See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/316335671

An overview on corporate response towards sustainability issues in textile

industry

Article in Environment Development and Sustainability · August 2018

DOI: 10.1007/s10668-017-9949-1

CITATIONS READS

136 5,806

2 authors, including:

Sapna A. Narula
TERI University
48 PUBLICATIONS 565 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Food Supply Chains View project

OFF Grid Intervenventions View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sapna A. Narula on 14 May 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Environ Dev Sustain
DOI 10.1007/s10668-017-9949-1

REVIEW

An overview on corporate response

towards sustainability issues in textile industry

Anupriya Desore1 • Sapna A. Narula1

Received: 18 March 2016 / Accepted: 11 April 2017

 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Abstract Textiles constitute an important part of human beings everyday life. Environ-
mentalists have been calling forth industries to incorporate sustainability principles into
their production processes. In comparison with other industries, textile industry is con-
sidered to be major contributor towards environmental pollution and is subject to creating
various ecological (water body pollution, waste generation, air pollution) issues throughout
supply chain from fibre production till fabric finishing. This paper reviews the existing
literature related to various sustainability issues surrounding the textile industry across the
globe. The authors classify the literature to discuss the drivers, barriers, and responses of
firms in the textile industry in favour of sustainability. Despite a growing body of research
in this area, we identify significant gaps in the literature with special reference to man-
agerial approaches being used for incorporating sustainability. While it is very important to
understand the motivations that drive firms towards sustainability and barriers to imple-
mentation, attention is also drawn towards research aspects pertaining to managerial
perception towards new technologies and processes. The article also provides future
research opportunities in form of specific questions to strengthen existing literature in this
field.

Keywords Sustainability issues
Textile industry
Textile value chain
Sustainability

strategies
Drivers and barriers
Strategic response

& Sapna A. Narula

[email protected]
Anupriya Desore
[email protected]
1
TERI University, C-10, Institutional Area, Vasant Kunj, Delhi 110070, India

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

1 Background

Textile and clothing industry which serves as an essential part of human beings’ everyday
life is one of the most global industries in the world (Silva and Teixeira 2008; Hansen and
Schaltegger 2013; Baskaran et al. 2012). The worth of global textile industry is determined
to be US$1 trillion worldwide, and also it contributes 7% to the total world exports and
employs approximately 35 million people worldwide (Global Market Report on Sustain-
able Textile 2010). There has been a substantial rise in demand from developed countries
leading to increase in output and employment, growth of agricultural sector and generation
of foreign exchange for developing countries (Abernathy et al. 2006; Seyoum 2007;
Assocham 2010) particularly after termination of multi fibre agreement in 2005.
Besides the role of textile industry in generation of employment, it is considered as one
of the major reasons of pollution worldwide. The textile manufacturing process is known
for consuming resources like water, fuel and a variety of chemicals on a large scale.
Industrial estimates show that more than 35% of chemicals released in the environment are
a result of various textile treatment and dyeing processes (Thiry 2011), also consumption
of fresh water by textile industry is around three trillion gallons worldwide and was used to
produce 60 billion Kilograms of fabric (Global Market Report on Sustainable Textile
2010). Approximately, 8500 L of water is consumed in growing 1 Kg of cotton which is
equivalent to manufacturing one pair of blue jeans as reported by worldwide fund for
nature. With emerging issues such as climate change, scarcity of resources, strict regula-
tory regime and demand for sustainable textiles along with growing textile consumption,
the issue of environmental damage through textile production must be addressed urgently
(Silva and Teixeira 2008; Jeswani et al. 2008; Bönte and Dienes 2013). There is a lot of
literature available in context of sustainability issues in textile industry, for example,
related to water (Kalliala and Talvenmaa 2000; FICCI water mission 2011; Chico et al.
2013; Alkaya and Demirer 2014), waste (Powell and Prostko-Bell 2010; Parvathi et al.
2009; Fletcher 2008) and energy management (Diebäcker 2000; Zabaniotou and Andreou
2010; Allwood et al. 2006). A few reviews are also available on the technological aspects
of textile industry (Khandegar and Saroha 2013; Reddy and ray 2011; Sen 2008; Santos
et al. 2007), yet none of the researchers has explored the existing work in the context of
implementation of these issues for industry. Literature, however, exists under a variety of
themes such as motivations by textile firms to adopt environmental practices, their strategic
response and the type of strategies followed and barriers to implement these strate-
gies (Karthik and Gopalkrishnan 2014; Sherburne 2009; Ren 2000). We have tried to
explore and analyse the existing literature from these angles while mapping the existing
research and at the same time finding research gaps and offering future directions. Con-
sidering the emergence of global textile supply chains and standards, it becomes pertinent
to examine these issues at the implementation level in this industry to ensure sustainability
in production and consumption of textiles. The study also assumes a lot of significance in
light with adoption of Goal 12 of Sustainable Development Goals which is sustainable
production and consumption.
This paper comprises of seven sections. Section 1 covers the background of textile
industry. Section 2 highlights the objectives and research questions for study, followed by
the scope of literature adopted in Sect. 3. Section 4 covers the literature pertaining to
sustainability issues surrounding the textile industry in form of energy, water and waste
management along the textile production chain. Section 5 answers through existing
research why textile firms go green, i.e. the factors motivating firms to adopt sustainable

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

practices. This section also highlights the barriers to adoption of environmental practices
by firms. Section 6 captures the response of firms towards incorporating sustainable
practices. Finally, the paper ends with the research gaps in the field and outlines areas for
future studies in Sect. 7.

2 Rationale and objective of study

Researchers have studied various industries with respect to sustainability such as hotel and
hospitality (Bohdanowicz 2006; Kasim 2007; Dalton et al. 2008; Tortella and Tirado
2011), automobile (Zhu and Sarkis 2006), Steel (Clemens 2001; Brunke et al. 2014), paper
and chemical (Wagner 2005; Zhu and Geng 2013) and food (Chkanikova and Mont 2012;
Beske et al. 2014), and a number of empirical as well as review studies with a variety of
research frameworks are available in this context. The fact that sustainability issues, dri-
vers, barriers and practices are industry specific makes it relevant to direct and design
industry-focused research.
The textile industry has also drawn the attention of strategy and sustainability
researchers in past (Allwood et al. 2006; Thiry 2011; Blackburn 2009; Fletcher and Grose
2012; Jørgensen and Jensen 2012; Alkaya and Demirer 2014) besides being researched by
technology researchers (Santos et al. 2007; Khandegar and Saroha 2013; Vajnhandi and
Valh 2014; Dasgupta et al. 2015) who reviewed various environmental practices and
technologies being used for various processes in textile industry. In our quest to search the
relevant literature, we came across reviews by Hasanbeigi and Price (2012) and Hong et al.
(2010) focusing primarily on use of energy efficient technologies for textile industry,
thereby highlighting energy and cost-saving measures available for textile industry at each
stage of production. A review on supply chains of US fashion industry is also available
which covered current trends across the US fashion supply chain, focusing on operational
practices and measures taken up by the industry in restructuring itself (Sen 2008). This
review is motivated by two gaps: first, there are none of the studies which captures the
managerial research done on sustainability issues in textile industry and the studies remain
scattered at various literature domains offering little scope of convergence amongst dis-
ciplines, and secondly, most of the studies were carried out in developed countries such as
Europe, USA, Australia, UK and Denmark (Jorgensen et al. 2010; Walker and Jones 2012;
Harms et al. 2013), whereas a lot of production centres are concentrated in developing
countries like India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and the research for these geographical regions
is scanty (Shrivastava 1995; Shrivastava 1996; Sharma et al. 1999; Verma 2002; Hossain
and Marinova 2003; Parker 2011).
While writing this review, we concentrated on following questions:
• What are the major sustainability issues across the textile supply chain as identified by
researchers?
• What has been the impact of the industry on environment with respect to air, water and
waste management as highlighted by previous research?
• What are the drivers and motivations for firms to go green in textile sector? What are
the barriers and constraints to implementation of environmental sustainability in textile
industry?
• How did textile firms respond towards sustainable issues?

