also found out that fashion industry experts themselves indicate that there is a point of difference between the two words ‘sustainability’ and ‘slow fashion’, perhaps, when

Since I also found out that fashion industry experts themselves indicate that there is a point

circumstances where manufacture of fast fashion takes place. The effects of fast fashion on environment, on the economies where the clothing is made, and on the social conditions of the people who make the clothes, are all left unsaid. Education on these factors might have an important effect on the current ‘boring’ and ‘uncool’ impressions of a fashion company’s sustainable manufacturing practices. This distinct lack of education in fashion regarding the consequences the current fast fashion system has on the environment, society and economy, only keeps the problems in place. This finding provides new practical knowledge for assessing the investigated theories mentioned in this paper, because education of the consumer has not been mentioned so far when exploring the topics of innovation, sustainability and slow fashion. Only Niinimäki offers a brief comment on the fact that a lack of knowledge could keep behavioral change from supporting fashion sustainability (2014).

My findings on the non-existent education of the fashion consumer indicate that education also influences the way the experts think about how they can communicate with their stakeholders. As mentioned earlier, I found out that experts do not find any “listeners” when talking about sustainable fashion. It is certainly likely that the lack of education could be one reason why companies do not dare to brand or promote themselves as being part of the movements of sustainability or slow fashion in Denmark. The findings imply that experts are afraid, and stakeholders in the Danish fashion industry are either not interested in or do not understand the importance of slow fashion or sustainable fashion to the values they hold in other ways, of clean environmental behavior and fair social practices. Thus, demand is nonexistent.

To summarize, I find several implications in the data regarding sustainability and slow

fashion as possible goals in the Danish fashion industry. To start with, fashion industry

experts believe sustainability does not sell. Here, the question is, why they believe this when

theory state the opposite, which holds that sustainability leads towards shared value,

competitive advantage and success. The discussion of my empirical findings leads me to

argue for several reasons why experts could think sustainability does not sell. First, it could

be that sustainability is perceived as uncool and boring by the consumer. Secondly, because

stakeholders are solely interested in buying according to personal aesthetics, this currently

remains the most important selling point in fashion. Third, stakeholders are not interested in

“listening” to promotion around aspects of sustainability, because stakeholders do not understand the importance of sustainability. This could be because the fashion companies have not invested in education in the field.

The Danish fashion industry's disinclination to educate the fashion consumer about sustainability seems to indicate its own ambivalence about the consequences of the fast fashion system. On the one hand, the experts do not want to use the term in any conversation external to their business world. On the other hand, they say they use sustainability internally. These findings imply that the fashion industry believes communicating about sustainability will not generate an economic return since there seems to be no demand for its values in the Danish market. What is more, the findings in my research imply that Danish consumers are not interested in knowing about the details of the manufacture of their clothes. It may be that the appalling conditions of production, child labor and minimum wages are not close enough to home to be of concern. Also, it implies, stakeholders defend themselves against knowing about the ecological consequences of fast fashion on the environment, the depletion of natural resources or the pollution of the water supply, by being bored with what is not cool. It seems that the industry experts are ignoring strategic sustainability, since they show no interest in engaging the Danish fashion consumer on the subject. Based on the theories of Porter and Kramer (2005), considering the Danish interest in all things ecological, I would argue that if the fashion industry educated its stakeholders, strategic sustainability initiatives like CSR and stakeholder management could indeed lead to competitive advantage. But because sustainability is not part of consumer education in Denmark, strategic sustainability has no selling point. The question of how education influences the perception of sustainability could provide fruitful future research for the fashion industry.

My research shows that most of the fashion experts I interviewed mentioned the food industry when talking about market acceptance of a new development in the industry.

Danish consumers have created a market for slow food (Denmark.dk, 2016). As outlined

earlier, the adopters of the slow fashion movement took their inspiration from the slow food

movement which is about for example organic, and local cuisine. New Nordic cuisine is an

example of an approach towards local food sources, high quality taste, produced at a high ethical standard in Denmark, showing the consumer values of sustainability, quality and health (Newnordicfood, 2016). This movement shows how slow food has found an acknowledged position in Denmark. In this context, experts interviewed in this study state, the reason why the slow food movement has been accepted in Denmark is that people have been told that organic and local food is good for their health and offers new quality in life.

The information accompanying the introduction of slow food habits in Danish culture, shows the success of emphasizing new qualities in life: “The strength of this approach lies in advancing organizational and communicative solutions that make environmental and social issues integral parts of a proposition that as a whole must be perceived as proposing new qualities” (Slow + Design p.6, 2006). If the fashion industry and its companies applied the same approach in their business strategy, it seems possible that a slow fashion movement could become as generally accepted as the slow food movement. The implication is that branding a product by proposing new qualities in life could make sustainability a valuable selling proposition.

A counter argument to this theory is that food has a direct impact on consumers’ health

because we eat food and it enters our body. Clothing does not have this obvious link to

personal health. However, the manufacture of clothing has an impact on society overall, on

the world economy and on the environment, since no part of the environment is completely

cut off from any other part. Hence it could be shown that slow fashion has an impact on our

lives and on our overall quality of life.