Towards sustainability in the Textile and Fashion industry, Copenhagen 26-27 April 2011

Environmental improvement by prolonging clothing use period

Kirsi Laitala1,2 and Ingun Grimstad Klepp1
1) National Institute for Consumer Research (SIFO), Oslo, Norway
2) Department of Product Design, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway

ABSTRACT
The amount of clothing in circulation has increased steadily the past years. This is an
environmental challenge which is often overlooked by producers and eco-labelling
organisations that concentrate mainly in the manufacturing phase. Growth in material flows
increases the need for transportation, storage space as well as the amount of waste.
This paper discusses the possibilities for reducing the material flow by increasing the clothing
life time, which can indirectly reduce the amount of clothing that consumers acquire, and in
turn, slow down the circulation pace. To achieve this, complete systems thinking is required,
where all the actors in clothes life cycle chain contribute. The aim is to find ways to improve
design and to produce good quality products that promote more sustainable use, such as
garments that have broader use areas or longer use period based on design that fits the body,
and resist changes in trends and appearance.
Results presented here are from a research project From textile waste to material resources in
a grave to cradle perspective. The analysis is based on a quantitative consumer survey and
qualitative interviews of strategic selection of households in order to find out the reasons
behind clothing disposal decisions, acquisition practices and maintenance habits. The
households delivered disposed apparel to be tested in the textile laboratory. This way,
information of both the social and technical aspects of disposal reasons was collected. The
results indicate that poor fit, technical quality and taste-related issues dominate reasons for
clothing disposal, in addition to situational reasons such as having too many similar garments.
These results can be used in helping designers awareness of the common problems that occur
during use and inspire a new design-paradigm.

Correspondence:
Kirsi Laitala
National Institute for Consumer Research (SIFO)
P.O. Box 4682 Nydalen, 0405 Oslo, Norway
E-mail: Kirsi.Laitala@sifo.no

1 Introduction
In Norway, the price of clothing has fallen since the 1995. As a matter of fact, last time
clothing was on the same price level as today was in the 1984 (Andersen, 2007). At the same
time the relative income has increased, thus enabling higher purchase power. This has resulted
in higher consumption of clothing, which can be seen in the increased import statistics (Fig.
1). The annual statistics show that the import corresponds to 16.5 kg of clothes per person
(Statistics Norway, 2010). At the same time, the amount of textile waste has increased.
Textile waste totals 26.8 kg per person, from which 10.5 kg comes from the households (SFT,
2008, Statistics Norway, 2010). The rest of the textile waste comes mainly from the service
sector and different industries. Two largest charity organisations collect together 3.6 kg
textiles per Norwegian (Fretex, 2010, UFF, 2010)1. Twenty percent of Fretex collected
clothing is sold in Norway, while 60 percent is exported and sold abroad, mainly to Asia and
Africa. About 4% is used as shoddy and rags, and the remaining 16% is thrown away as waste
(Hansen, 2000, Fretex, 2009). However, the garments which are unsuitable for reuse lack
collection and recycling systems, in contrast to the other big waste groups like glass, poster
and wet organic materials. Material recycling of textiles is more complicated due to their
complex and heterogeneous consistence including cellulose, synthetic fibres, protein fibres
and a range of different chemicals, plastic materials, metals etc. However, some countries
such as UK do have textile collection systems for material recycling. Most of recycled textiles
are down-cycled and used in mattress/upholstery applications, carpet underlay and sound
isolations systems in automotives (Morley et al., 2006).

Import of clothes to Norway

90 000
80 000
Import in tonnes

70 000
60 000
50 000
40 000
30 000
20 000
10 000
0
1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Figure 1: Textile import statistics to Norway (tonnes of clothes)

These constantly increasing amounts of textiles have environmental consequences. Growth in

material flows increases the need for transportation, storage space as well as the amount of
waste. This is an environmental challenge which is often overlooked by producers and eco1

Fretex is a social enterprise owned by the Norwegian Salvations Army. UFF Norway is part of the international
Humana People to People Movement.

labelling organisations that concentrate mainly in the manufacturing phase. Therefore,

studying consumers clothing acquisition, use and disposal habits are of importance.
Several life cycle assessment (LCA) studies on textiles and clothing show that the use phase is
the most energy-demanding stage of clothing items life cycle (Blackburn and Payne, 2004,
Dahllf, 2004, Madsen et al., 2007). Depending on the energy source, it may also be the most
polluting phase. However, when discussing possibilities to increase sustainability, the focus is
usually on the production phase. If the use period is considered, the attention is drawn to
maintenance, mainly washing and drying (as discussed in Laitala et al., 2011). A LCA study
of one specific product alone does not necessarily emphasise enough the importance of
longevity. Short lifetime increases the need for products to be replaced faster, thus increasing
the environmental load from production and disposal phases. One of the possible ways of
increasing sustainability within the field of textiles and clothing is to prolong the use period
(Klepp, 2001, Fletcher, 2008, Cooper et al., 2010). Therefore, consumers decisions during
use are crucial and affect the lifetime of clothing.
This paper discusses the possibilities for reducing the material flow by increasing the clothing
life time, which can indirectly reduce the amount of clothing that consumers acquire, and in
turn, slow down the circulation pace. To achieve this, complete systems thinking is required,
where all the actors in clothes life cycle chain contribute. The aim is to find ways to improve
design and to produce good quality products that promote more sustainable use, such as
garments that have broader use areas or longer use period based on design that fits the body,
and resist changes in trends and appearance. 2 Our focus lies in the first R of Reduce, Reuse
and Recycle waste management hierarchy, but without forgetting the other two Rs.
In the following chapter, a short literature review of consumers clothing use and disposal
habits is given.