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

Table 1 An overview of keyword classification for study

Keyword combinations Science Emerald Wiley Springer Total
direct

Textile industry (TI) 120 49 95 9 273

Sustainability practices and textile industry (SP & TI) 78 7 2 2 89
Sustainability strategies and textile industry (SS & TI) 77 14 1 1 93
Sustainability issues and textile industry (SI & TI) 5 6 1 1 13
Environmental issues and textile industry (EI & TI) 25 5 6 1 37
Drivers and barriers and textile industry (DnB & TI) 9 33 8 2 52
Strategic response and textile industry (SR & TI) 5 4 6 2 17
Total 319 118 119 18 574

3 Scope and coverage of the literature review

For this literature review, we used systematic review methodology (Tranfield et al. 2003).
The articles for this study were identified through search in leading scholarly databases:
Science direct, Emerald, Wiley along with book chapters from special series on textile
science and clothing in Springer database, where searches were made using the key phrase
‘Textile Industry’. These databases were selected because of a wide variety of journals of
environment, sustainability, business management, textile industry being covered by them.
A total of 574 papers were collected through this process. Table 1 shows the number of
journal papers and book chapters identified using an advanced search option with a
combination of keywords under the abstract, title and keyword option.
After data collection, the next step was to identify relevant articles from the papers
collected from database. The title and abstracts of the retrieved articles were further
reviewed by authors to analyse their relevance to the research questions, and a final list of
147 potential research papers along with articles and book chapters was retained which
covered the objectives and scope of the paper. Out of the 145 articles identified, a total of
95 papers on textile sustainability formed the core of this review paper. Remaining 50
papers relating to other industries and managerial issues were included to support the study
but did not form the part of the main review. Literature analysis is as follows:

3.1 Year-wise distribution

Through year-wise article classification, we found that the academic studies in this field
gained momentum post-year 2005 when the industry was going through changes in form of
rising demand for exports from developing countries. Figure 1 shows the distribution of
identified contributions as per year of publications.

3.2 Distribution across journals

Majority of these core papers are from Textile Science and Clothing Technology (4);
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management (8); Journal of Cleaner Production (15);
International Journal of Production Economics (8); Clothing and Textile Research (5);
Sustainable Fashion Supply Chain Management (4); Journal of Environmental Manage-
ment (4); Business Strategy and Environment (4); Procedia: Social and Behavioural

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

Distribuon of arcles

1997-2000

2000-2005

2006-2016

0 20 40 60 80 100
2006-2016 2000-2005 1997-2000
No. of Publicaons 81 10 6

Fig. 1 Yearly distribution of selected articles

Sciences (3); Indian Journal of Fibre and Textile Research (3); and Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management (3). Remaining articles are from other
related Journals such as Ecological Economics; Energy Policy; Social Responsibility
Journal; Sustainability; and Management Research Review and Journal of Corporate
Citizenship.

3.3 Article type and geographical classification

The identified core papers (95) consist of 79% empirical studies, 12% exploratory studies
and 9% review and conceptual papers along with government reports and articles with a
major concentration in European countries as compared to developing nations such as
India. The country-wise classification of these core papers is shown in Figs. 2 and 3 below.

3.4 Research methods used

Amongst the data collected for review, more than 50% of empirical studies reported
followed quantitative techniques. Regression analysis and structure equation modelling
were used for analysis of quantitative studies, whereas studies of qualitative nature fol-
lowed case study approach as stated by Yin (2009).
Considering the scope and coverage of the literature, the authors had to restrict the
article search to limited databases consisting of articles from the managerial perspective
rather than technological issues despite the risk of omitting relevant articles from other

Fig. 2 Country-wise Country Classificaon

classification of literature No. of Studies
44

17 18
15

Europe and other USA, Australia, India China, Sri Lanka,

European countries Canada Taiwan, Indonesia,
Korea

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

Ginning & Spinning, wet processing (

Fiber pre treatment,
Processing Weaving and
Production dyeing, printing )
factory Knitting

Transportation Packaging
Fabric
Finishing

Fig. 3 Textile production supply chain Source Adapted with changes from Gardetti and Torres (2012)

important databases that also might have significant research work. This limitation can be
revised by future studies in this field by collating data using related keywords from other
databases.
To study the response of firms towards the adoption of sustainable practices, we found
the sustainability strategy framework by Stead and Stead (2008a) very relevant which are
known to provide cost savings and competitive advantages to firms. They classify the
sustainability strategies into two types: process driven and market driven. Strategies that
provide cost-saving advantages to firms through improvement in environmental efficiency
are known to be process-driven strategies, whereas market-driven strategies tend to dif-
ferentiate firms’ products from their competitors in the marketplace through diversification
into new market segments or redesigning products to be more environmentally sensitive
(Stead and Stead 2008a).
The purpose of selecting this framework for our study was to identify and classify the
firms’ strategies and point out future directions for environmental management in textile
firms.

4 Textile industry production chain

This section describes the textile industry production chain which begins with the trans-
formation of cotton and wool (natural fibres) and chemical fibres into yarns and fabrics.
These fabrics are then converted to clothing which includes garments, household goods
and industrial textiles (Youngjoo and Dong Kyu 2015; Herva et al. 2008).
The supply chain begins with obtaining fibre from raw material which causes soil
degradation. Ginning is the initial process where fibre is first separated from the cotton
seed. In this process, cotton is then vacuumed into tubes which then passes through a dryer
to reduce its moisture and improve the quality of fibre. In the next step, cleaning equipment
is used to remove leaf trash, sticks and other foreign material; then, the cotton is spun into
yarn which is further used for weaving and knitting (Zabaniotou and Andreou 2010; Reddy
and Ray 2011). During wet processing, pre- treatment, printing and dyeing of fabric is
carried out.
Environmental impacts start at the initial stage of production itself and can be grouped
under categories such as raw material production where chemicals toxic in nature is used in
growing cotton either in form of fertilizers, insecticides, and pesticides or in form of
emissions during the production of synthetic fibres. Next is the stage of textile manufac-
turing, dyeing and finishing where chemicals and solid wastes arising from yarn

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

manufacturing of natural fibres are released in water (Reddy & Ray 2011; Khandegar and
Saroha 2013). Industrial estimates show that textile treatment and dyeing accounts for 20%
of industrial freshwater pollution (Kalliala and Talvenmaa 2000), abundant chemicals used
and released during textile treatment and dyeing results in degradation of work environ-
ment along with creating various environmental problems unless treated before disposal
(Kane 2001; Kant 2012; Powell and Prostko-Bell 2010; Parvathi et al. 2009). Movement of
goods along the textile supply chain constitutes the third stage of environmental impact. At
this stage, energy is consumed in form of providing fuel for machinery, mechanization of
old plants and transportation required for distribution of materials (Hethorn and Ulasewicz
2008; DEFRA 2008; EPA 2010; UNIDO 2012). The air pollution generated during
manufacturing process possess severe health risks which cause occupational diseases
commonly observed amongst workers exposed to cotton and hemp dust (Kane 2001;
Goworek 2011; Kant 2012; Hiremath et al. 2012). Product disposal by consumers is also
amongst the major causes of environmental impacts as most are not aware of environ-
mental consequences of the ways of disposal (Winge 2008; Hiller Connell 2010; Resta
et al. 2013). The impacts of textile and clothing supply chain on the environment are
summarized in Fig. 4.
Owing to these impacts, corporations are also becoming aware of the consequences of
their practices on the environment (Peinado-Vara 2006). Section 5 talks at length about
factors motivating firms to adopt sustainable practices along with barriers faced by them.

