4. Results

Based on the collected data, it is found that six types of eco-materials (i.e., organic cotton, recycled cotton, recycled nylon, recycled polyester, recycled down, and traceable down) are used at Patagonia. The outcome of selected eco-material is consistent with Patagonia's mission, i.e., reducing the environmental impact in the material selection stage. Eco-material selection is the beginning of sustainable supply chain management. Designers select eco-materials to convey the design philosophy and optimize the consumers' sustainable, aesthetic and functional needs.

Table 1 shows the descriptive analysis results in terms of the number of eco-materials used in both menswear and womenswear at Patagonia. It indicates that the eco-materials include organic materials, recycled materials, and traceable materials. Recycled polyester is the most widely used for both menswear and womenswear development (29.0% and 19.5%, respectively), followed by organic cotton (19.5% and 15.1%, respectively), and recycled nylon (5.6% and 3.1%, respectively) at Patagonia. Recycled polyester can be easily re-melted or reshaped in order to make new products, rendering it a popular choice in new product development.

Eco-Materials Category

Menswear

Womenswear

Total

Product Line Used

Organic cotton 80 (19.5%) 62 (15.1%) 142 (34.6%) Sweatshirts & Hoodies/Shirts/T-shirts/Pants & Jeans/Shorts/
Recycled cotton 7 (1.7%) 2 (0.5%) 9 (2.2%)
Recycled polyester 119 (29.0%) 80 (19.5%) 199 (48.5%) Jackets & Vests/Fleece/Sweatshirts & Hoodies/Sweaters/Shirts/T-shirts/Pants & Jeans/Shorts
Recycled nylon 23 (5.6%) 13 (3.1%) 36 (8.7%) Jackets & Vests
Recycled down 2 (0.5%) 2 (0.5%) 4 (1.0%)
Traceable down 10 (2.5%) 10 (2.4%) 20 (5.0%)
Remarks: Total eco-materials used is 410 (241 for menswear and 169 for womenswear) in this season collection at Patagonia.

Table 1. The number of eco-materials used in the product line development at Patagonia.

From Table 1, it shows that Patagonia has frequently used organic cotton in its product line. As a matter of fact, the quality of organic cotton is equal to or even better than conventional cotton. Organic cotton is cultivated without harmful chemicals and the farming methods used to produce it support biodiversity and healthy ecosystems, which can enhance soil quality and reduce water usage. Sustainable fashion designers use organic cotton based on the style and characteristic of the apparel. As organic cotton is soft and healthy, sustainable fashion designers apply this material to products that directly adhere to the skin (e.g., hoodies and shirts).

Recycled materials in Patagonia's product line include recycled polyester, nylon, cotton, and down. The collection line of jackets, vests, and pants is not 100% made from recycled materials, but it is close. Recycled polyester is the most used material at Patagonia (as shown in Table 1). Based on the information on recycled polyester on the Patagonia website, soda bottles, unusable manufacturing waste and worn-out garments are used in producing recycled polyester. Recycled polyester is used to develop shell jackets, board shorts and fleeces. Using recycled polyester helps prolong landfill life and reduce toxic emission from incinerators. It is beneficial to build up a more sustainable ecosystem.

Traceable material is an innovative practice at Patagonia. Transparency is an important part of the sustainable supply chain. Traceable down helps assure animal welfare by tracing the source of down from parent farm to apparel factory. Using traceable materials hence encourages fashion designers to develop products in a more transparent way at Patagonia.

We separated the product line analysis into three categories: gender difference, pattern design, and product fit, as shown in Table 2. We concluded that on average less than one eco-material is used in Patagonia's products except for the products with pattern design. Specifically, we find that menswear uses more eco-materials than womenswear (0.85 vs. 0.78). It implies that Patagonia uses more eco-materials in menswear products. The reason might be because of gender differences in sustainable consumer behavior. Menswear generally has a simple silhouette, which implies more basic products and leads to a higher use of sustainable material. Moreover, we find that products with pattern design are more likely to use eco-materials (1.04 vs. 0.74). The pattern printing process potentially generates a significant amount of pollution in the textile supply chain. Using more eco-materials in patterned products can balance sustainability factors. Furthermore, we see that the number of eco-material usage for product fit is similar between regular and slim fit (0.76 vs. 0.76). This implies that both regular and slim fits products are made by a similar number of eco-materials.