2 Background
Some studies have discussed the clothing use phase, both concerning the maintenance habits
and disposal patterns. One of the first published models for clothing consumption was
developed by Winakor (1969). She described the different stages from clothing acquisition to
disposal, including use, care and active and inactive storages. According to her, the inactive
storage is a kind of limbo between inventory and discarding. Cluver (2008) has studied this
further in her dissertation, concentrating especially on the complex decision making process
between storage and disposal, and why clothes are kept in storage even though they are no
longer used. According to her study, several factors prompt disposal versus storage in
decision making, including calls from charitable organisations, seasonal changes, need of
storage space, changes in life, and identification of suitable recipients.
Klepp (2001) has studied womens clothing habits and reasons for clothing disposal. She
divided the disposal reasons in six main categories, which were a further development of
studies made by Packard (1960) and Strandbakken (1997) concerning consumers product
disposal patterns (Table 1). The results show that technical or quality related obsolescence is
given as most common reason for clothes disposal, even though a large amount is discarded
due to psychological and situational reasons.
2

This paper is a part of a larger research project From textile waste to material resources in a grave to cradle
perspective.

Similar research was done by Koch and Domina in Michigan, who studied which different
textiles disposal methods were used, and why clothes were discarded. One of the most
common reasons for finding a new use area for clothing after the use period is not to waste
it. Fit problems were typical reasons for giving away clothing. Damaged clothing was usually
used as rags or modified and reused (Domina and Koch, 1999, Koch and Domina, 1999).
Table 1: Reasons for disposal of clothes in study of 24 Norwegian women (Klepp, 2001)

Type of obsolescence
Technical or quality related (The product is worn out, ruined or is
uncomfortable in use.)
Psychological (The owner is tired of the product, does not use that
style anymore, or clothes seem outdated)
Situational (The owner has developed new needs, such as
changed body size, has other similar clothes and lacks closet
space, or that the clothes have too narrow use area)
Never worn (Product not suitable for purpose. Often bought on
impulse or received as present)
Functional (New and better products have come to the market)
Sentimental (The owner takes the product out of use and keeps it
for other purpose, does not want to use it in order to not to ruin it)
Total

Percentage of total
number of registered
reasons
35%
31%
19%

13%
1%
1%
100%

Another study, which included focus group studies and interviews of British younger female
fashion consumers, revealed that most respondents did not have a specific idea of how long
they would keep the clothing (Bristwistle and Moore, 2007). Most kept items as long as they
were wearable and said that they stopped wearing cheap clothing for three main reasons:
lower quality, new fashion trend or clothes were bought for one specific occasion. They were
more likely to retain expensive clothing, even if they no longer wore it.
A recent study from the UK revealed that the respondents discarded clothing mainly due to
the condition of clothing, new trends in fashion, lack of space, loss of emotional attachment
and changes in body shape (Cooper et al., 2010).
Several studies on clothing recycling have concentrated on environmental behaviour and
attitudes of consumers, recycling habits and hindrances for environmentally friendly
behaviour (Shim, 1995, Daneshvary et al., 1998, Domina and Koch, 2002, Ha-Brookshire and
Hodges, 2009). These studies showed that some specific consumer groups are more likely to
recycle, and that convenience of recycling plays a central role.
Most of these studies are based on interviews or surveys and not directly related to studies of
disposed clothing, with the exception of Klepps research. However, her research
concentrated on 40-year-old women, and therefore a further study involving more
heterogeneous sample and different research methods is needed to answer a broader research
question, and to get more detailed data. Research methods that are used here are described in
the following chapter.

3 Methods
Due to the interdisciplinary nature of the project and the complex research theme, data has
been collected through different methods, including quantitative survey, qualitative
interviews, wardrobe studies, as well as laboratory tests. This paper presents results from
survey and interviews.

3.1 Quantitative questionnaire.

Quantitative information of consumers experiences and opinions concerning clothing use,
maintenance routines (washing, drying and ironing), and disposal habits was collected
through a survey in Norway. Respondents were recruited though random selection from the
phone catalogue, through personal and work related networks as well as publicity in media. A
total of 546 answers were received. Each quotation from the survey is presented with a code
that gives the gender and age of the respondent. The background variables for the respondents
are presented in Table 2. The distribution of respondents is uneven with evident female
domination (77%). The age group 25-39 is overrepresented in comparison to the average of
the adult population, and the youngest and oldest age groups are underrepresented. The
respondents have higher education than the average Norwegian population. The received data
is not representative for the whole population, which has been taken that into account when
conclusions are drawn. The results cannot be used for generalizations for the Norwegian
population as a whole. However, we still have a large number of respondents that can be
compared with each other in the sample, and we can use the sample as an example of
consumers in Norway. The cases are not weighed.
Table 2: Respondents divided by background variables and compared to Norwegian population
(15 years and older)(Agerskov, 2010, Statistics Norway, 2011)
Sample
Population
BACKGROUND VARIABLES
[%]
[%]
GENDER
Male
23
50
Female
77
50
100
100
AGE GROUP
15-24 years
9
16
25-39 years
48
25
40-59 years
33
33
60+ years
9
26
100
100
EDUCATION
1
Primary and lower secondary school
5
27
1
Upper secondary education (gymnasium)
16
41
1
Higher education (college or university)
75
27
1
Other or unspecified
3
6
100
100
EMPLOYMENT STATUS
2
Employed (full or part time)
78
69
1
Unemployed
3
3
3
Non-working (retired, homemaker etc.)
9
27
1
Student
8
16
Other
3
100
1) Figure gives percent of total population aged 15-74 years.
2) Figure gives percent of total population aged 16-74 years
3) Figure gives percentage of pensioners (retired or disabled) of total population above the age 16