5 Why do textile firms go green?

Drivers act as motivating factors that tend to shape the organizational strategy and has the
power to influence the response of firms (Abreu 2015; Walker et al. 2008). In the past few
years, textile firms have shown some momentum towards incorporating sustainable con-
cepts in their supply chains (Silva and Teixeira 2008; Jeswani et al. 2008; Bönte and
Dienes 2013; Diabat et al. 2014). Also, the study by cotton incorporated (2009) shows that

Fig. 4 Environmental/social impacts of textile and clothing industry along the supply chain

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

in a 20-year framework from 1990 to 2009, the textile industry has shown reduction in
consumption of natural resources (water, energy) towards processing of cotton by 50%,
along with reduction in chemical use by 40% globally (Thiry 2011), but increasing
environmental issues indicate the need for continuous improvement in this industry. This
section highlights numerous factors found in the literature that plays a role in motivating
firms to go sustainable along with barriers faced by them. Firms are driven by the desire to
contribute towards solving environmental problems along with sheer motive to earn profits.
The management literature mentions a range of internal and external factors that may
inhibit firms’ performance and act as a catalyst for firms to implement sustainable prac-
tices. Human and financial resources are of utmost importance in shaping firm’s envi-
ronmental strategies along with other internal organizational resources. Internal factors
such as managers’ own ethical commitment and values towards sustainability, (Niinimäki
2010), their desire to gain a unique green position in the market, to improve company’s
reputation (Min and Galle 2001; Arora et al. 2004; Darnall and Edwards 2006; Gozalez-
Benito and Gozalez- Benito 2006; Ho and Choi 2012; Wu et al. 2012) are some of the
organizational factors which help firms implement green practices. Also, for textile firms,
this trend is seen to be followed more by firms in European countries which imply their
proactive nature towards implementing strategies aiming to attain green competitive
advantage (Porter 1985; McAdam and McClelland 2002; Simchi-Levi 2008). Apart from
these factors, firms also get affected by its institutional environment consisting of sup-
pliers, regulatory agencies and competitors (DiMaggio and Walter 1983). A market
pressure in form of demand from foreign buyers and manufacturers (Daub and Ergenzinger
2005) and pressure from regulatory bodies towards environmental clearance also influence
firms to take up environmental decisions. Firms response is also reported to be influenced
by institutional members as it can change firms’ viewpoint in terms of the cost involved
and benefit achieved through environmental management. Pressure from regulatory bodies
considering raising social issues to improve labour standards, the health of employees,
community development, etc. (Mahler 2007; Rieple and Singh 2010), has prompted several
NGOs and associations to run sustainable campaigns to denounce such practices. For
example, owing to these pressures leading brands such as Reebok, Nike, H&M and Levis
have started to incorporate socially responsible measures in their supply chains (Shen et al.
2012).
We also examined research on factors or barriers which hamper firms’ growth in
adopting environment-friendly practices in the textile industry, and these were identified to
be a lack of financial resources (Lo et al. 2012; Youngjoo and Dong Kyu 2015; Jeswani
et al. 2008; Mittal and Sangwan 2014) and weak legislation on part of government.
Alongside, a plenty of literature argues that government involvement could reduce com-
panies cost and in return encourage them to implement environment-friendly practices
(Darnall and Edwards 2006; Goworek et al. 2012; Pedersen and Andersen 2013). Most of
the barriers were found to be consumer centric. The following paragraph presents a dis-
cussion on various drivers and barriers from consumer viewpoint towards adopting sus-
tainable practices as they play a key role in the textile industry.

5.1 Consumer as a driver for environmental Initiatives

Textile industry being highly consumer driven, the knowledge, values and perceptions of
consumers impact the demand for products in this industry (Butler and Francis 1997;
Dickson 1999, 2000; Simi 2012). Most of the barriers faced by this industry are also
consumer centric. Recent studies in this field show that young consumers are much more

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

concerned and aware about the environmental issues. Numerous studies on consumer
behaviour by authors (Daub and Ergenzinger 2005; Lee 2008; Hill and Lee 2012; Ha-
Brookshire and Norum 2011; Williams and Page 2011) have pointed out their increasing
interest towards sustainable clothing. But at the same time, consumers’ willingness to pay
for green or organic clothes has produced contradictory results (Bhaduri and Ha-Brook-
shire 2011; Eder-Hansen et al. 2012). While some segments of consumers are willing to
pay for organic clothes, there are an equal number of studies supporting that consumers
hesitate to pay as they perceive organic clothes or clothes made of recycled material to be
of lower quality, out of trend and highly priced (Dickson 1999; Achabou and Dekhili 2015;
Armstrong et al. 2015).
In most of the studies, attitude and behaviour gap has also been found to be affecting
consumer purchase behaviour as they prefer low-priced fashionable clothes over ethical
dimensions in terms of price and quality (Joergens 2006). Some are also of the view that
retailers should adhere to socially responsible practices rather than pointing out to con-
sumers (Mohr and Webb 2001; Gupta and Hodges 2012; Kim and Damhorst 1998; Kim
et al. 1999). Limited knowledge and awareness about sustainability impacts of clothing
amongst consumers have also been reported as a barrier (Eder-Hansen et al. 2012) as many
ecologically conscious consumers do not have appropriate knowledge to perform a com-
parison based on ecological footprints of assorted products and select a more environment-
friendly product (Karaalp and Yilmaz 2012). Strong evidence in research exists, where
even environmentally aware respondents make purchase decisions influenced primarily by
economic and personal factors (Abreu 2015; Achabou and Dekhili 2015; Hiller Connell
2010). Most consumers prefer to buy low to reasonably priced clothing lying in their range
or within their budget from retailers despite knowing these clothes are not so durable and
environment friendly (Defra 2008; Bhaduri and Ha-Brookshire 2011).
The need for constant change in fashion industry is one of the dominating factors
restricting the environmental progress in textile firms (Achabou and Dekhili 2015) along
with other factors based on consumers’ perception that ethical fashion products are old
fashioned and costlier than the conventional clothes (Chan and Wong 2012; Pedersen and
Andersen 2013; Abreu 2015; Youngjoo and Dong Kyu 2015). Researchers believe that
mandating ecolabels for apparel products and making them available to consumers can
help in overcoming awareness and knowledge-based barriers and thereby promoting the
sale of organic clothes (Almeida 2015). Providing correct information will also help in
building trust between the manufacturer and consumer (Devinney et al. 2011; Goworek
et al. 2012). Various ecolabels for textile industry such as Global Organic Textile Standard
(GOTS), Better Cotton Initiative, Oeko-Tex Standard, EU-Ecolabels for textile (EU-2002),
Organic Exchange 100 and blended standards to promote use of organic cotton are being
followed by the industry and have led to an increase in the consumption of standard
products by 48% as reported by standard compliance report on sustainability issues (Potts
et al. 2014). These standards include specific requirements for organic textiles and serve as
an important motivating factor.
These barriers as identified from existing research have aided our understanding of
consumer’s buying decision process and are collectively mapped in Fig. 5.
In our opinion, the consumer-driven barriers can be addressed by working on each of
the five stages of the consumer buying decision process. At the initial stages of need
recognition (I) and information search (II), the negative consumer perception towards
sustainable clothes and issues such as lack of knowledge and awareness about green or
sustainable clothes can be changed by providing more information about product com-
position and making consumers aware of the environmental impacts through various

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

Lack of informaon,
knowledge and
awareness amongst
consumers to compare
convenonal vs
environmental friendly
opons

Price Barrier
(ethical clothes are
Limited availability of highly priced)
ethical clothes

Consumer Style barrier

Confusion in Driven (ethical clothes old
understanding fashioned and low
labels and green
Barriers
quaity/ need for
washing constant change)

