Futures of futures studies in fashion

http://www.diva-portal.org Postprint This is the accepted version of a chapter published in Routledge Handbook of Sustainability and Fashion. Citation for the original published chapter: Tham, M. (2015) The futures of futures studies in fashion. In: Kate Fletcher, Mathilda Tham (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Sustainability and Fashion (pp. 283-292). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge Routledge International Handbooks N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published chapter. Permanent link to this version: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-33458 Chapter  28   Futures  of  futures  studies  in  fashion   Mathilda  Tham     Introduction   Often  I  look  at  my  young  daughters,  Paloma  and  Rosa  Lulu,  future  wearers,  makers,  crafters,   or  perhaps  best  described  as  collaborators  of  fashion  (and  of  course  many,  many  other   things)  and  think:  “who  am  I,  that  only  know  the  past,  to  guide  these  magical  beings  into  the   future?”  And  yet,  I  sometimes  call  myself  a  futurist.       Disturbingly-­‐hopefully-­‐naturally,  I  won’t  be  alive  for  a  big  part  of  my  daughters’  future.   Significantly  and  thankfully,  I  am  not  their  only  guide.  Still,  and  despite  the  vertigo-­‐like   sensation  that  fills  me  as  I  consider  the  deep  and  far  void  of  time  and  experience  that  lies   ahead  of  my  daughters,  nothing  can  keep  me  from  squinting,  trying  to  discern  it,  listening  to   the  murmurs  of  this  future,  and  foremost  hoping,  willing  for  the  very,  very  best.       I  believe  this  volume  well  reflects  the  rich  body  of  knowledge  that  now  exists,  some  of  it   already  well  rehearsed  and  some  emerging,  on  issues  of  concern  as  well  as  strategies  to   make  fashion  more  compatible  with  a  paradigm  of  sustainability.  This  chapter  instead  and   complementarily  explores  auspicious  implementation  of  such  knowledge,  and  auspicious   processes  of  change.  It  argues  that  Futures  Studies,  as  manifested  in  fashion  forecasting,  can   constitute  a  powerful  driver  for  change  in  the  endeavour  of  creating  fashion  futures  of   sustainability.         1 It  positions  fashion  forecasting  as  a  strategic  tool  that  can  synergise  levels  of  products,   systems  and  even  paradigms.  It  further  suggests  that  forecasting  can  offer  a  free  zone  for   risky  and  playful  exploration,  the  bringing  together  of  personal  and  professional  values   systems  and  experiences,  an  agile  dance  between  micro  and  macro  perspectives,  and   operational  and  strategic  design.       To  explain  the  conceptual  space  that  forecasting  may  offer  fashion,  and  thus  its  potential  as   an  auspicious  driver  of  change,  I  will  draw  on  some  interwoven  ideas,  predominantly  from   systems-­‐thinking,  action  oriented  research,  peacework  and  futures  studies.  To  me  they  find   a  designerly  shape  and  agency  through  an  emerging  field  of  metadesign,  a  design  of  design   itself,  seeds  for  change,  a  collaborative  and  inclusive  design  process.  (See  e.g.  Giaccardi,   2005;  Wood,  2007;  Tham  and  Jones,  2008)  The  ideas  I  propose  reflect  the  focus  of  my   research  and  practice  for  the  past  decade  or  so.  A  fashion  designer  and  forecaster  uneasy  in   a  paradigm  of  unsustainability,  a  PhD  project  allowed  me  to  design  myself  out  of  it.  I  found  a   positive,  creative  and  activist  place  through  what  I  term  the  lucky  people  forecast  approach,   which  I  use  in  research,  education  and  organisational  change.         Fashion  forecasting   Below  follows  a  description  of  forecasting  as  relevant  for  this  chapter,  drawing  on  existing   literature  and  an  empirical  study.  For  further  guidance  the  reader  may  consult  McKelvey  and   Muslow,  2008;  Tham,  2008;  Brannon,  2010;  Kim,  Fiore  and  Kim,  2011;  and  Rousso,  2012.     Brief  history   Fashion  forecasting  (trend  forecasting,  fashion  prediction  or  prognosis)  as  an  organised   phenomenon  appeared  in  the  1960s  in  Paris  where  agences  de  style  such  as  MAFIA,   Promostyle  and  Precler  (founded  1970)  started  developing  and  selling  seasonal  advice  to   2 fashion  companies.  Giertz-­‐Mårtenson  (following  Giddens,  1991)  views  the  development  as   part  of  the  post-­‐modern  condition:     “when  the  institutional  thinking  with  firmly  established  authorities  gradually   disappeared  from  fashion,  the  risk  element  of  fashion  design  became  much  more   significant.  There  was  no  longer  a  given  institution  (the  haute  couture  of  Paris)  or  a   clear  manifest  (for  every  season  the  declared  and  approved  new  fashion)  to  rely   upon.  