3.2 Qualitative consumer interviews and wardrobe studies

A strategic sample of 16 households was selected for a qualitative study to collect detailed
information of households clothing material flow. The households collected all clothes taken
out of use and filled in a list of their clothing acquisitions throughout the six months. During
the second interview, the list of clothing acquisitions and all disposed clothing items were
gone through (wardrobe study, for detailed method description see Klepp and Bjerck,
Unpublished). For each disposed item, the following details were registered (when available):
-User
-Disposal reason(s)
-Age of the garment
-When it was used the last time
-How much it had been used and for what
-Means of disposal
The respondents were selected from volunteers that had agreed to be contacted based on the
quantitative survey conducted earlier. The intention was to interview people with different
backgrounds and life situations. The background variables of the main respondents are listed
in table 3. The respondents had varied economic situations and varying levels of interest in
clothes, fashion and environmental issues. In addition to the main respondents of each
household, three of the cohabitants were interviewed, two female and one male, resulting in
19 interviews. Some of the children were close by during the interviews and sometimes
participated in the discussion. Together with the children and other family members, a total of
35 people were included in to the registration of in and outgoing clothing.
Table 3: Main respondents background variables

Sex
Age

Family

Relationship status
Area of living

Education

Employment situation

3
4

Female
Male
20-34
35-49
50+
No children
Parents with small children
Parents (adult children)
Single/living alone
Living with partner
West Oslo
East Oslo
Other cities
Below college level
College
University
Working3
Student4
Retired

13
3
8
6
2
7
7
2
6
10
5
3
8
1
6
9
12
3
1

Three of them only work part time

All three students had part time jobs

Because the chosen research method requires a lot from the participants, it was important to
find benevolent respondents. The distribution of respondents is by no means representative of
the population, but is a strategically selected sample (Eneroth, 1984). There is evident female
domination, the younger age groups are overrepresented and the respondents have higher
education than the average Norwegian population. During the recruitment phase, several men
and elderly were contacted, and some were willing to participate, but left the study afterwards
either due to illness or other reasons. We believe that this wide chosen selection criteria gives
material that is suitable to discuss the projects research questions.
A semi-structured interview guide was used, where the topics were fixed, but not the order or
wording of the questions. The questions were formulated in a manner that made the
respondents describe and reflect on their experiences as a conversation. The interviews were
recorded, transcribed, coded and analysed with ATLAS.ti software. The clothing was
categorised and analysed with Excel and SPSS software. All quotations from the interviews
are given with age and a fictional name of the respondent.
As the next step, the clothing that was collected will be studied further in the textile
laboratory. The products taken out of use due to technical reasons such as wear and tear or
changes in appearance will be analysed in order to see which test methods could reveal these
weaknesses and to quantify the technical quality. Based on these results, it will be possible to
suggest minimum limits for these properties, which will be useful in the selection of materials
for production. By combining the knowledge from interviews with laboratory tests,
information on both the social and technical aspects of clothes can be revealed and we will be
able to discuss the relationship between these two aspects of clothing consumption. The focus
is on the reasons for the disposal decisions, and what could be done to increase the lifespan of
the products.
In this article, we will discuss some key findings related to the disposal reasons. This will be
done by comparing the groups of consumers, children, women and men. Because the
technical analysis of the discarded clothes has not yet been done, the specific questions related
to technical obsolescence will be discussed in later publications.

4 Results
In the following, the survey results are presented together with some findings from the
interviews. First, we discuss the respondents environmental interests and the considerations,
followed by clothing disposal habits and reasons.

4.1 Environmental considerations

We were interested in respondents interests in three areas; environment, clothing, and
fashion. The answer distribution of respondents that were either quite or very interested in
these matters is presented in Figure 2. Majority of both men and women were most interested
in environment. Women said they were in average more interested in clothes and fashion than
men were. Both genders were on average more interested in clothes than fashion. Younger
respondents are more interested in fashion and clothes than the older ones, but there is no
significant difference between the age groups concerning environmental interest. The
interviews gave similar indications. Almost everybody said they were interested in
environment. They gave examples of their everyday life, such as how they sort waste, dont
purchase more than needed, or used public transport when possible. Interest in clothes and
7

fashion varied more, and in general the informants were more interested in clothes than
fashion, as they wanted at least to feel comfortable and appear professional at work or school.
Markus, 42, described how his interest had changed during the years Well, I'm quite average
interested in clothes. It's not like I just buy something to keep me warm (laughs a little). A
little more than that. [...] I was more interested before we got children. Now you dont have
time for that. [] I think my style now is just more casual/classic. I was maybe more fashion
conscious before. I felt that clothes went out of fashion. I do not feel that things are going out
of fashion now. So now I rather buy clothes that might remain in a way longer than... I do not
buy the most fancy, the trendiest. Because I'm 42 years old, so... That would be more
pathetic. Still, Markus would mainly buy brand clothing and the oldest clothes he used were
only about 3-5 years old. Heidi, 32, described her opinion of fashion: No. I am not interested
in fashion other than that I follow to see when clothes that I like come in fashion again
(laughs a little). [...] It can go two years without me buying anything, besides for underwear,
because everything is just awful colour and everything (laughs a little). Could be a long
period in between when my style is in fashion. She described using a lot of clothes that were
10-15 years old.