Need Post
Informaon Alternave Purchase
Recognion Purchase
Search Evaluaon Decision
(I) Behavior
( II ) ( III ) ( IV )
(V)

5 Stage Consumer Buying Decision Process

Fig. 5 Consumer-driven barriers and consumer buying decision process

ecolabels as supported by the literature (Almeida 2015; Goworek et al. 2012). At this stage,
support from the government, NGO’s and commercial sources can play a significant role.
Moving on to third and fourth stage, i.e. stage of alternative evaluation and purchase where
consumers compare conventional product benefits with green products, is governed by a
willingness to pay by consumers. At this stage, style and price of ethical clothes often lead
to the gap between purchase intention and final purchase (Butler and Francis 1997; Chan
and Wong 2012). Consumers’ trust plays a key role at this stage. Brands, ecolabels and
standards hence help in aiding the consumer for their decision-making. These standards, in
fact, provide additional information to consumers along with building their trust (Dickson
2000; Rex and Baumann 2007; Choudhary 2015). The last stage of buying decision pro-
cess, i.e. post-purchase behaviour which bridges the gap in consumers purchase intention
and actual purchase, is highly determined by the quality and durability of product; it is
therefore retailers’ prime responsibility to ensure that ethical clothes provide the same
satisfaction to consumers as conventional clothes (Devinney et al. 2011). In a nutshell,

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

providing complete information about product composition highlighting where and how a
product was made through a medium of ecolabels can be a potential solution in increasing
visibility of the product and thereby making it easier and much more convenient for
consumers to make sustainable buying decisions (Ottman 2006; Achabou and Dekhili
2015; Choudhary 2015). Further studies should focus on strengthening each stage of
consumer buying decision process towards sustainable consumption as it will improve
consumer confidence in ethical products and help in better understanding of ethical issues
in this industry.

6 Strategic response of textile firms in favour of environmental

management

To overcome the challenge to be environmentally sustainable, firms are responding in

diverse ways either by working on environment-friendly production processes or by
focusing on green product markets (Hasanbeigi and Price 2012, Ngai et al. 2013; Alkaya
and Demirer 2014; Hansen and Schaltegger 2013; Rao and Holt 2005). We have used the
Stead and Stead (2008a) framework of process-driven (pollution prevention) and market-
driven (product stewardship) sustainability strategies for classifying the response of firms
presented in following subsections. The framework used is explained in Sect. 3.

6.1 Process-driven sustainability strategy

Strategies that provide cost-saving advantages to firms in form of improvement in envi-

ronment efficiency are known as process-driven sustainability strategies (Stead and Stead
2008b). These strategies help firms in reducing depletion of resources, along with a
reduction in material usage and energy consumption by firms.

6.2 Market-driven (product stewardship) sustainability strategy

Strategies that differentiate firm’s products from their competitors in the marketplace
through diversifying into new market segments or through making changes in the existing
product to make them more environment friendly are known as market-driven sustain-
ability strategies (Stead and Stead 2008b). These strategies propose that environmental
hazards and life cycle costs should be minimized in products or services.
Tables 2 and 3 show numerous studies from textile industry that have adopted sus-
tainable business practices. We have classified these studies based on various activities
followed under process and market-driven sustainability strategies. Both strategies are
economically feasible, with a reasonable financial outcome, return on investment and a
positive return on equity (Williams et al. 1993; Stead and Stead 1995; Hart and Ahuja
1996; Hart 1995).
Most popular process-driven strategies as identified from previous research were
directed towards process intensifications, redesigning of production processes to be envi-
ronmentally sensitive through cleaner production technologies. These strategies had a
prime focus to achieve cost advantages by improving environmental efficiency, whereas
firms that adopt market-oriented strategies were found to be diversifying into environ-
mental markets or market segments, working towards introduction of environmentally
oriented products such as water-friendly types of denim (Shen 2014) and making use of

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

Table 2 Analysis of firms response (product driven)

Activities Measures adopted by firms Author/year Country

Overview of process-driven strategies

Redesigning Incorporating environment-friendly Santos et al. (2007), Dasgupta India,
pollution and waste technologies such as anaerobic et al. (2015), Zabaniotou and Greece
control systems biotechnology, membrane-based Andreou (2010), Ozturk et al.
techniques, nanofiltration to (2015)
reduce wastewater emissions and
use of renewable energy sources
To rebuild and renew old Wenzel and Knudsen (2005), Denmark
equipment’s through process Resta et al. (2013)
intensifications
To collect and reuse water and Wenzel and Knudsen (2005) Denmark
waterborne energy and chemicals
through process integration
Redesigning Firms are working towards Nieminen et al. (2007), Alkaya Turkey
production process adoption of best available and Demirer (2014), Chico
to be techniques such as the renovation et al. (2013)
environmentally of water softening system, use of
sensitive drop fill washing instead of
overflow and various valves and
fittings in water transmission
system which led to
environmental and economic
benefits such as decreased water
consumption, wastewater
generation, reduction in energy
consumption
Implementation of energy utility Ngai et al. (2013) China
management maturity model,
thereby resulting in energy and
utility resource management to
bring changes in the production
process
Adoption of cleaner production Dasgupta et al. (2015), India
technologies in textile bleaching Khandegar and Saroha
and dyeing to maintain resource (2013), Narayanaswamy and
productivity Scott (2001)
Firms are working towards process Wenzel and Knudsen (2005) Denmark
alterations within existing
equipment to save water and
waterborne energy and chemicals
along with cross-utilization of
effluent streams between
processes to achieve water
efficiency

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

Table 2 continued

Activities Measures adopted by firms Author/year Country

Using recycled Use of waste during ginning of Zabaniotou and Andreou (2010) Greece
materials from cotton to develop alternative
production energy sources to reduce
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
Use of environment-friendly Youngjoo and Dong Kyu Korea
material in form of natural fibres (2015), Niinimäki and Hassi
and recycled materials, apparel (2011), Narayanaswamy and
reuse and ecomarketing Scott (2001)
Technologies to reuse denim fibre Youngjoo and Dong Kyu Korea
waste back into the original fibre (2015)
Use of recyclable Use of ecomaterial in sustainable Sezen and Cankaya (2013), Ho China,
energy sources manufacturing; adoption of low- and Choi (2012), Sen (2008), USA,
emission modes of transport to Simchi-Levi (2008) Germany
ensure green distribution
To recover energy in water streams Wenzel and Knudsen (2005) Denmark
by heat exchange

textile standards. The research also concludes that firms that have implemented and
practiced green initiatives are found to be showing better firm performance, better stake-
holder relations, reduction in cost and improvement in environmental efficiency (Wu et al.
2012; Baskaran et al. 2012; Caniato et al. 2012; Hansen and Schaltegger 2013).
As pointed by Chen and burns (2006) in their study that environmental impact of textile
products can be categorized based on impacts related to its production, maintenance, and
eventual disposal indicates the need to make production processes sustainable, i.e. working
towards the greening of the entire supply chain. These production processes can be made
sustainable through various product stewardship activities such as right use and disposal of
used products which can be achieved through involvement of firm’s stakeholders con-
sisting of suppliers, environmentalists, regulators, etc. (Handfield et al. 2005). Research
gaps also point towards studies from the green supply chain perspective in the textile
industry to promote sustainable consumption. This would, in fact, facilitate connections
between production chains in developing countries and consumers in developed countries
and can provide economically relevant and ecoefficient solutions for sustainable
consumption.