The  fashion  press’  accelerating  reports  on  constantly  new  styles  and  the  sub   cultures’  expression  emphasised  this  even  further.”  (Giertz-­‐Mårtenson,  2006:  17,  my   translation)     How  it  works   Forecasting  constitutes  an  integral  part  of  –  at  least  –  the  mass-­‐market  segment’s  process  of   conceptualizing,  designing  and  bringing  to  market  a  fashion  offer.  Formal  trend  work  is   offered  by  specialised  agencies,  including  WGSN  (World  Global  Style  Network),  Promostyle   and  TrendUnion  through  seminars,  trend  books,  trend  magazines  and,  increasingly,   designated  websites.  The  reports  range  from  directions  on  style  (as  specific  as  the   positioning  of  a  pocket)  to  directions  on  lifestyle  and  socio/cultural/  technological/economic   trends.  In  addition  to  the  use  of  such  services,  design  teams  (and  especially  designers)  also   conduct  their  own  informal  trend  work  by,  for  example,  conducting  market  research  in   shops  visiting  trade  fairs  and  second-­‐hand  shops,  perusing  websites  for  catwalk  trends  (see   e.g.  www.style.com,  documenting  personal  style  in  capitals  and  emerging  fashion  locations   around  the  world.  Depending  on  interest  and  time,  designers  may  also  be  drawing  on  films,   exhibitions  and  literature  to  inform  the  work  on  a  new  collection.  (Tham,  2008)  The  reports   resulting  from  both  formal  and  informal  trend  work  often  constitute  tantalizing  documents,   rich  in  visual  material,  using  emotive  language.     3    My  empirical  study  (with  representatives  from  H&M,  the  Gap,  Levi´s,  Top  Shop)  showed  that   alongside  the  sales  figures  of  current  and  previous  seasons,  fashion  forecasting  constitutes   the  most  important  driver  of  fashion  in  the  mass-­‐market  domain.  With  many  and  very  quick   decisions  to  make,  and  a  highly  competitive  market,  such  ‘evidence’  serves  an  important   role  in  the  dialogue  between  designer,  buyer  and  the  sales  organisation.  My  study  also   showed  that  the  forecasting  work,  ‘looking  at  the  big  picture’,  was  a  highly  appreciated   aspect  of  designers’  work.  They  lamented  the  shortage  of  time  to  dedicate  to  first  hand   exploratory  trend  research.     Forecasting  and  sustainability   My  empirical  study  showed  little  alignment  between  trend  work  and  sustainability  work  in   the  mass-­‐market  industry  context.  Sustainability  featured  only  as  a  theme  (or  trend),   alongside  others  within  a  report  (whether  bought  or  produced  in-­‐house),  with  suggestions   mainly  concerning  product  level  choices,  such  as  the  specification  of  organic  cotton  (Tham,   2008).  Literature  on  forecasting  to  date  reflects  this  lack  of  integration.  However,   sustainability  has  increased  presence  in  the  reports  generally,  and  examples  exist  of  formal   trend  reports  dedicated  entirely  to  sustainability.  Typically,  these  provide  examples/case   studies  of  initiatives  in  the  market  and  from  niche  practitioners,  including  product  level   approaches  (such  as  design  for  longevity)  and  systems  level  approaches  (such  as  an   innovative  take  back  scheme).  (See  e.g.  Prahl,  2012)  In  2010,  Forum  for  the  Future  launched   a  scenario  and  workshop  resource  dedicated  to  fashion  and  sustainability,  with  the  aim  of   inspiring  educators  and  companies.  (Forum  for  the  Future,  2010)  These  constitute  positive   developments,  but  I  see  a  larger  potential  for  forecasting  to  support  fashion  futures  of   sustainability.     4 Futures  Studies   Fashion  forecasting  can  be  understood  as  a  branch  of  Futures  Studies.  Here  I  highlight  some   aspects  of  this  larger  field  that  I  believe  can  enrich  the  fashion  application,  particularly  in  the   context  of  sustainability.       While  existing  as  pockets  in  various  academic  fields  before,  Futures  Studies  emerged  as  a   discipline  in  its  own  right  after  the  Second  World  War;  out  of  the  need  for  cohesive  strategic   planning  and  an  interest  coming  from  scholars,  writers  and  artists  in  conceptualising  and   creating  a  more  positive  future.  (Slaughter,  1996)  By  the  late  1970s  several  international   futures  organisations  had  developed,  of  which  the  Club  of  Rome  and  its  publication  The   Limits  to  Growth  is  notable  in  this  context  (Meadows  et  al.,  1972).  Non-­‐fiction  future   oriented  best-­‐sellers  by,  for  example,  Alvin  Toffler  and  Faith  Popcorn,  popularised  the  field   and  established  it  in  a  marketing  context.  