Percentage of respondents interested in environment,

fashion, and clothes by gender
80%
70%
60%
50%
Female

40%
74%
30%

67%

Male

67%
48%

20%
32%
21%

10%
0%
Environment

Fashion (P<0.01)

Clothes (P<0.01)

Figure 2: Percentage of respondents that answered they are either quite or very interested in
environmental questions, fashion, and clothes divided by gender (N=284)

To combine the environmental considerations with clothing consumption, we asked the

survey respondents into which degree they considered clothes environmental consequences
during the different life phases. These results are presented in Figure 3. The answers are
difficult to interpret, because we have not separated between the considerations and the
actions. When respondents have answered that they do not think environment at specific
situation, it might mean several things:
1. They do not think or act for environment
2. They do think but do not act
3. They do not think but do act (possibly of other reasons)
8

Case 2 is demonstrated by comment I always feel a bit guilty when I throw away instead of
giving away, but the convenience wins. It is easier to throw away (female, 28). She is
reflected and does think the consequences, but does not act on it. Case 3 is demonstrated by
comment I line dry all clothing, so I do not think about the environment then. (male, 18).
This respondent does the environmentally correct thing, but probably has other reasons for
this practice and does not consider it as an environmental action. However, the results do
show that the environmental considerations are mainly connected to the end of use period
where the clothes are either given or thrown away, whereas least consideration is given to
clothing purchase.

To a which degree do you consider clothes' environmental

consequences during the following situations:
Giving away
Every time
Throwing away
Sometimes
Drying
To a very small
degree
Washing
Does not consider
environment
Reparation
Don't know
Purchase
0%

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

Figure 3: To a which degree do you consider clothes' environmental consequences during the
following situations (N=285)

In the interviews, the respondents were more aware of the purchase phase and when asked for
What do you connect with sustainable clothing consumption?, they often spontaneously
answered themes related to purchase, such as to buy only what you need, to use products until
they are worn out, and to look for ecological cotton instead of regular. This might be related
to the question setting, where word consumption was used, and is often related to purchase.
There were great variations between the respondents consideration, and some for example
said that they did not have any such considerations, as they only used what was needed, and
not more.
There was variation in level of knowledge concerning the theme. This was especially visible
in whether the respondent considered all natural fibres automatically better for the
environment than synthetics, or if they knew that conventional cotton production had
detrimental consequences for the environment.

Many informants told they avoided using tumble drier, but often for other reasons than the
environment, for example economical to save electricity, to save clothing from abrasion, or
because they just did not have one. Many respondents were aware that it is more economical
to fill the washing machine, and they often said they did it (but usually not completely
packed). When it comes to disposal phase, most respondents said they gave clothes to charity
or friends, and seldom throw garments in garbage. Many respondents said they were not good
enough in throwing away clothing, and were just collecting it, and often suffered from lack of
storage space.

4.2 Disposal and recycling habits

The survey respondents were asked for their clothing disposal habits and frequency of giving
or throwing away clothing. Most common frequency was once or twice a year, which often
was related to spring and autumn cleaning, when summer and winter clothes are rotated
between storages. Men reported to dispose clothing more seldom than women.

Clothing disposal frequency

60%

50%
48%
40%

30%
22%

20%

12%

10%

0%

9%

7%

1%
More than 10 5-10 times a
times a year
year

1%
3-4 times a
year

1-2 times a Every second More seldom

year
year

Never

Figure 4: Reported clothing disposal frequency (N=482)

Next questions concerned where the clothing is disposed to after the use period. Figure 5 is
valid for clothing that is not worn out but no longer used, whereas figure 6 indicates the
disposal methods for worn out or damaged clothing. Most of usable clothing is given to
charity organisations or friends or family. Many respondents also ment that they usually use
clothing until it is worn out. Selling garments is not that common. Very few admitted
throwing usable clothes to garbage, whereas this is the main disposal method for damaged
clothing. Many also intend to repair the clothing, if possible. About 11% of repsondents gave
damaged clothing to charity, even the Norwegian charity orgnaisations specify that they only
want to receive undamaged garments. The interviews revealed that almost everybody
delivered sometimes used clothing to charity or friends. Many of them felt bad about clothing
that could not be delivered to recycling, and were hoping alternative ways to dispose these
items instead of just binning them.
10

What is done with clothing that is no longer

used but not worn out?
Gives clothes to charity or flea market
Uses clothes until they are worn out
Gives clothes to friends or family

Often
Uses clothes as rags

Sometimes
Never

Throws clothes to garbage

Makes something new of clothes
Sells clothes at used market or internet
0%

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

Figure : Disposal and recycling methods for clothing that is not worn out (N=482)

What is done with clothing that is worn out or

damaged?
Throws clothes to garbage
Repairs clothes if possible
Uses clothes as rags

Often
Gives clothes to charity or flea market

Sometimes
Never

Makes something new of clothes

Gives clothes to friends or family
Sells clothes at used market or internet
0%

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

Figure 6: Disposal and recycling methods for clothing that is worn out or damaged (N=482)

11

Similar results were found in a recent representative survey conducted in Norway (Fig. 7)
(Laitala et al., 2011 Forthcoming). It is more common to give clothing to friends or charity
than to receive or buy used clothing. The difference in giving and receiving clothing from
friends can be partly explained that the most common type of clothing inherited is childrens
clothing, and the adult respondents may give it away but did not answer that they used it by
themselves. Also, a large portion of clothing that was never used was often inherited. Women
were more active than men in all the other categories of the figure 7, besides throwing useable
garments into trash.