7 Conclusion and implications for further research

This review paper has presented the motivations for textile firms to adopt environmental
practices, the response of the firms in form of both process- and market-driven strategies
and major drivers and barriers to implementation of these practices. The results of the
study are useful for managers and academicians to advance their understanding of types of
strategies to be adopted by firms and the drivers and barriers for implementation of
environmental management at the firm level, thereby promoting sustainable consumption
and production of textiles.
Managerial issues have been completely ignored by previous researchers in the context
of environmental management in this industry. Various internal factors in form of nature of

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

Table 3 Evidences for market-driven sustainability strategies

Activities Measures adopted by firms Author/year Country

Overview of market-driven strategies

Entering new Firms diversification into new Ho (2014), Hansen and Germany,
environmental environmental segments such as Schaltegger (2013), Rieple Hong
markets or market organic cotton industry and natural and Singh (2010), Silva and Kong,
segments and recycled fibres to ensure wider Teixeira (2008) India
social and environmental benefits in
terms of low cost of pest
management, increased yield and
reduced crop failure
Introducing new Use of 100% organic cotton, T-shirts Niinimäki and Hassi (2011), Europe,
environmentally and baby wear made of organic Rieple and Singh (2010) India
oriented products cotton
Water-friendly sustainable types of Shen (2014)
denim
Redesign products Integrated production of natural fibres Hansen and Schaltegger Germany,
to be and replacement of natural fibre to (2013), Rieple and Singh India
environmentally minimize the use of pesticides (2010), Abreu (2015)
sensitive Expertise in converting materials
such as military laundry bags and
seat belts into new fashion products
Substitution of natural fibre with
man-made fibre from renewable
sources such as cellulose or milk
proteins
Advertise Entering green retailing and Shen (2014), Shen et al. Germany,
environmental educating consumers about (2012), Gardetti and Torres UK
benefits/green environmental issues and giving (2012), De Brito et al. (2008)
marketing them incentives like 15% off
coupons to promote sustainable
actions
Use of GOTS certified products and Allwood et al. (2008), Caniato UK, USA
other ecolabels such as Oeko-Tex et al. (2012), Almeida
Standard 100 (2015), Choudhary (2015)
Redesigning Use of reusable packages, removal of Shen (2014), Srinivasan and Germany,
product packages outward card boxes to minimize the Lu (2014), Wever and UK,
packaging size Vogtlander (2013) Ireland
Introducing take back systems along Pedersen and Andersen (2013)
with various repair and recycling
techniques

work and role of employees also play a role in determining the extent to which sustain-
ability practices are adopted, and a fundamental shift in organization’s culture is needed to
achieve sustainable production. In various other manufacturing sectors, firms are entering
environmental, inter-firm and supply chain collaborations with each other (Rao and Holt
2005; Vachon and Klassen 2008; Gold et al. 2010; Elliot 2013; Moon et al. 2012; Zhang
et al. 2013; Harms et al. 2013; Wu et al. 2014; Diabat et al. 2014). Further research may
focus on examining the role of collaboration between industry partners, textile mills and
brands along the supply chain as many global brands and retailers such as Marks and
Spencer, Walmart, Nike, Levi Strauss and H&M are actively looking towards working
with green manufacturers to seek joint solutions towards sustainable manufacturing.

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

More insights are needed to find out firm-related factors such as management com-
mitment, managerial perceptions towards environmental issues and their response in form
of strategies, internal resource constraints etc, particularly in the case of countries which
serve as production hubs for the textile industry and where environmental pollution is a
major issue.
There is also a need to identify how the comparison can be drawn between multinational
companies and domestic firms with respect to motivations, strategic response and barriers
across the supply chain to ensure the implementation of global standards. Following
questions need to be examined through empirical research: What are the internal stake-
holder pressures driving textile firms to go green? What constraints a textile manufacturing
firm to pursue environmental goals? Is it lack of resources and capability and no short-term
benefit or lack of support from top management? What is the level of awareness amongst
managers and employees towards sustainable practices? How do they perceive sustain-
ability issues? Is there any relationship between the awareness level, practices adopted and
firm performance?
The response of firms towards sustainability issues show that firms are taking active
steps to improve their environmental performance and competitiveness, but research is
mainly skewed towards developed countries. The global nature of textile industry requires
supply chain focus towards integrating environmental issues as most of the developing
countries such as India, Bangladesh and Pakistan are manufacturing hubs for this industry,
whereas developed countries are on the consumption front. The role of supply chain
collaborations in development, design, use and disposal of fashion clothes needs to be
explored. The fact as to whether already such supply chain alliances have been able to
fetch profits for firms also needs to be investigated? On the firm side, it will be worthwhile
to explore various means firms can use to advertise and communicate environmental
benefits, and how do firms use this communication effort to justify costs and thereby
expand its market-driven strategies.
Consumer-driven barriers have been well explored by researchers as compared to other
stakeholders such as managers and top management, yet these studies do not make use of
advanced empirical examination and use of existing consumer behaviour models. What do
consumers perceive about ethical clothes and how these perceptions affect consumers’
decision-making process is also important. The role of information and awareness on
consumer front has been well documented, but how this is used by manufacturing firm
managers to launch new products needs attention by researchers. An effective communi-
cation strategy needs to be enforced in an appropriate manner to bridge the gap between
consumers’ perceptions and firm’s efforts.
Various product stewardship activities such as right use and disposal of used products
are extremely important in the context of their effectiveness. Studies need to be advanced
in examining the role of consumers in shaping firms’ environmental strategy and new
product development strategy in favour of sustainable production and consumption of
textiles.

References
Abernathy, F. H., Volpe, A., & Weil, D. (2006). The future of apparel and textile industries: Prospects and
choices for public and private actors. Environment and Planning, 38, 2207–2232.
Abreu, M. C. S. (2015). Perspectives, drivers and a roadmap for corporate social responsibility in textile and
clothing industry. Textile Science and Clothing Technology, 1, 1–21.

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

Achabou, M. A., & Dekhili, S. (2015). Constraints and drivers of growth in the ethical fashion sector: The
case of France. Sustainable Fashion Supply Chain Management, Springer Series in Supply Chain
Management, 1, 167–181.
Alkaya, E., & Demirer, G. N. (2014). Sustainable textile production: A case study from a woven fabric
manufacturing mill in Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 595–603.
Allwood, J. M., Laursen, S. E., de Rodrı́guez, C. M., & Bocken, N. M. P. (2006). Well dressed? The present
and future sustainability of clothing and textiles in the United Kingdom’’. Cambridge, UK: University
of Cambridge, Institute for Manufacturing.
Allwood, J. M., Laursen, S. E., Russell, S. N., de Rodrıguez, C. M., & Bocken, N. M. P. (2008). An
approach to scenario analysis of the sustainability of an industrial sector applied to clothing and textiles
in the UK. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16, 1234–1246.
Almeida, L. (2015). Ecolabels and organic certification for textile products. Roadmap to sustainable textiles
and clothing. Textile Science and Clothing Technology. doi:10.1007/978-981-287-164-0_7.
Armstrong, C. M., Niinimäki, K., Kujala, S., Karell, E., & Lang, C. (2015). Sustainable product-service
systems for clothing: Exploring consumer perceptions of consumption alternatives in Finland. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 97, 30–39.
Arora, A., Jaju, A., Kefalas, A. G., & Perenich, T. (2004). An exploratory analysis of global managerial
mindsets: A case of US textile and apparel industry. Journal of International Management, 10,
393–411.
ASSOCHAM (2010). ‘‘Eco Pulse: India Textile Scenario,’’ http://www.fibre2fashion.com/industry-article/
21/2042/indias-textile-industry-still-spinning-a-gloomy-tale1.asp. Accessed 14 Nov 2013.
Baskaran, V., Nachiappan, S., & Rahman, S. (2012). Indian textile suppliers’ evaluation using grey
approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 135, 647–658.
Beske, P., Land, A., & Seuring, S. (2014). Sustainable supply chain management practices and dynamic
capabilities in the food industry: A critical analysis of the literature. International Journal of Pro-
duction Economics, 152, 131–143.
Bhaduri, G., & Ha-Brookshire, J. E. (2011). Do transparent business practices pay? Exploration of trans-
parency and consumer purchase intention. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 29(2), 135–149.
Blackburn, R. S. (2009). Sustainable textiles, lifecycle and environmental impact. Cambridge, MA:
Woodhead Publishing Limited.
Butler, S. M., & Francis, S. (1997). The effects of environmental attitudes on apparel purchasing behavior.
Clothing and Textile Research Journal, 15, 76–85.
Caniato, F., Caridi, M., Crippa, L., & Moretto, A. (2012). Environmental sustainability in fashion supply
chains: An exploratory case based research. International Journal of Production Economics, 135,
659–670.
Chan, T. Y., & Wong, C. W. Y. (2012). The consumption side of sustainable fashion supply chain
understanding fashion consumer eco-fashion consumption decision. Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management, 16, 193–215.
Chen, H., & Burns, D. L. (2006). Environmental analysis of textile products. Clothing and Textile Research
Journal, 24, 248–261.
Chico, D., Aldaya, M. M., & Garrido, A. (2013). A water footprint assessment of a pair of jeans: the
influence of agricultural policies on the sustainability of consumer products. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 57, 238–248.
Choudhary, A. K. (2015). Development of ecolabels for sustainable textiles. Textile Science and Tech-
nology, 6, 137–173.
Clemens, B. (2001). Changing environmental strategies over time: An empirical study of the steel industry
in the US. Journal of Environmental Management, 62, 221–231.
Dasgupta, J., Sikder, J., Chakraborty, S., Curcio, S., & Drioli, E. (2015). Remediation of textile effluents by
membrane based treatment techniques: A state of the art review. Journal of Environmental Man-
agement, 147, 55–72.
Diebäcker, M. (2000). Environmental and social benchmarking for industrial processes in developing
countries: A pilot project for the textile industry in India, Indonesia and Zimbabwe. Integrated
Manufacturing Systems, 11, 491–500. doi:10.1108/09576060010349794.
De Brito, M. P., Carbone, V., & Blanquart, C. M. (2008). Towards a sustainable fashion retail supply chain
in Europe: Organization and performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 114,
534–553.
Defra (UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs). (2008). Sustainable Clothing Roadmap
Briefing Note December 2007: Sustainability Impacts of Clothing and Current Interventions. London:
Defra.