In  recent  years  a  Critical  Futures  Studies   movement  has  emerged  which  promotes  a  self-­‐reflexive  stance  of  the  futurist,  predominant   worldviews  (a  Western  hegemony)  are  challenged  and  a  wealth  of  social  realities  are   engaged  with.  The  word  futures  in  plural  signifies  this  important  shift.  (See  e.g.  Slaughter,   1996;  Inayatullah,  1998)       Futures  Studies  makes  a  key  distinction  between  probable  futures,  which  answer  the   question  ‘what  is  likely  to  happen?’  by  extrapolating  data  (for  example  meteorology  and   population  growth  studies),  and  preferable  futures,  which  answer  the  question  ‘what  would   we  like  to  happen?'  In  reality  the  approaches  are  often  combined,  and  the  role  of  futurists  to   create  “new,  alternative  images  of  the  future  –  visionary  explorations  of  the  possible,   systemic  investigations  of  the  probable,  and  moral  evaluation  of  the  preferable.”  (Toffler,   1978:  x)  Futures  Studies  can  therefore  integrate  rationality  and  value  –  or  analysis  and  care.     5 Muslim  futures  scholar  Ziuddin  Sardar,  a  strong  advocate  for  need  for  a  diversity  of  voices   engaged  in  futures  work,  and  critic  of  a  Western  bias  in  the  field,  powerfully  articulates  the   circular  nature  and  resulting  potentially  disastrous  effects  of  the  forecast:     “forecasting  is  one  of  the  major  tools  by  which  the  future  is  colonised.  No  matter  how   sophisticated  the  technique…    forecasting  simply  ends  up  by  projecting  (the  selected)  past   and  the  (often-­‐privileged)  present  on  to  a  linear  future.”  (Sardar,  1999:  9)     The  circular  argument  is  exemplified  in  the  fashion  forecast,  where  anecdotally  if  influential   players,  let  us  say  the  trend  forecaster  Li  Edelkoort,  propose  the  poncho  as  the  next  big   thing,  it  is  likely  that  it  will  be,  because  of  fearful  ears  of  companies  who  ‘cannot  afford’  to   get  their  offer  wrong  (and  she  was  right  last  time),  because  of  media’s  acquiescent   promotion  of  the  poncho,  and  because  when  the  user  hits  the  shops,  they  find  the  poncho  in   prime  place  and  not  much  else.  I  want  to  emphasise  this  does  not  mean  I  view  fashion  users   as  mindless  victims,  nor  that  I  ignore  the  diversity  of  fashion  offers  that  exist  if  fashion  is   regarded  a  collaborate  effort  and  its  many  niche  practices,  and  creativity  (at  both   designer/producer  and  user  ends)  are  acknowledged.  Yet,  many  readers  will,  with  me,  have   noticed,  how  the  influence  of  some  brands  and  a  global  media  result  in  the  dominance  of   certain  styles,  colours,  not  only  on  the  highstreet  in  London  and  similar,  but  also  in  a   shopping  centre  in  Amman,  Shanghai  or  Rio  de  Janeiro.     The  role  of  powerful  forecasts  in  shaping  the  future  (and  therefore  in  editing  away  less   marketable  versions  of  it)  resonates  with  ecofeminist,  philosopher  and  historian  Carolyn   Merchant’s  salient  description  of  how  ‘controlling  imagery’  guides  us  as  at  least  as   powerfully  as  does  legislation.  Descriptive  metaphors  and  images  (as  when  nature  is   perceived  as  a  dead  resource  detached  from  humans  instead  of  alive  with  us)  operate  at  the   6 deep  level  of  our  individual  and  societal  mindsets,  giving  ethical  restraints  or  sanctions.   (Merchant,  1992:  4)     Karl-­‐Erik  Edris,  scholar  of  the  rise  and  fall  of  civilizations  through  history,  attributes  their   longevity  to  a  strong  religious  root  (Edris,  1987).  The  role  of  politics,  he  argues,  has  been  to   legalise,  formalise  and  organise  the  vision;  the  role  of  economics  to  provide  for  the  vision  –   to  resource  it.  According  to  Edris,  the  dire  predicament  of  contemporary  Western  society  is   a  result  of  how  in  Western  affluent  secularised  society  a  spiritual  imperative  is  no  longer  the   starting  point  for  visions.  (See  also  Thomas,  Chapter  11)  In  modern  history  political   conviction  came  to  overtake  religious  belief  as  the  root  of  new  visions.  In  post-­‐modernity   politics  is  no  longer  a  viable  platform  for  visions  as  ideologies  are  giving  way  to  issue  politics,   and  there  is  an  overall  mistrust  in  politicians.  Therefore  (in  extreme  terms)  we  are  left  with   economics  as  the  foundation  of  visions  (Edris,  1987),  problematic  as  its  primary  goal  is  never   sustainability  in  holistic  terms.  (See  Fletcher,  Chapter  1)    Edris’s  interpretations  of  the  rise   and  fall  of  civilisations  thus  highlight  how  a  flawed  vision,  or  worldview,  results  in  a  flawed   operation  of  the  system.     