Within the past year, have you done any of the following?
Given clothes to charity

77%

Given used clothes to friends

50%

Thrown a usable garment into trash

36%

Received used clothing

35%

Bought used clothing

18%

Used old clothes to make something new

11%
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Figure 7: Percentage of positive answers to question Within the past year, have you done any
of the following? (N=1124)

Younger survey respondents were more likely to buy second-hand clothing. This was also
seen in the interviews, where the elder informants more often connected hygiene problems to
used clothing. Pia, 59, explains that she never buys second-hand clothing: I cannot imagine
buying clothes that are used before, that people who I do not know have used. But I can
receive used clothes from my daughter. Olivia, 67, was not as much against the idea, but
would hardly ever buy something I hardly ever buy used clothes. I've given up. For one
thing, I think these second-hand stores are often expensive.... I go by there from time to time
to take a look, and I bought some children's clothes for my grandchild. But not for myself. [...]
I often think that when the fabric is used and it gets warm again, I have the impression that it
smells a bit sweat. [] Even though it is clean, especially if there are synthetic fibers in it,
you get the smell. You may only feel it by yourself, but.
Many of the informants below 40 were positive to using second hand clothing, even though
most of them seldom bought something. The main obstacles were described as finding the
correct size, the longer time that was needed in looking for suitable clothing, the store
locations, and the high clothing prices. A few young female informants were regular secondhand clothing shoppers. These informants looked for special treasures in vintage stores or
internet. Barbara, 25, was not satisfied with how most second-hand stores selected their sale
items, and preferred to shop used clothes only in a few specific stores. She described her used
clothing purchase reason as It is of course to find something that is completely unique, and
something a little bit more distinct.[] And it happens that you find something very special
and very different in second-hand stores. Especially the ones that I have as my favorites,
which are very good at choosing things that are... whether it's vintage designer brands; very
exclusive things, that are old and things which may be collectibles or have gone out or... Or
just old stuff that's fine, without any particular brand.
12

4.3 Disposal reasons

The survey respondents were asked for their opinion on what would need to be different in
their clothing in general for them to use them longer (Fig. 8). Several readymade answering
options were given and the respondents could either agree or disagree with them, or suggest
other alternative answers. Some of the main reasons given here were a combination of
technical and quality related aspects, unsuitable fit and the situational/psychological/social
reasons. Fashion and demands for appearance in work scored low. This will be discussed later
in chapter 4.3.4.

Figure 8: Agreement to different statements of what would be needed for the respondents to
keep using their clothing longer.

During the six months project period that the 16 households were followed, 619 garments
were taken out of use and registered. Each participant stopped using on average 18.4
garments. However, these figures do not include all items that the respondents stopped using.
Some childrens clothing had been placed in storage when it became too small, to pass on
later for younger siblings or for sentimental reasons. In addition, one of the respondents had to
move to a smaller place on very short notice, and had to dispose of a large amount of clothing
(about 4 large garbage bags). Therefore, the registered clothes give indication of normal
routines related to clothing disposal, whereas the unregistered disposals may reflect the
disrupted routines that occur during changes in life, such as moving.
The respondents gave up to five different disposal reasons per garment. All of these were
registered and categorised to 63 different categories, which were then grouped according to
table 4. Some respondents were very clear on why they stopped using the garments, whereas
others had problems giving the exact reasons.

13

Table 4: Grouping of given clothing disposal reasons

Size and fit issues

-Too small (grown out of it)
-Too small (always been)
-Too big (lost weight)
-Too big (always been)
-Fit, waist
-Fit, hips
-Fit, bust
-Fit, length
-Fit, collar
-Fit, shoulders
-Fit (general or not specified)

Functional shortcomings
-Does not fall nicely
-Rolls up
-Unpractical
-Uncomfortable (physical)
-Static
-Itches
-Too warm
-Too cold
-Functional failure
-Material not good
-Too wrinkled or would need ironing

Changes in garments
-Hole or rift
-Broken seam or other sewing failure
-Threads drawn out
-Colour change (fading)
-Yellowing
-Discoloration (bleeding from other
garments)
-Sweat spots
-Soiling spots
-Print faded
-Dimensional changes
-Pilling
-Fuzzing
-Worn out
-Washed out
-Material has become thin
-Fabric become harder
-Lost elasticity
-Spirality
-Felting
-Sweat odour
-Broken zipper
-Bra underwire broken or bent
-Broken decorations
-Buttons missing or not working
-Failed mending or repair

Fashion or style changes

-Fashion change or outdated
-Own style changed
-Change in life situation
-Bored with the garment
Situational
-Does not fit with other clothes
-No occasions to use it
-Have several similar or better garments
-Does not use that type of garments
Taste related unsuitability
-Not own style
-Dislike of colour
-Dislike of pattern or print
-Dislike of design or shape

Other or unknown
-Missing pair
-Someone else needed it
-Other
-Unknown

When interpreting the results we must keep in mind the methodological weaknesses that some
knowledge of disposal causes was second-hand information. Parents always gave reasons for
their childrens clothing disposal. In these cases reasons like dislike of colour is usually the
parents dislike, not the childs. In addition, four wives were interviewed about their
husbands clothing disposal and one husband on his wifes clothing disposal. Men buy their
own clothing to a lesser extent than women, and they also purchase less frequently for others
(Laitala et al., 2009). Doing the laundry and management of the wardrobe are the most
14

female-dominated household chores(Klepp, 2005). This means that women in general are
good respondents on men's clothing consumption. At the same time, this raises some
methodological problems. We will have to assume that women might portray men as more
irresponsible, immature consumers than themselves. This difference fits into the picture of
incompetent homemaker that women portray and the men accept (Kaufmann, 1998, Klepp,
2005). Another weakness of the material is that fewer men participated, and they stopped
using on average fewer clothing items, which makes the statistical basis weaker.
Table 5: Seven most common disposal reasons for different types of garments

Shirt, top or sweater

1. Too small (grown out of it)
2. Have several similar or better garments
3. Hole or rift
4. Worn out
5. Fit - length
6. Dimensional changes
7. Dislike of design or shape
Skirt or dress
1. Too small (grown out of it)
2. Fit (general or not specified)
3. Have several similar or better garments
4. Dislike of design or shape
5. Does not use that type of garments
6. Own style changed
7. Worn out
Overall or body
1. Soiling spots
2. Too small (grown out of it)
3. Have several similar or better garments
4. Broken zipper
5. Fashion change or outdated
6. Hole or rift
7. Material not good
Socks
1. Hole or rift
2. Worn out
3. Too small (grown out of it)
4. Colour change or fading
5. Lost elasticity
6. Material has become thin
7. Missing pair
Nightwear or bathrobe
1. Have several similar or better garments
2. Too small (grown out of it)
3. Worn out
4. Fit (length)
5. Hole or rift
6. Does not use that type of garments
7. Dislike of colour