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

Diabat, A., Kannan, D., & Mathiyazhagan, K. (2014). Analysis of enablers for implementation of sus-
tainable supply chain management: A textile case. Journal of Cleaner Production, 8, 391–403.
Dickson, M. (1999). US consumer’s knowledge of and concern with apparel sweatshops. Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management, 3(1), 44–55.
Dickson, M. (2000). Personal values, beliefs, knowledge, and attitudes relating to intentions to purchase
apparel from socially responsible businesses. Clothing and Textile Research Journal, 18(1), 19–30.
Eder-Hansen, J., Kryger, J., Morris, J., Sisco, C., Watson, D., Kiørboe, N., Dahlgren Petersen, S., Bang
Larsen, K., & Burchardi, I. (2012). The NICE Consumer. Research summary and discussion paper
toward a framework for sustainable fashion consumption in the EU. Copenhagen: Danish Fashion
Institute & BSR.
Elliot, S. (2013). A transdisciplinary exploratory model of corporate responses to the challenges of envi-
ronmental sustainability. Business Strategy and Environment, 22, 269–282.
FICCI (2008). ‘‘Study on slowdown in India’s textile industry,’’ Retrieved from www.fiber2fashion.com.
Fletcher, K. (2008). Sustainable fashion and textiles: Design journeys. London: Earth Scan.
Fletcher, K., & Grose, L. (2012). Fashion and sustainability: Design for change. London: Lawrence King.
Gardetti, M.A., & Torres, A.L. (2012). A special issue on textiles, fashion and sustainability. Journal of
Corporate Citizenship, 45.
Global Market Report on Sustainable Textiles, Executive Summary (2010). Textile exchange, (pp. 1–7).
Goworek, H. (2011). Social and environmental sustainability in the clothing industry: A case study of a fair-
trade retailer. Social Responsibility Journal, 7, 74–86. doi:10.1108/17471111111114558.
Goworek, H., Fisher, T., Cooper, T., Woodward, S., & Hiller, A. (2012). The sustainable clothing market: an
evaluation of potential strategies for UK retailers. International Journal Retail Distribution Man-
agement, 40, 935–955. doi:10.1108/09590551211274937.
Gupta, M., & Hodges, N. (2012). Corporate social responsibility in the apparel industry: An exploration of
Indian consumers’ perceptions and expectations. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 16,
216–233.
Ha-Brookshire, J., & Norum, P. (2011). Cotton and sustainability: Impacting student learning through
sustainable cotton summit. International Journal Sustainability Higher Education, 12(4), 369–380.
doi:10.1108/14676371111168287.
Handfield, R., Sroufe, R., & Walton, S. (2005). Integrating environmental management and supply chain
strategies. Business Strategy and Environment, 14, 1–19.
Hansen, E. G., & Schaltegger, S. (2013). 100 percent organic? A sustainable entrepreneurship perspective on
the diffusion of organic clothing. Corporate Governance, 13, 583–598.
Harms, D., Hansen, E. G., & Schaltegger, S. (2013). Strategies in sustainable supply chain management: An
empirical investigation of large German companies. In: Corporate Social Responsibility Environment
Management, 20, pp. 205–218. Published online 24 May 2012 in Wiley Online Library (wileyon-
linelibrary.com). doi:10.1002/csr.1293.
Hasanbeigi, A., & Price, L. (2012). A review of energy use and energy efficiency technologies for the textile
industry. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16, 3648–3665.
Herva, M., Franco, A., Ferreiro, S., Alvarez, A., & Roca, E. (2008). An approach for the application of the
ecological footprint as an environmental indicator in the textile sector. Journal of Hazardous Material,
156, 478–487.
Hethorn, J., & Ulasewicz, C. (Eds.). (2008). Sustainable fashion, why now? A conversation about issues,
practices, and possibilities. New York: Fairchild Books.
Hill, J., & Lee, H.-H. (2012). Young generation Y consumers’ perceptions of sustainability in the apparel
industry. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 16(4), 477–491.
Hiller Connell, K. Y. (2010). Internal and external barriers to eco-conscious apparel acquisition. Interna-
tional Journal of Consumer Studies, 34(1), 279–286.
Hiremath, R. B., Kattumuri, R., Kumar, B., Khatri, V. N., & Patil, S. S. (2012). An integrated networking
approach for a sustainable textile sector in Solapur, India. Urbaniizziv, 23, 140–151.
Ho, C. K. D. (2014). A case study of H&M’s strategy and practices of corporate environmental sustain-
ability. In: Logistics, Operations, supply chain management and sustainability, eco production (pp.
241–254). Book chapter, ISBN 9873319072876. 9783319072869. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07287-6_16.
Hong, G.-B., Su, T.-L., Lee, J.-D., Hsu, T.-C., & Chen, H.-W. (2010). Energy conservation potential in
Taiwanese textile industry. Energy Policy, 38, 7048–7053.
Hossain, A., & Marinova, D. (2003). Assessing tools for sustainability: Bangladesh context. Proceedings of
the second meeting of the academic forum of regional government for sustainable development.
Fremantle, Australia.
Joergens, C. (2006). ‘‘Ethical fashion: Myth or future trend? Journal of Fashion Marketing and Manage-
ment, 10(3), 360–371.