Counterfactuals   Let  us  momentarily  return  to  Paloma  and  Rosa  Lulu,  future  collaborators  in  fashion  (and   more),  who  are  already  creating  futures  scenarios.     “Psychologists  have  found  that  counterfactual  thinking  is  absolutely  pervasive  in  our   everyday  life  and  deeply  affects  our  judgments,  our  decisions,  and  our  emotions.”  (Gopnik,   2009:  21)     7 Gopnik  writes  powerfully  of  the  role  of  human  childhood  in  human  civilization  and  the   survival  of  the  human  species.  She  discusses  recent  developments  in  cognitive  science  which   reveal  that  not  only  can  even  very  young  children  discern  between  fantasy  and  reality,  they   also  purposefully  explore  alternative  realities  to  make  plans  and  create  the  world.  She   means  that  what  in  philosophy  is  known  as  counterfactuals  –  alternatives  to  reality  in  the   past,  present  and  future  –  is  a  central  facet  of  the  human  condition  and  our  evolutionary   success;  the  ability  to  imagine  such  alternative  realities  means  we  don’t  need  to  rely  on  trial   and  error  in  all  decision  making.  Whereas  factual  knowledge  and  imagination  are   conventionally  perceived  as  opposites,  they  become  a  sophisticated  whole  in   counterfactuals.  So  futures  imagination  is  vital  for  our  survival.  We  must  give  space  for  it.     Discussion   The  explicit  forecast  shapes  the  future  of  fashion.  I  argue  that,  in  addition,  fashion  proposals   (products,  collections,  imagery)  act  as  implicit  forecasts  that  shape  the  future.  Fashion   proposals  that  are  influential  (through  their  ubiquity,  a  strong  designer  name  or  brand,   powerful  marketing  and  alliances)  cast  not  only  subsequent  product  types,  but  also  actions,   attitudes,  values  and  meaning  –  accumulatively  a  future.  To  forecast,  of  course,  in  effect   means  to  shape  before;  the  cast  constituting  the  boundaries  of  an  object  in  the  making,  and   consequently  the  boundaries  of  our  imagination.  The  future  or  legend  that  has  been   powerfully  and  persuasively  articulated  takes  precedence  over  such  futures  that  have  not   been  articulated  at  all,  or  articulated  in  weaker  voices.       That  forecasts  are  published  that  integrate  fashion  and  sustainability  is  positive,  yet  they   have  severe  limitations.  One  problem  is  that  scenarios  appear  as  choices,  just  like   commodities  (this  or  that  future);  another  is  the  many  voices  and  perspectives  they  by   necessity  (or  not)  exclude,  by  ultimately  adhering  to  an  overarching  financial  framework.  To   8 me  most  significantly,  the  forecast  as  report  will  remain  abstract  to  its  perusers  (or   consumers).  The  true  power  of  forecasting,  I  believe,  comes  from  participating  in  imagining   our  shared  futures.  Participation  affords  the  personal  situatedness,  commitment,  empathy,   and  the  drawing  on  an  extended  epistemology  (Heron  and  Reason,  2001).  There  is  no   sustainability  by  proxy.  It  must  start  in  the  individual.  Yet,  we  cannot  be  holistic  on  our  own.   We  must  imagine  together.     Futures  of  futures  studies  in  fashion  –  proposal  1   I  developed  the  lucky  people  forecast  approach  to  explore  the  potential  of  a  forecasting  to,   by  drawing  on  insights  presented  above  as  well  as  the  inspirational  qualities  of  fashion  and   fashion  forecasting,  mobilise  holistic  and  systemic  engagement  with  sustainability  across  a   broad  range  of  fashion  stakeholders.  The  approach  has  been  evaluated  in  and  evolved   through  various  industry  and  educational  contexts  in  Sweden,  the  UK,  Turkey,  China  and   Indonesia.  The  approach,  its  use  and  effect  have  been  described  elsewhere.  (See  e.g.  Tham   and  Jones,  2008;  Tham,  2012)  For  the  purposes  of  this  chapter,  two  findings  are  especially   relevant.     The  first  concerns  the  approach’s  generative  quality.  Creative  scenario  work  that  starts  from   personal,  and  communal  negotiated  values,  allows  fashion  stakeholders  to  unleash  creativity   and  extend  tacit  and  explicit  knowing  beyond  product  focused  and  operational  realms   towards  proposals  of  nested  ideas  at  levels  of  products,  systems  and  even  paradigms.  These   have  potential  for  real  application.  The  scenarios  become  cohesive,  personable  and  portable   holders  of  a  wealth  of  insights  and  ideas,  thus  forging  integrated  knowing  and  a  sense  of   ownership.  The  scenarios  constitute  new  legends  alternative  to  dominant  narratives  deriving   from  the  commercial  framework.  