Trousers, jeans or shorts

1. Too small (grown out of it)
2. Worn out
3. Hole or rift
4. Too big (always been)
5. Have several similar or better garments
6. Soiling spots
7. Fashion change or outdated
Jacket
1. Too small (grown out of it)
2. Have several similar or better garments
3. Broken zipper
4. Not own style
5. Fashion change or outdated
6. Worn out
7. Too big - always been
Underwear
1. Lost elasticity
2. Discoloration (bleeding from other
garments)
3. Hole or rift
4. Too small (grown out of it)
5. Dislike of design or shape
6. Too small (always been)
7. Worn out
Stockings or leggings
1. Hole or rift
2. Too small (grown out of it)
3. Worn out
4. Broken seam or other sewing failure
5. Material has become thin
6. Material not good
7. Failed mending or repair
Accessories (gloves, hats, scarves etc)
1. Have several similar or better garments
2. Too small (grown out of it)
3. Hole or rift
4. Material not good
5. Missing pair
6. Functional failure
7. Broken decorations
15

Table 5 lists the seven most common disposal reasons for each type of garments. The first
four clothing types all have the same main reason, the clothing has become too small. Another
common reason have several similar or better garments demonstrates the large amount of
clothes in circulation. Respondents often have more than they need of some garment types,
and therefore dispose of the ones that are considered mediocre.
Worn and worn out were common expressions to describe clothing that had changed
appearance without exactly describing the changes. Skirts and dresses had in general fewer
changes due to use than other garments, and were disposed of due to fit, size and design
issues.
Many jackets and overalls are disposed of due to broken zippers. In the underwear category, a
large number of discoloration and elasticity loss is partly related to one respondents washing
load that was destroyed due to a blue sock at 90 C white wash and the following bleaching
attempt. Socks and stocking are mainly used until there are holes or rifts on them, or at least
until they are very worn out and thin.
In line with earlier research results as presented earlier, some of the main reasons for clothes
disposal are a combination of technical and quality related aspects, unsuitable fit and the
situational/psychological/social reasons (Domina and Koch, 1999, Koch and Domina, 1999,
Klepp, 2001, Bristwistle and Moore, 2007). The large number of clothing that has become too
small may largely be based on childrens clothing, so in the following chapter, the results of
childrens and adults clothing are compared.
4.3.1 Differences between childrens and adults disposed clothing
In the 1950s, children were described as slitvargen when it comes to clothing consumption,
an expression meaning that the children wore out the clothing like wolfs (Berggren Torell,
2007). However, in our material childrens clothing is mainly disposed because it has become
too small (Fig.9 and Table 7). In other words, they outgrow more clothes than wear out
clothes. Or at least, that is what the parents say. The childrens garments may be worn out as
well, but on these clothing items it is most obvious to give too small as a disposal reason,
than listing all the other reasons in addition. This must be viewed in the context of the age of
the children, as well as the total number of clothes the kids have.
Adults disposed mostly due to changes in the garments. Almost half of the reasons given were
related changes such as holes, wear and tear, dimensional changes and colour changes.
Adults clothing was also disposed more due to personal taste related issues than childrens
clothing. The unknown category on children and teens is relatively high, as the respondents
who were parents to teenagers often did not know the exact reasons for why teenagers stopped
using their clothing. These teenagers were not available for interviews.

16

Figure 9: Disposal reasons for children and teens and adults

Table 7: Top 10 single reasons for clothing disposal. Separate for children and adults

Children and teens

Too small (grown out of it)
Hole or rift
Have several similar or better
garments
Soiling spots
Worn out
Fashion change or outdated
Unknown
Dislike of design or shape
Pilling
Too big (always been)

40 %
9%
8%
7%
4%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%

Adults
Hole or rift
Worn out
Have several similar or better
garments
Dislike of design or shape
Too small (grown out of it)
Fit (length)
Dimensional changes
Colour change or fading
Lost elasticity
Too small - always been

12 %
8%
6%
4%
4%
4%
4%
3%
3%
3%

4.3.2 Differences between mens and womens disposed clothing

The most important finding of the comparison between men and women is perhaps the fact
that the results are so similar (Fig. 10). There are few studies that systematically compare
women's and men's clothing consumption. The way this issue is often discussed gives an
impression that the differences are very large, and the similarities are thus easily overlooked.
However, this does not mean that there are no differences.

17

Figure 10: Clothing disposal reasons for women and men

The main difference is that women in much greater extent than men - more than twice as often
- have problems with fit and sizes. We were already aware of this problem through a prior
study on clothing sizing, which showed that women experienced more problems in finding
clothes that fit, and that womens trousers had more variations in the relationship between
sizes and labelling (Laitala et al., 2009). Also the fact that womens clothing more often has
tighter fit makes them more sensitive to changes in body size than mens clothing. Another
important difference is that men are more concerned with functional aspects than women. To
be able to understand these figures better we must go into what type of clothing men and
women have disposed of, also study in detail the reasons behind.
4.3.3 Importance of acquisition for disposal
About 18 % of all registered garments had never been used or only used once or twice. This
corresponds well with the study of the disposal of clothing among 40-year-old women in
Norway in 2001 (Klepp, 2001). In that study, not used at all was 13% of listed disposal
reasons and 19% of the reasons by the number of garments. All the women in the study
disposed of clothing they had never used. It is also evident in our material that the way clothes
are acquired has an impact on whether they are used or not. Most the unused clothes were
gifts or inherited clothing items from family and friends. This means that the receiver has very
little control over what she/he is given. In addition came clothing that was not tried on before
purchase, or that was bought on sale.
4.3.4 Fashion
The reasons registered here were only based on what the respondents said. In some cases, it
was obvious that there were more reasons behind the disposal decisions than what was said
aloud. Many adult women do not want to admit their reason for disposal being purely fashion
(Storm-Mathisen and Klepp, 2006). Instead, they want to be perceived as sensible, rational
consumers who are confident in their choices and style. Fashion and brand items are
18