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

Jørgensen, M. S., & Jensen, C. L. (2012). The shaping of environmental impacts from Danish production
and consumption of clothing. Ecological Economics, 83, 164–173.
Jorgensen, M. S., Jorgensen, U., & Hendriksen, K. (2010). Environmental management in Danish textile
transnational textile product chains. Management Research Review, 33(4), 357–379.
Kalliala, E., & Talvenmaa, P. (2000). Environmental profile of textile wet processing in Finland. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 8, 143–154.
Kane, C. D. (2001). Environmental and health hazards in spinning industry and their control. Indian Journal
of Fiber and Textile Research, 26, 39–43.
Kant, R. (2012). Textile dyeing industry an environmental hazard. Natural Science, e4(1), 22–26. doi:10.
4236/ns.2012.41004.
Karaalp, H. S., & Yilmaz, N. D. (2012). Comparative advantage of textiles and clothing: Evidence for
Bangladesh, China, Germany and Turkey. Fibers Text Eastern Europe, 21(1), 14–17.
Karthik, T., & Gopalakrishnan, D. (2014). Environmental analysis of textile value chain: An overview. In: S.
S. Muthu (Ed.), Roadmap to sustainable textiles and clothing, textile science and clothing technology,
edition: 2014, chapter: Environmental analysis of textile value chain: An overview, (pp. 153–188).
Singapore: Springer.
Khandegar, V., & Saroha, A. K. (2013). Electrocoagulation for the treatment of textile industry effluent: A
review. Journal of Environmental Management, 128, 949–963.
Kim, H., & Damhorst, M. R. (1998). Environmental concern and apparel consumption. Clothing and
Textiles Research Journal, 16, 126–133.
Kim, S., Littrell, M. A., & Ogle, J. L. P. (1999). The relative importance of social responsibility as a
predictor of purchase intentions for clothing. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 3(3),
207–218.
Lo, C. K. Y., Yeung, C. L. A., & Cheng, T. C. E. (2012). The impact of environmental management systems
on financial performance in fashion and textile industries. International Journal of Production Eco-
nomics, 135, 561–567.
McAdam, R., & McClelland, J. (2002). Sources of new product idea and creativity practices in the UK
textile industry. Technovation, 22, 113–121.
Moon, K., Ying, C., & Ngai, E. (2012). An instrument for measuring supply chain flexibility for the textile
and clothing companies. European Journal of Operational Research, 222(2), 191–203.
Narayanaswamy, V., & Scott, J. A. (2001). Lessons from cleaner production experiences in Indian hosiery
clusters. Journal of Cleaner Production, 9, 325–340.
Nieminen, E., Linke, M., Tobler, M., & Beke, B. V. (2007). EU COST Action 628: Life cycle assessment
(LCA) of textile products, eco-efficiency and definition of best available technology (BAT) of textile
processing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 1259–1270.
Niinimäki, K. (2010). Eco-clothing, consumer identity and ideology. Sustainable Development, 18,
150–162. doi:10.1002/sd.455.
Niinimäki, K., & Hassi, L. (2011). Emerging design strategies in sustainable production and consumption of
textiles and clothing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 1876–1883.
Ozturk, E., Karaboyacı, M., Yetis, U., Yigit, N. O., & Kitis, M. (2015). Evaluation of integrated pollution
prevention control in a textile fiber production and dyeing mill. Journal of Cleaner Production, 88,
116–124.
Parker, E. (2011). Steps towards sustainability in fashion: Snapshot Bangladesh.
Parvathi, C., Maruthavanan, T., & Prakash, C. (2009). Environmental impacts of textile industries. The
Indian Textile Journal, 120(2), 22.
Pedersen, E. R. G., & Andersen, K. R. (2013). The SocioLog. dx experience: A global expert study on
sustainable fashion. Copenhagen Business School Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility
(cbsCSR).
Peinado-Vara, E. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Latin America. Journal of Corporate Citizenship
Springer, 21, 61–69.
Powell, I., & Prostko-Bell, C. (2010). Leveraging EHS data and tools for a safer and greener supply chain.
EHS Today, May 1, (pp. 27–29).
Reddy, B. S., & Ray, B. K. (2011). Understanding industrial energy use: Physical energy Intensity changes
in Indian manufacturing sector. Energy Policy, 39, 7234–7243.
Ren, A. (2000). Development of environmental performance indicators for textile process and product.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 8, 473–481.
Resta, B., Dotti, S., Pinto, R., & Gaiardelli, P. (2013). A decision-making process for sustainability in the
textile sector. International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP), APMS, Part II, IFIP AICT,
415, 418–425.

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

Rieple, A., & Singh, R. (2010). A value chain analysis of the organic cotton industry: The case of UK
retailers and Indian suppliers. Ecological Economics, 69(11), 2292–2302.
Santos, A. B., Cervantes, F. J., & VanLier, J. B. (2007). Review paper on current technologies for
decolourisation of textile wastewaters: Perspectives for anaerobic biotechnology. Bioresource Tech-
nology, 98, 2369–2385.
Sen, A. (2008). The US fashion industry: A supply chain review. International Journal of Production
Economics, 114, 371–393.
Seyoum, B. (2007). Trade liberalization and patterns of strategic adjustment in the US textiles and clothing
industry. International Business Review, 16, 109–135.
Shen, B. (2014). Sustainable fashion supply chain: Lessons from H&M. Sustainability, 6, 6236–6249.
Shen, B., Wang, Y., Lo, C. K. Y., & Shum, M. (2012). The impact of ethical fashion on consumer purchase
behavior. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 16(2), 234–245.
Sherburne, A. (2009). Achieving sustainable textiles: A designer’s perspective’. In R. S. Blackburn (Ed.),
Sustainable textiles: Life cycle and environmental impact. Cambridge, MA: Woodhead Publishing
Limited/The Textile Institute.
Silva, R. V., & Teixeira, N. (2008). Environmental business strategy: The Portuguese case. Business
Strategy and Environment, 17, 208–218.
Simi, T. B. (2012). Indian textile & clothing sector environmental standards and consumer knowledge in the
EU. Briefing paper, CUTS International CITEE (2).
Stead, J. G., & Stead, W. E. (2008a). Sustainable strategic management: An evolutionary perspective.
International Journal Sustainable Strategic Management, 1, 62–81.
Thiry, M. C. (2011). Staying alive: Making textiles sustainable. AATCC Review November/December 2011
www.aatcc.org.
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) 2012. Annual report. http://www.unido.org/
fileadmin/user_media/PMO/PBC/PBC29/13-80554_AR2012_Ebook.pdf.
Vajnhandi, S., & Valh, J. V. (2014). The status of water reuse in European textile sector. Journal of
Environmental Management, 141, 29–35.
Verma, S. (2002). Export competitiveness of Indian Textile and Garment industry. Working paper No. 94,
Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations.
Wenzel, H., & Knudsen, H. H. (2005). Water savings and reuse in the textile industry. Modern Tools and
Methods of Water Treatment for Improving Living Standards, 48, 169–189.
Wu, G.-C., Ding, J.-H., & Chen, P. S. (2012). The effects of GSCM drivers and institutional pressures on
GSCM practices in Taiwan’s textile and apparel industry. International Journal of Production Eco-
nomics, 135, 618–636.
Winge, T. M. (2008). Green is the new black’: Celebrity chic and the ‘green’ commodity fetish. Fashion
Theory, 12(4), 511–524.
Youngjoo, N., & Dong Kyu, N. (2015). Investigating the sustainability of the Korean textile and fashion
industry. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, 27(1), 23–33.
Zabaniotou, A., & Andreou, K. (2010). Development of alternative energy sources for GHG emissions
reduction in the textile industry by energy recovery from cotton ginning waste. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 18, 784–790.