Metaphors  representing  an  epistemological  leap  into  a   realm  of  ‘what  ifs’  serve  a  particularly  auspicious  force  in  extending  participants’   9 imagination,  and  as  potent  provocations  or  seeds  to  take  out  into  the  world  after  a  session.         Metadesign  can  be  an  integrator  of  systems.  (Wood,  2007)  The  agile  dance  afforded  by   creative  scenario  work  can  be  formalised  in  the  framework  below.  (Figure  28.1.)     [insert  figure  28.1  here]       Figure  28.1  Joined  up  design.  (After  Lundebye,  2004)     Systems  thinking  has  informed  my  understanding  of  unsustainability  in  the  fashion  organism   (yes  it  is  alive!)  as  caused  by  severed  or  missing  feedback  loops.  (See  also  Fletcher,  2008;  and   Meadows,  2001)  They  are  manifested  in  the  alienation  of  fashion  professionals  and   consumers  here  and  workers  there;  humans  here  now,  and  other  species,  and  humans  in   other  places  and  in  the  future.  They  are  staged  in  a  lack  engagement  with  the  complex   resource  flows  the  garments  we  wear  depend  upon,  and  the  many  messages  embodied  in   our  clothing.  They  are  manifested  in  a  lack  of  confidence  and  perhaps  creativity  many  of  us   display,  which  prompts  us  to  overconsume.     The  framework  joining  up  nested  levels  of  design  can  help  us  to  identify  paths  between  the   fashion  object,  the  infrastructures  it  necessitates  and  the  narratives  it  cements    –  or  breaks   against.  A  real  or  imagined  system  ‘trend’  (such  as  ‘what  if  I  shared  my  wardrobe  with  four   other  people’)  gives  parameters  with  space  for  many  viable  interpretations  for  the  product   design  (such  as  size  ‘openness’,  material  durability  or  transparent  making;  facilitating   reparation).  The  product  design  can  cause  ripples  across  the  layers,  challenging,  for  example,   paradigmatic  assumptions  of  gender,  a  narrative  of  inexhaustible  resources,  or  technological   determinism.  By  restoring  or  creating  an  understanding  of  the  complex  paths  between  the   10 levels,  we  can  start  imagining  the  healing,  or  mending  of  vital  feedback  loops.       As  practically  applied  in  the  fashion  industry  context,  formal  forecasting  can  have  a  role  in   providing  broad  outlooks  on  socio-­‐economic-­‐ecological  trends,  and  best  available  lifecycle   science  can  contribute  to  the  robustness  of  the  agile  dance.  However,  the  situated  deep   exploration  needs  to  take  place  within  the  fashion  organisation  (involving  as  many   stakeholders  as  possible),  where  knowledge  and  understandings  are  held  (or  should  be  held)   about  specific  contexts  of  design,  production,  and  use,  care  and  disposal.           A  second  key  insight  yielded  from  the  lucky  people  forecast  approach  concerns  the  pivotal   role  of  the  experience  of  agency  in  fostering  comprehensive  engagement  with  sustainability.   An  increased  sense  of  agency  (in  personal/professional  realms)  inspires  curiosity  to  learn   more,  enables  understanding  of  relationships  (between  micro  and  macro  phenomena,   environmental,  social  and  financial  concerns,  and  the  situating  of  the  self  in  these)  and  the   enhanced  appreciation  of  the  significance  of  sustainability.  In  addition,  the  extra-­‐ordinary   space  that  the  creative  scenario  session  offers,  enables  perspectives  to  cut  across  disciplines   and  specialisms,  fostering  a  healthy  empathy  between  stakeholders.  Experiencing  the  lucky   people  forecast  approach  has  constituted  for  many  fashion  stakeholder  participants  a   threshold  moment  between  their  identification  as  outsiders  to  insiders  of  sustainability  (or   between  culprits  and  helpers).  This  points  to  a  further  potential  for  application  in   organisational  change  towards  sustainability.       A  place  called  reconciliation  –  an  inspiring  framework  from  peacebuilding   Professor  Paul  Lederach,  a  key  scholar  and  actor  in  peacebuilding,  powerfully  critiques   conventional  approaches  to  peace  negotiation,  and  offers  frameworks  towards  holistic  and   systemic  peacebuilding.  (Lederach,  1997)  The  predicament  we  are  in,  as  regards  human   11 driven  detrimental  changes  to  the  environment  and  interlinked  socio-­‐economic  concerns,  is   not  war  (but  may  cause  wars),  yet,  like  extreme  conflicts  characterized  by  hatred,  violence   and  severely  divided  societies,  it  is  a  crisis  of  international  proportions.  Below  I  describe   some  core  and  interwoven  tenets  of  Lederach’s  text  that  I  find  offer  valuable  insights  into   the  processes  of  change  which  the  sustainability  imperative  provokes,  at  both  individual  and   societal  levels,  and  an  expanded  scope  for  forecasting.     