associated with the youth and uncertain consumers that havent found their own style yet
(Klepp and Storm-Mathisen, 2005). It is therefore to be expected that fashion is not reported
as disposal reason that often, even if it might be an underlying reason. Instead of saying it
directly, the respondent can emphasize that the clothing is too narrow or wide, even if there
has not been any changes in the clothing or body size, the only difference being the
fashionable fit (Klepp, 2001). The material revealed two main scenarios when the fashion
change was given as disposal reason. The first was mothers of teenage daughters, who
assumed that their daughters had stopped using some garments due to trend changes. These
garments were usually quite new, about a year old. The other cases were clothing items that
were about 8-20 years old, and referred to as outdated. For these clothes, it is possible that last
time they were used they were less obsolete and that other reasons than fashion were more
important at that time (Klepp, 2004). Many clothing items laid years unused in the wardrobes
before the owners decided to dispose or recycle them.
A more detailed analysis of fashion as the disposal reason therefore requires that the given
disposal reasons are considered in combination with changes in garments and their owners.
We are planning an analysis which combines the expressed reasons with the technical analysis
of the clothes.

5 Conclusions
Technical problems related to wear and tear are an important reason for disposal. This
suggests that there is much to be gained from technical improvements, especially if combined
with improvements in the way the clothes are used. Another important reason, size and fit
problems, is related to the mass production of clothing where grading for different sizes and
body types is problematic, when a few ready-to-wear sizes are supposed to fit a large part of
the population. The adaptation to the body is a great design challenge especially on womens
clothing. Few ready-to-wear items fit well and close to the body and at the same time are
flexible enough for changes in weight and body shape. In addition, better labelling and better
correspondence between women's actual bodies and the available clothes would contribute
positively. Men's clothing requires good technical solutions and comfort, as well as clothing
that has good flexibility when it comes to changes in style and fashion.
When it comes to children's clothing, it will also be important to make the clothes less
sensitive to changes in body size, and to find good solutions to reduce the number of clothes
in circulation. Fewer and better clothes will contribute to facilitate the management of
clothing, and to reduce the environmental impacts. Many parents said that clothing usually
lasted one or maximum two seasons before it became too small. There were only a few
exceptions to this, one being an African dress that could be worn both short and long, and
therefore lasted for four years (Fig. 11). However, childrens clothing was more often
inherited, and the clothes that were not worn out therefore often had more than one user
already before they were delivered to charity or disposed.
There are numerous possibilities for designing more sustainable clothing. Doing so, demands
for functional, symbolic and superior requirements have to be addressed. The information we
have on use and disposal of clothing can in theory be used for improved design. Better quality
must be combined with fewer clothes by each owner so that the technical improvements can
result in reduced consumption and decreased environmental impact. Dislike towards wasting
clothes suggests that there is a motivation to change this consumption pattern. The positive
opinions on recycling and using second-hand clothing among younger respondents indicate
19

that there is a potential to increase this share. Improving the sorting systems of second-hand
clothing could help to overcome the problems several respondents had with having to use too
much time in finding suitable second-hand clothing.

Figure 11: African dress that the girl could use from age three to seven before she outgrew it

Improved knowledge among designers on the actual clothing consumption, combined with
better knowledge among consumers about textiles quality and mending techniques could lead
to significant improvements as increased lifetime. When moving along the waste management
hierarchy from reduce and reuse to recycling, another option for reducing the total
environmental impact is to design for simpler material recycling. This may in some cases be
more suitable solution for some specific products where long life time may not be as desired.
An example of this is health care, where the high hygiene demands can make use of
disposable products more desirable than the otherwise needed disinfection process of longer
lasting products.

6 Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Norwegian Research Council and Orkla ASA for
financing the project From textile waste to material resources in a grave to cradle
perspective This paper is part of the four-year project that was started in 2009 and includes a
PhD project for the first author. Project is led by National Institute for Consumer Research in
Norway. It has relevant textile chain stakeholders as partners, including textile recycling
companies Fretex (The Norwegian Salvation army) and UFF (Humana People to People),
clothing and detergent producers (Norrna Sport and Lilleborg), Nordic initiative Clean &
Ethical Fashion (a project under Nordic Fashion Association called NICE), Department of
Product Design of Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and three design
schools (University of the Arts London, Oslo National Academy of the Arts and the Swedish
School of Textiles).

