4.1 Article

Knowledge sharing among green fashion communities online Lessons for the sustainable supply chain

期刊

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/13612021211222860

关键词

Fashion industry; Supply chain management; Consumer behaviour; Internet; Communities; Green; Sustainable; Ethical; Luxury; Online communities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate the knowledge content on green fashion and the expectations regarding the sustainable supply chain held by consumers and shared within online communities. In sustainable and eco-sectors, the supply chain is of outmost concern for consumers, as most benefits derived from the eco-purchase are linked to the green and ethical credentials of the supply chain. Design/methodology/approach - A netnographic approach is used. Discussions on green fashion were collected in two green fashion forums over two periods (2007-2008 and 2010-2011) and were content analyzed. Findings - Results show a switch in knowledge content between the two periods, from a focus on sustainability to a focus on fashion. Also, there is an evolution in the nature of knowledge content, being initially subjective and becoming more objective and showing expertise during the last period studied. As the communities gain maturity, members are interested in sharing precise knowledge on a variety of aspects linked to the sustainable supply chain, including fabric, materials, manufacturing processes, transportation, distribution, and recycling or re-use of fashion items. In addition, the role of the members evolves toward educating newcomers and sustaining the development of the green fashion sector. Originality value - This research contributes to the field by offering an original perspective on the green fashion supply chain and consumer vision of the industry, through the point of view of major actors and online communities. It advocates for a consumer orientation in the building of sustainable fashion supply chains.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据