven by psychological behavioural motivations.

Fashion is a social process and involves individuals coming together in a collective as they negotiate their positions within the group (Kaiser, 2012, p. 12). Fashion is also a form of non-verbal communication that allows consumers to express their identity and to create meaning to who they are (Workman & Caldwell, 2007). Importantly the nuances of fashion allow consumers to express multiple personas developed from their multiple roles and from the different positions they occupy in society (Damhorst, 1999, p. 7).

Fashion products are multi-functional and of high social value to individuals. This value is not derived from clothing satisfying biogenic or utilitarian needs such as warmth, protection or modesty. Fashion products provide functions which are much more valuable as a result of their ability to provide satisfaction for hedonistic and psychogenic needs and desires (Solomon & Rabolt, 2004). These are needs driven by emotional responses such as excitement and fantasy, as well as the need to demonstrate power, status and affiliation to certain groups.

Fashion is an individual’s opportunity to demonstrate their status, to show their wealth and success and also to fulfil desires associated with powerful motivators such as sexual attraction. Sexual attraction is one the most powerful of human desires, part of our evolutionary, biological adaptions that can override many values and beliefs an individual may hold (Devinney et al., 2014, p. 47). Thus, fashion is fundamentally about self-enhancement, where hedonic and psychogenic needs developed from an evolutionary unconscious that modify the individual’s responses to social norms. Fashion creates an egotistical focus on self-regard, where concerns about status can drive behaviour. In the fashion context we can argue individuals are more likely to demonstrate egoistical valuations and are, therefore, less likely to display ethical behaviour at the point of purchase. Evidence shows individuals will only choose products that are ethical when there is no sacrifice of the key functions that product should deliver (Devinney et al., 2014, p. 113; Gastersleben et al., 2002). This implies that ethical fashion must still provide all the non-verbal communication functions for status, identity, wealth, sexual attraction and alignment with the group(s), and that ethical concerns are more likely to be sacrificed before these other hedonistic functions are compromised.

In terms of cognitive processing, the level of cognitive involvement an individual has in the process of shopping for fashion is high. This implies more conscious control by the individual during the decision making process. However, an important part of the cognitive assessment is related to the consequences of making a particular purchase. It is argued individuals are more likely to be focused on the personal needs and consequences of a fashion purchase (does it promote status, wealth, group identity, sexual attraction) rather than the consequences for others (social standards in an unseen, unknown garment factory). Increased cognitive involvement is driven by egoistical motives to retain status or demonstrate wealth, rather than altruistic motives for ethical concerns. In addition, the challenge of finding stylish ethical fashion and the higher financial cost of ethical fashion increases constraint on the cognitive process and therefore, the tendency for habitual behaviour increases.

Habit is further reinforced by the complexity of determining if a particular purchase decision is actually ethical. How well informed are consumers about the environmental and social impacts of the clothing they purchase, and how well informed are they about the consequences of their purchases on individuals in distant supply chains? Some have argued that consumers should be given more information to help understand the complexity of the ethical issues faced by the fashion industry. However, evidence suggests simply providing abstract information about these ethical issues does little to change behaviour (Winter, 2003), and providing more data and information does not necessarily increase the cognitive control exhibited by the consumer (Bandura, 1982; Kaplan, 2000).

Furthermore, in the message-dense shopping experience, with a multitude of sources bombarding the consumer with information about the latest fashions, what celebrities are wearing, the best prices and the must-have outfits, the cognitive effort needed to manage all this information increases. Increased cognitive effort leads to less conscious control and a greater likelihood of habitual decision making and behaviours, again increasing the likelihood of egoistical behaviour.

We can therefore suggest that the cognitive control for fashion decisions is reduced and habitual automation is more influential. This tends to drive behaviour that is hedonistic or egoistical. Thus consumer behaviour for fashion can become a counter-intentional set of habits due to the context of the experience, in spite of individuals’ best intentions to be ethical. Our value orientation is mediated by habits and context, leading to a position where behaviour is not consciously deliberate. It is for this very fact that advertising and marketing are so powerful, as they capitalise on automaticity of behaviour (Rosenberg, 2003).

5. Consumption culture

The consumption of fashion is part of a wider dialogue about the cultural and social importance of consumption in general. In a rational world, consumption is about satisfying biogenic and utilitarian needs. However, modern consumption is now driven by the less rational forces of hedonic and psychogenic desires for status and power. Humans have always used material objects and consumption to distinguish themselves (Kasser et al., 2003), but modern consumption is even more rooted in cultural desires for identity. Consumption is about satisfying the desire to define self-identity and an individual’s place in society. With the increased availability and diversity of goods, we have seen modern consumption become an even more important tool for self-expression and identity (Miller, 1995, p. 32). Consumption goods, and in particular fashion goods, are part of the information system that carry the codes that reflect cultural values to such an extent that culture and consumption are mutually dependent (McCracken, 1988, p. 131, Douglas & Isherwood, 1996, p. xiv). The culture for individuals to be constantly creating, reforming and reinforcing multiple personas is very prevalent (Bauman, 2007, p. 29). Consumption also bridges the gap between the real and the ideal allowing people to dream (McCracken, 1988, p. 113) and to achieve parity with their social group or to aspire to their reference group and celebrity; these are egoistical motivations. Visiting the marketplace is now an essential part of individuals’ lives (Bauman, 2007, p. 26). The act of consumption in defining an individual creates a valuation which is focused on self-regard and ego – traits that are likely to be less aligned with ethical behaviour.

The complexity of human psychology, the role of fashion and the impact of the consumption culture on behaviour can be analysed and interpreted in many ways. The diversity of factors influencing behaviour implies that no one model will represent all societies, groups or individuals in all contexts, situations and over time. But an argument can be constructed that suggests that ethical behaviour, and in particular ethical behaviour for mainstream fashion, is a challenging concept. At an individual level, valuations guide individual’s intentions, and these intentions can be modulated by context and time, and as a result, it is clear an altruistic individual can in some contexts have egoistical motivations. The importance of fashion for non-verbal communication about an individual’s status can create the context for egoistical behaviour. The physical process of shopping and the cognitive effort needed to make decisions about fashion tends to push the behavioural control towards the more unconscious and habitual end of the cognitive scale; this also erodes the altruistic state of a consumer. Finally, at a cultural level consumption is a vital part of self-identity reinforcing a more egoistical rather than altruistic or biospheric valuation.

Devinney et al. refer to the myth of the ethical consumer as an idealisation of being a proper member of society, an idealisation that may or may not be achievable (Devinney et al., 2014, p. 4). Is being an ethical fashion consumer more of an aspiration than a reality, and is this why ethical intentions are not reflected in behaviour when the consumer is in the grip of their shopping fever? Consumption is a cultural phenomenon and for a culture to exist, it must be supported by individuals who follow it, who at the same time are shaped by the beliefs and practices of that culture. Religion is a perfect example of this symbiotic relationship between individuals and culture (Kasser et al., 2003). In the church of consumption, where the importance of self-presentation, aesthetics and appearance drive how we make valuations about ourselves and others, can ethical consumption become a new paradigm? Or are individuals locked into egoistical valuations as a result of psychology, the values of the fashion world and the culture of consumption?