20

References
Agerskov, U (2010), Nordic statistical yearbook 2010, vol. 48 [Kbenhavn], Nordisk
Ministerrd.
Andersen, E (2007), Rimeligere klr og teletjenester. Oslo, Norwegian statistics. Available
http://www.ssb.no/samfunnsspeilet/utg/200702/08/index.html
[Accessed
from:
29.07.2010].
Berggren Torell, V (2007), Folkhemmets barnklder: diskurser om det kldda barnet under
1920-1950-talen. PhD. Gteborgs universitet.
Blackburn, R S & Payne, J D (2004), Life cycle analysis of cotton towels: impact of domestic
laundering and recommendations for extending periods between washing. Green
Chemistry, 6, G59-G61.
Bristwistle, G & Moore, C M (2007), Fashion clothing where does it all end up?
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35, 210-216.
Cluver, B G (2008), Consumer Clothing Inventory Management. Oregon State University.
Cooper, T, Fisher, T, Hiller, A, Goworek, H & Woodward, S (2010), Excessive speed/short
lives - Attitudes to clothing longevity and disposal. In: F Ceschin, C Vezzoli & J
Zhang, eds. LeNS conference Sustainability in design: NOW!, Bangalore, India, 728737.
Dahllf, L (2004), LCA methodology issues for textile products. Gothenburg.
Daneshvary, N, Daneshvary, R & Schwer, R K (1998), Solid-Waste Recycling Behavior and
Support for Curbside Textile Recycling. Environment and Behaviour, 30, 144-161.
Domina, T & Koch, K (1999), Consumer reuse and recycling of post-consumer textile waste.
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 3, 346 - 359.
Domina, T & Koch, K (2002), Convenience and Frequency of Recycling: Implications for
Including Textiles in Curbside Recycling Programs. Environment and Behavior, 34,
216-238.
Eneroth, B (1984), Hur mter man "vackert"?: Grundbok i kvalitativ metod Stockholm,
Stockholm Akademilitteratur.
Fletcher, K (2008), Sustainable fashion & textiles Design Journeys London, Earthscan.
Fretex
(2009),
Hva
blir
tyet
til?
Oslo,
http://www.fretex.no/modules/module_123/proxy.asp?iDisplayType=2&iCategoryId=
73&iInfoId=10089&mid=136 [Accessed 28.05.2009].
Fretex (2010), Faktaark. Oslo, http://www.fretex.no/stream_file.asp?iEntityId=595 [Accessed
12.10.2010].
Ha-Brookshire, J E & Hodges, N N (2009), Socially responsible consumer Behaviour?
Exploring Used Clothing Donation Behaviour. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal
27, 179-196.
Hansen, K T (2000), Salaula: The World of Secondhand Clothing and Zambia Chicago, The
University of Chicago Press.
Kaufmann, J-C (1998), Dirty linen: couples and their laundry London, Middlesex University
Press.
Klepp, I G (2001), Hvorfor gr klr ut av bruk? Avhending sett i forhold til kvinners
klesvaner. Oslo.
Klepp, I G (2004), Farlige farger Norsk antropologisk tidsskrift, 15, 227-240.
Klepp, I G (2005), Demonstrations of feminine purity the meaning of cleanliness and the
growth of laundry. In G Hagemann & H Roll-Hansen (eds.) Twentieth-century
housewives. Meanings and implications of unpaid work Oslo: unipub Oslo Academic
press.
Klepp, I G & Bjerck, M (Unpublished), Out of the closet.
21

Klepp, I G & Storm-Mathisen, A (2005), Reading fashion as age: Teenage girls and grown
womens Accounts of Clothing as Body and Social Status. Fashion Theory: The Journal
of Dress, Body and Culture 9, 323-342.
Koch, K & Domina, T (1999), Consumer Textile Recycling as a Means of Solid Waste
Reduction. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 28, 3-17.
Laitala, K, Boks, C & Klepp, I G (2011), Potential for environmental improvements in
laundering. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 35, 254-264.
Laitala, K, Hauge, B & Klepp, I G (2009), Large? Clothing size and size labeling.
Copenhagen, 2009:503.
Laitala, K, Klepp, I G & Boks, C (2011 Forthcoming), Clothing consumption: Consumers'
environmental attitudes and actions. ESA 2011.
Madsen, J, Hartlin, B, Perumalpillai, S, Selby, S & Aumnier, S (2007), Mapping of Evidence
on Sustainable Development Impacts that Occur in Life Cycles of Clothing: A Report
to DEFRA. London.
Morley, N, Slater, S, Russell, S, Tipper, M & Ward, G D (2006), Recycling of Low Grade
Clothing Waste. Prepared for Defra Aylesbury, UK.
Packard, V (1960), The status seekers London, Longmans.
Sft (2008), Mer avfall skal gjenvinnes Oslo, Climate and Pollution Agency. Available from:
http://www.sft.no/artikkel____42346.aspx [Accessed 03.03.2008].
Shim, S (1995), Environmentalism and Consumers Clothing Disposal Patterns: An
Exploratory Study. Clothing and Textiles Research journal, 13, 38-48.
Statistics Norway (2010), National economy and external trade: Table 03064: Imports, by
country, two-digit SITC and mode of transport (tonnes). Articles of apparel and
accessories. Oslo, http://statbank.ssb.no//statistikkbanken/default_fr.asp?PLanguage=1
[Accessed 30.08.2010].
Statistics Norway (2011), Folkemengd, etter alder og fylke. 1. januar 2011. Prosent [Oslo],
Statistics
Norway.
Available
from:
http://www.ssb.no/emner/02/01/10/folkemengde/tab-2011-02-24-02.html [Accessed
10th March 2011].
Storm-Mathisen, A & Klepp, I G (2006), Young Fashion and Adult Style: How Teenage Girls
and Grown Women Accounts for the Impact of Style and Fashion on Their Personal
Clothing Practices. Ethnologia Scandinavica. A journal for Nordic ethnology, 36, 91106.
Strandbakken, P (1997), Produktlevetid og produktkultur: En underskelse av
forbrukeroppfatninger. Lysaker.
Uff (2010), 22,5 millioner kg CO2 spart i 2009: Ombruk av 1 kilo ty sparer miljet for 4,1
kilo CO2. Oslo, http://www.uffnorge.org/Articel.asp?NewsID=74 [Accessed
12.10.2010].
Winakor, G (1969), The Process of Clothing Consumption. Journal of Home Economics 61,
629-634.

22