Simplistic  definitions  of  problem   Lederach  points  out  the  limitations  of  how  problems  or  reasons  for  conflicts  have   predominantly  been  defined,  focusing  on  issues  instead  of  relationships.  I  argue  that   un/sustainability  as  constructed  in  the  realm  of  fashion  (for  example  Code  of  Conducts),  and   beyond  (for  example  the  Millennium  Development  Goals),  has  been  shaped  (or  cast)  as  a   series  of  issues  –  whether  concerning  human  rights  or  environmental  management  –  over   underlying  fluid  relationships  (between  the  social,  cultural,  economic,  technological,   ecological  and  more)  (see  also  relational  aspects  of  fashion  and  sustainability  in  Fletcher,   Chapter  1).       Simplistic  categorisation  of  stakeholders   Similarly,  Lederach  highlights  flaws  in  the  focus  on  conflicting  parties  as  nation  states  over   aspects  of  identity  and  belonging.  The  fashion  sustainability  discourse  polarizes  stakeholders   (producers/brands  versus  consumers,  legal/  fiscal  top-­‐down  initiatives  versus  grass-­‐roots   movements).  Yet,  brands  and  institutions  are  built  and  operationalised  by  people  who  are   also  consumers  (or  my  preferred  term  users),  and  have  fluid  and  complex  loyalties  –  and  a   range  of  affiliations  aside  from,  and  sometimes  at  odds  with,  the  organisations  they  work   for.     12 Unproductive  separation  between  rationality  and  emotion   Lederach  powerfully  places  emotions  in  understandings  and  resolution  of  international   crises,  remarking  that  while  “contemporary  conflicts  are  indeed  hard-­‐core  situations…  and   require  political  savvy,  traditional  mechanisms  relying  solely  on  statist  diplomacy  and   realpolitik  have  not  demonstrated  a  capacity  to  control  these  conflicts,  much  less  transform   them  toward  constructive,  peaceful  outcomes.”  (Lederach,  1997:  25)  His  description  of  how   in  the  peace  work  community  “a  big  brother  of  International  Relations  admonishes  a  little   sister  of  Conflict  Resolutions  for  emotionalism  and  sentimentality”  reminds  me  of  how   within  fashion  and  sustainability  work,  legal  and  fiscal  frameworks  and  metrics  are  placed   apart  from  (and  above)  experiential  dimensions.       Simplistic  understanding  of  solution  and  identification  of  solution  holders   Lederach  argues  that  ceasefire  is  not  a  viable  definition  of  peace,  but  must  be  accompanied   by,  for  example,  health,  well-­‐being,  education  and  financial  stability  (which  he  means   necessitates  female  voices  to  be  included  in  negotiations  and  onwards).  (See  also  Southwell,   Chapter  10)  The  peace  process  he  proposes  therefore  is  a  long-­‐term  investment  and   commitment  –  albeit  with  initial  urgent  action  –  which  should  ideally  be  preventative.  It   necessitates  a  broad  involvement  from  communities  –  ultimately  everyone.  In  the  fashion   and  sustainability  context  ceasefire  can  be  compared  with  the  incremental  measure   invented  and  actioned  in  isolation.       Truth,  mercy,  justice  and  peace    “Truth  and  mercy  have  met  together,  peace  and  justice  have  kissed.”  (Lederach,  1997:  28)     Inspired  by  a  hymn  that  recurred  in  the  negotiations  he  advised  on  between  the  Sandinista   government  and  the  Yatama,  an  indigenous  resistance  movement  of  Nicaragua,  Lederach   13 identifies  four  key  ingredients  requisite  for  sustainable  peace  building:  truth,  mercy,  justice   and  peace.  Reconciliation,  he  describes,  is  the  place  or  locus  where  these  meet,  as  well  as   ongoing  focus.  All  the  four  are  necessary;  for  example,  truth  alone  leaves  us  raw,  and  mercy   alone  is  superficial  (like  the  frequently  said  sorry).  (Lederach,  1997:  31)     “Reconciliation-­‐as-­‐encounter  suggests  that  space  for  the  acknowledging  of  the  past  and   envisioning  of  the  future  is  the  necessary  ingredients  for  reframing  the  present.  For  this  to   happen,  people  must  find  ways  to  encounter  themselves  and  their  enemies,  their  hopes   and  their  fears.”  (Lederach,  1997:  27)   [insert  figure  28.2  here]     Figure  28.2.  The  Place  Called  Reconciliation.  (Lederach,  1997:  30)     Discussion   The  simplistic  and  binary  definitions  that  Lederach  identifies  as  typical  in  the  construction  of   war  and  peace,  and  I  argue  also  are  prominent  in  the  construction  of  un/sustainability,  are   unsurprising.  Distinct  points  (and  dichotomies)  seem  fathomable,  tangible,  and  actionable   and  resonate  with  a  Newtonian  Lego  logic  which  still  pervades  our  societies  here.  (See  also   Thackara,  Chapter  4)  They  reduce  the  mess  in  our  heads.  