Appendix (additional managerial studies supporting the review)

Bohdanowicz, P. (2006). Environmental awareness and initiatives in the Swedish and Polish hotel indus-
tries—Survey results. International Journal of Hospitality Management, V25(4), 662–668.
Bönte, W., & Dienes, C. (2013). Environmental innovations and strategies for the development of new
production technologies: Empirical evidence from Europe. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22,
501–516.
Brunke, J-C., Johansson, M., & Thollander, P. (2014). Empirical investigation of barriers and drivers to the
adoption of energy conservation measures, energy management practices and energy services in the
Swedish iron and steel industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 84, 509–525.
Chkanikova, O., & Mont, O. (2012). Corporate supply chain responsibility: Drivers and barriers for sus-
tainable food retailing. Corporate Social Responsibility Environmental Management. Published online
in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). doi: 10.1002/csr.1316.
Dalton, G. J., Lockington, D. A., & Baldock, T. E. (2008). A survey of tourist attitudes to renewable energy
supply in Australian hotel accommodation. Renewable Energy, 33, 2174–2185.
Darnall, N., & Edwards, D. (2006). Predicting the cost of environmental management system adoption: the
role of capabilities, resources and ownership structure. Strategic Management Journal, 27(4), 301–320.

123
 A. Desore, S. A. Narula

Daub, C., & Ergenzinger, R. (2005). Enabling sustainable management through a new multi-disciplinary
concept of customer satisfaction. European Journal of Marketing, 39(9), 998–1012.
Devinney, T., Auger, P., & Eckhardt, G.M. (2011). Value vs Value: New research revealing a disparity
between what shoppers say and what they do debunks the myth of the ethical consumer. Strat-
egy ? Business 62.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Walter, W. P. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective
rationality in organizational fields. American Socio-logical Review, 48, 147–160.
EPA progress report (2010). Science and research at the US. Environmental Protection Agency.http://
www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-12/documents/annual-report-2010.pdf.
FICCI Water Mission (2011). Water use in Indian industry survey, New Delhi.
Gold, S., Seuring, S., & Beske, P. (2010). Sustainable supply chain management and inter organizational
resources: A literature review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 17,
230–245.
Gozalez-Benito, J., & Gozalez- Benito, O. (2006). A review of determinant factors of environmental
proactivity. Business Strategy and Environment, 15, 87–102.
Hart, S. (1995). A natural resource based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4),
966–1014.
Hart, S., & Ahuja, G. (1996). Does it pay to be green? An empirical examination of the relationship between
pollution prevention and firm performance. Business Strategy and Environment, 5(1), 30–37.
Ho, H. P.-Y., & Choi, T.-M. (2012). A Five-R analysis for sustainable fashion supply chain management in
Hong Kong: A case analysis. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 16, 161–175. doi:10.
1108/13612021211222815.
Jeswani, H. K., Wehrmeyer, W., & Mulugetta, Y. (2008). How warm is the corporate response to climate
change? Evidence from Pakistan and the UK. Business Strategy and Environment, 18, 46–60.
Kasim, A. (2007). Towards a wider adoption of environmental responsibility in the hotel sector. Interna-
tional Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 8(2), 25–49.
Lee, S. Y. (2008). Drivers for the participation of small and medium-sized suppliers in green supply chain
initiatives. Supply Chain Management, 13, 185–198.
Mahler, D. (2007). Spotlight on supply chain management: the sustainable supply chain. Supply Chain
Management Review, 11(8), 59–60.
Min, H., & Galle, W. P. (2001). Green purchasing practices of US firms. International Journal of Operations
Production Management, 21, 1222–1238.
Mittal, V. K., & Sangwan, K. S. (2014). Prioritizing barriers to green manufacturing: environmental, social
and economic perspectives. Procedia CIRP, 17, 559–564.
Mohr, L., & Webb, D. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of
corporate social responsibility on buying behaviour. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–72.
Ngai, E. W. T., Chau, D. C. K., Poon, J. K. L., & To, C. K. M. (2013). Energy and utility management
maturity model for sustainable manufacturing process. International Journal of Production Economics,
146, 453–464.
Ottman, J. A. (2006). The Rules of Green Marketing’’, Marketing Profs at http://www.marketingprofs.com/
6/ottman1.aspas. Retrieved on May 2015.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York: The Free Press.
Potts, J., Lynch, M., Wilkings, A., Huppé, G., Cunningham, M., & Voora, V. (2014). The state of sus-
tainability initiatives review 2014: Standards and the green economy. International Institute for Sus-
tainable Development (IISD) and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED),
p. 332.
Rao, P., & Holt, D. (2005). Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance?
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25, 898–916.
Rex, E., & Baumann, H. (2007). Beyond ecolabels: What green marketing can learn from conventional
marketing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 567–576.
Sezen, B., & Cankaya, S. (2013). Effects of green manufacturing and eco-innovation on sustainability
performance. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 99, 154–163.
Sharma, S., Pablo, A. L., & Vrendenburg, H. (1999). Corporate environmental responsiveness strategies: the
importance of issue interpretation and organizational context. Journal of Applied Behaviour Science,
35, 87–108.
Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. The Academy of
Management Review, 20, 936–960.
Shrivastava, P. (1996). Greening Business. Cincinnati, OH: Thompson Executive Press.

123
Title: an overview on corporate response towards…

Simchi-Levi, D. (2008), ‘‘Going green in the supply chain’’, Manufacturing and Logistics IT, July 9. www.
logisticsit.com/absolutenm/templates/article-supplychain.aspx?articleid=3781&zoneid=5. Accessed 1
June 2015.
Srinivasan, S., & Lu, W. (2014). Development of a supporting tool for sustainable FMCG packaging
designs. Procedia CIRP, 15, 395–400.
Stead, W. E., & Stead, J. G. (1995). An empirical investigation of sustainability strategy implementation in
industrial organizations. In D. Collins & M. Starik (Eds.), Research in Corporate Social Performance
and Policy, Supplement 1 (pp. 43–66). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Stead, J. G., & Stead, W. E. (2008b). Sustainable strategic management: An evolutionary perspective. Int.
J. Sustainable strategic management, 1, 62–81.
Tortella, B. D., & Tirado, D. (2011). Hotel water consumption at a seasonal mass tourist destination. The
case of the Island of Mallorca. Journal of Environmental Management, 92, 2568–2579.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence- informed
management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207–222.
Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D. (2008). Environmental management and manufacturing performance: The role
of collaboration in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 111, 299–315.
Wagner, M. (2005). How to reconcile environmental and economic performance to improve corporate
sustainability: Corporate environmental strategies in the European paper industry. Journal of Envi-
ronmental Management, 76, 105–118.
Walker, H., & Jones, N. (2012). Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private Sector. Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(1), 15–28.
Walker, H., Sisto, L. D., & McBain, D. (2008). Drivers and barriers to environmental supply chain man-
agement practices: Lessons from the public and private sectors. Journal of Purchasing Supply Man-
agement, 14, 69–85.
Wever, R., & Vogtlander, J. (2013). Eco- efficient value creation: An alternative perspective on packaging
and sustainability. Packaging Technology and Science, 26(4), 229–248.
Williams, H. E., Medhhurst, J., & Drew, K. (1993). Corporate strategies for a sustainable future. In K.
Fischer & J. Schot (Eds.), Environmental strategies for industry (pp. 117–146). Washington, DC:
Island Press.
Williams, K. C., & Page, R. A. (2011). Marketing to the generations. Journal of Behavioral Studies in
Business, 5(1), 1–17.
Wu, T., Jim Wu, Y. C., Chen, Y. J., & Goh, M. (2014). Aligning supply chain strategy with corporate
environmental strategy: A contingency approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 147,
220–229. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.02.027.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and Methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Zhang, F., Rio, M., Allais, R., Zwolinski, P., Carrillo, T. R., Roucoules, L., et al. (2013). Towards a
systematic navigation framework to integrate sustainable development into the company. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 54, 199–214.
Zhu, Q., & Geng, Y. (2013). Drivers and barriers of extended supply chain practices for energy saving and
emission reduction among Chinese manufacturers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 30, 6–12.
Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2006). An inter-sectoral comparison of green supply chain management in China:
Drivers and practices. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(5), 472–486.

123
View publication stats