Category

Numbers

Mean

Standard Deviation

Gender Difference Menswear 260 0.85 0.653
Womenswear 196 0.78 0.655
Pattern Design With 129 1.04 0.594
Without 327 0.74 0.657
Product Fit Regular 302 0.76 0.568
Slim 154 0.76 0.560

Table 2. Number of eco-materials used for different categories at Patagonia.

Table 3 indicates the regression results of eco-materials used in product line and color choices/product weight at Patagonia. First, we found that for womenswear at Patagonia, products containing more eco-materials are heavier, even if the products do not include patterns or are slim fit; for the regular fit products, products containing more eco-materials have more color choices.

Dependent Variables

Independent Variables

No. of Color Choices

Weight (g)

No. of eco-materials usage in product line Gender Difference Menswear 0.073 (0.234) 0.030 (0.622)
Womenswear 0.016 (0.822) 0.195 (0.006) **
Pattern Design With pattern −0.152 (0.259) 0.017 (0.900)
Without pattern 0.091 (0.282) 0.287 (0.001) ***
Product Fit Regular fit 0.157 (0.082) * 0.122 (0.176)
Slim fit −0.144 (0.216) 0.299 (0.009) **
Remarks: Pearson correlation is reported outside parentheses and sig. (2-tailed) is reported in parentheses. *** p < 0.005, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.1.

Table 3. Statistical results of product line analysis at Patagonia.

From Table 3, we see that designers do not use more eco-materials when developing products with more color choices for both menswear and womenswear product lines at Patagonia. Moreover, designing patterns in new products is an important strategy for fashion designers in new product line development. However, based on the statistical results in Table 3, we see that it has no statistical effect on the number of eco-materials used or the number of color choices except for the regular fit products. This implies that when Patagonia designers develop a new product with more color choices, they might not be likely to use more eco-materials except for regular fit products. At Patagonia, product fit is critically important for eco-design. We observed that for the regular fit product development, the more sustainable products have more color choices, but for the slim fit products, the more sustainable products have less color choices. For the slim fit product development, products containing more eco-materials are heavier, but for the regular fit products, products containing more eco-materials are lighter. These results could provide many important insights on supply chain management because multiple color choices imply maintaining more stock keeping units (SKUs) in inventory and heavy product weights require extra attention during transportation and distribution.

Table 4 shows the relationship between eco-materials used and online reviewers' opinions. The reviewers' opinions include the number of reviews and reviewer scores. The number of reviews refers to how many discussions are online (the comments may be positive or negative). The reviewer scores imply the reviewers' acceptance, i.e., a higher score implies the consumers have higher product acceptance. Thus, Table 4 implies whether more eco-materials can increase online discussion and reviewers' acceptance. We found that the menswear eco-designed products, the eco-designed products with patterns, and the slim fit eco-designed products have less online consumers' acceptance, respectively.

Dependent Variables Independent Variables
No. of Reviews Reviewer Scores
No. of eco-materials usage in product line Gender Difference Menswear 0.022 (0.719) −0.152 (0.014) *
Womenswear 0.032 (0.655) 0.006 (0.932)
Pattern Design With pattern 0.003 (0.978) −0.157 (0.077) *
Without pattern 0.014 (0.804) −0.012 (0.824)
Product Fit Regular fit 0.079 (0.171) 0.008 (0.886)
Slim fit −0.046 (0.576) −0.230 (0.004) **
Remarks: Pearson correlation is reported outside parentheses and sig. (2-tailed) is reported in parentheses. ** p < 0.005, * p < 0.1.

Table 4. Statistical results of eco-materials with online reviewers' opinions at Patagonia.