But  the  mess  is  still  there!       Systems  thinking  teaches  us  the  danger  of  steering  away  from  the  mess  of  the  complexity  of   intertwined  socio-­‐economical-­‐ecological  systems.  Because  of  the  non-­‐linear  and  asymmetric   causal  structures  of  systems,  fix-­‐its  risk  precipitating  larger  problems  ahead  and  transferring   a  problem  to  other  parts  of  the  system  or  linked  systems.  My  experience  of  facilitating   organisational  change  towards  sustainability,  and  my  readings  (see  e.g.  Macy  and  Johnstone,   2012),  have  alerted  me  to  the  danger  of  steering  away  from  the  mess  of  human  emotions.   14 True  peace  cannot  be  without  giving  attention  to  deeply  harboured  feelings  of  sorrow,   animosity  and  fear.  Sustainability  will  not  be  without  giving  attention  to,  for  example,  the   strong  urge  to  communicate  through  fashion,  or  the  fear  of  change.       When  an  individual  or  an  organization  is  asked  to  adapt  to  sustainability  (whether  the   change  concerns  design  choices,  business  models,  waste  streams  or  personal  habits),  this   entails  leaving  the  status  quo  to  enter  new  territories,  provoking  us  as  whole  human  beings.   We  can  feel  fear  (for  ourselves,  children,  whether  we  can  live  up  to  the  task  ahead),  anger   (at  previous  generations  or  an  authority  that  tells  us  to  act  differently  than  we  are  used  to),   sorrow  (for  a  lost  world,  a  lost  lifestyle),  critique  (that  what  we  were,  did  and  knew  was   wrong),  apathy,  confusion,  frustration,  shame,  guilt  and  more.  Rarely  do  we  feel  undivided   enthusiasm  when  asked  to  leave  behind  much  of  what  we  knew  to  be  true  and  who  we  were   –  which  we  thought  was  good/enough.       Most  awkwardly,  profound  change  requires  encountering  ourselves  in  our  less  attractive   guises.  In  all  honesty,  we  (yes  I)  enjoy  getting  our  knickers  in  a  twist  or  having  a  chip  on  our   shoulders  (how  I  love  these  English  expressions,  and  sometimes  in  the  company  of  small   children  both  can  be  true);  we  have  uncomfortable  biases,  resentments,  egos  and   ambitions.  But,  directing  ourselves  to  the  fruitful  space  of  reconciliation,  and  turning  our   capabilities  towards  the  future  (Fry,  2011)  requires  that  we  confront  and  leave  churlish   enjoyments  behind  for  the  reward  of  better  and  stronger  relationships.  The  space  of   encounter  affords  this,  as  well  as  closure,  by  providing  a  pivotal  point  in  time,  the  drawing  a   line  in  the  sand,  and  (just  like  Rob  Hopkins,  founder  of  the  transition  movement,  said  while   symbolically  holding  a  can  of  oil)  ‘loving  and  leaving’  this  no  longer  viable  past  behind.   (Hopkins,  2009)     15 Futures  of  futures  studies  in  fashion  –  proposal  2   I  forecast  that  futures  of  futures  studies  in  fashion  can  offer  a  place  to  lay  bare  and  process   the  multifarious  hard  and  soft,  small  and  large,  close  and  far,  weak  and  strong  dimensions  of   fashion  and  sustainability  –  a  place  of  reconciliation  for  all  us  collaborators  of  fashion.  The   process  of  four  stages  of  encounter  –  truth,  mercy,  justice  and  peace  –  can  become  a  new   integral  practice  of  fashion  work,  assigned  dignity  on  a  par  with  annual  reports  and  global   brand  meetings.  I  recommend  that  research  onwards  should  explore  platforms,  formats  and   facilitation  for  the  inclusion  of  a  wide  range  of  stakeholders  in  such  bold  and  celebratory   meetings.     Lederach  describes  how  the  moment  of  reconciliation  readdresses  the  wrongs  of  the  past   and  envisions  a  common  shared  future.  (Lederach,  1997)  That  this  future  is  shared  is  crucial,   and  as  transferred  to  the  context  of  fashion  and  sustainability,  we  could  understand  this  as   casting  fashion  and  sustainability  as  one,  and  their  various  stakeholders  as  one   heterogeneous  team  working  towards  one  rich  and  deeply  held  vision.     Conclusion   The  systems  and  even  paradigms  we  live  with  are  created  by  humans,  and  so  we  can  create   other  systems  and  paradigms  that  are  better  suited  for  our  present  and  future  wellbeing,   and  that  of  fellow  humans  and  fellow  species.  This  seems  simple  and  obvious,  but  often  gets   forgotten  in  the  stream  of  tasks,  technologies  and  more,  so  that  we  often  resort  to  ‘diddling   with  the  deck-­‐chairs  on  the  Titanic’  (Meadows,  1997)  instead  of  being  with  the  most   fundamental  questions  ‘who  do  we  want  to  be,  and  how  do  we  want  to  live  our  lives?’.     Every  time  I  think  and  write  about  or  try  to  do  fashion  and  sustainability,  I  need  to  remind   myself  of  my  love  for  fashion.  In  the  fashion  moment  at  its  best,  vibrant  with  creativity,  play   16 and  experimentation,  I  encounter  extended  possibilities  of  myself  and  of  being  together   with  others.  I  forecast  fashion  moments  where  we,  collaborators  of  fashion  can  encounter   ourselves  and  each  other,  and  our  messy-­‐disturbing–beautiful  world  raw.  Then  we  can   imagine  our  shared  futures.     References   Brannon,  E.  L.  (2005),  Fashion  Forecasting,  New  York:  Fairchild  Publications.   Edris,  K.  E.  (1987),  Vision  eller  Vanmakt,  Uppsala:  Hallgren  &  Fallgren.   Fletcher,  K.  (2008),  Sustainable  Fashion  and  Textiles:  Design  Journeys,  London:  Earthscan.   Fletcher,  K.  and  Grose,  L.  (2012),  Fashion  and  Sustainability:  Design  for  Change,  London:   Laurence  King.   Forum  for  the  Future  (2010)  Fashion  Futures  2025:  Global  Scenarios  for  a  Sustainable   Fashion  Industry.  Levi  Strauss  February  and  Forum  for  the  Future  February  2010.  Available  at   http://www.forumforthefuture.org/project/fashion-­‐futures-­‐2025/overview  Accessed  on  12   November  2012.     Fry,  T.  (2011),  Design  as  Politics,  New  York:  Berg.       Giaccardi,  E.  (2005),  Metadesign  as  an  Emergent  Design  Culture,  Leonardo  38  (4):342-­‐349.   Giddens,  A.  (1991),  Modernity  and  Self-­‐Identity,  Cambridge:  Polity  Press.   Giertz-­‐Mårtenson,  I.  (2006),  Att  Se  in  i  Framtiden:  En  undersökning  av  trendanalys  inom   Modebranschen,  Master  Thesis,  Ethnology,  Stockholm  University,  Stockholm.   Gopnik,  A.  (2009),  The  Philosophical  Baby,  London:  Bodley  Head.   Heron,  J.  and  Reason.  P.  (2001),  The  Practice  of  Co-­‐operative  Inquiry:  Research  with  rather   than  on  people,  In  Handbook  of  Action  Research:  Participative  Inquiry  and  Practice,  edited   by  P.  Reason  and  H.  Bradbury.  London:  Sage  Publications.   Hopkins,  R.  (2009),  Rob  Hopkins:  Transition  to  a  world  without  oil,  [Video  file]   Retrieved  from   17 http://www.ted.com/talks/rob_hopkins_transition_to_a_world_without_oil.html?quote=59 9  Accessed  12  February,  2012   Inayatullah,  S.  (1998),  Causal  Layered  Analysis:  Poststructuralism  as  method,  Futures  30   (8):815-­‐829.   Kim,  E,  Fiore  A.  M.  Kim,  H.  (2011),  Fashion  Trends:  Analysis  and  Forecasting,  London:  Berg.   Lederach,  J.P.  (1997),  Building  Peace:  Sustainable  reconciliation  in  divided  societies,   Washington:  United  States  Institute  of  Peace.   Macy,  J.  and  Johnstone,  C.  (2012),  Active  Hope:  How  to  Face  the  Mess  We’re  In  Without   Going  Crazy,  Novato,  C.A.:  New  World  Library.     McKelvey,  K.  and  Muslow,  J.  (2008),  Fashion  Forecasting,  Oxford:  John  Wiley  and  Sons.   Meadows,  D.  H.  (2008),  Thinking  in  Systems:  A  Primer,  White  River  Junction,  VT,  Chelsea:   Green  Publishing  Company.   Meadows,  D.  H.  (1997),  Places  to  Intervene  in  a  System,  Whole  Earth  Review  (91).   Meadows,  D.  H.,  Meadows,  D.  L.,  Randers,  J.,  and  W.  Berhens.  (1972),  The  Limits  to  Growth,   London:  Earth  Island.   Merchant,  C.  (1982),  The  Death  of  Nature:  Women,  ecology  and  the  scientific  revolution,   London:  Wildwood  House.   Prahl,  A.  (2012),  Design  for  Sustainable  Consumption:  trend  analysis.  Report.  18  April  2012.   WGSN.   Rousso,  C.  (2012),  Fashion  Forward:  A  guide  to  fashion  forecasting,  New  York:  Fairchild   Books.   Sardar,  Z.,  ed.  (1999),  Rescuing  All  Our  Futures:  the  future  of  futures  studies,  Twickenham:   Adamantine  Press.   Slaughter,  R.  A.,  ed.  (1996),  The  Knowledge  Base  of  Futures  Studies,  Melbourne:  DDM   Media  Group.   Tham,  M.  (2008),  Lucky  People  Forecast:  A  systemic  Futures  Perspective  on  Fashion  and   18 Sustainability,  PhD  Thesis,  Goldsmiths,  University  of  London.   Tham,  M.  and  Jones,  H.  (2008),  Metadesign  Tools:  Designing  the  seeds  for  shared  processes   of  change,  In  Cipolla,  C.  och  Peruccio,  P.P.  (eds.)  Changing  the  Change.  Design,  Visions,   Proposals  and  Tools.  Proceeding.  Turin:  Allemandi  Conference  Press.  p.1491-­‐1505.  Ebook.   Available  at  www.allemandi.com/university/ctc.pdf   Tham,  M.  (2010),  Languaging  fashion  and  sustainability  –  towards  synergistic  modes  of   thinking,  wording,  visualising  and  doing  fashion  and  sustainability,  The  Nordic  Textile   Journal,  Special  Issue  Fashion  Communication.  1/2010.  14-­‐23.   Toffler,  A.  (1978),  Foreword,  In  Cultures  of  the  Future,  edited  by  M.  Maruyama  and  A.  M.   Harkins,  The  Hague:  Mouton.   Wood,  J.  (2007),  Design  for  Micro-­‐utopias:  Making  the  Unthinkable  Possible,  Design  for   Social  Responsibility,  London:  Ashgate.                 19