by anine.hallen -

Design philosophies of Northern Playground and H&M Group

In this blog I will look into two design philosophies from two very different companies. What are the benefits of these strategies, and what are the challenges?

Northern Playground, “Our job is to make it easier and more fun to own less.”

Two main principles:

  • Duration (physical and non-physical)
  • Multi functionality (for all occasions and adventures)

Looks and functionality:

Northern Playground mainly uses one design strategy. This is designing with simple designs, multi functionality and keep-worthiness. Their design process is slow and never puts looks over functionality. Northern Playground never launch something new unless they belive it fills a hole in their collection and that it will stay a classic “forever.”

Quality:

The clothes from Northern Playground should have long lifetime and high quality through repairability, less chemicals, needing less washing and designing the garment first and then setting an appropriate price. The clothes should also be possible to recycle.

Supply chains:

Employees in their supply chain should have more than a living wage. They should have good lives and good working conditions. In addition there is full transparency in who Northern Playground partner with.

Read more:

Read more about Northern Playgrounds design strategy here: https://www.northernplayground.no/en/content/design-philosophy, and more about their buisness models, processes etc. here: https://www.northernplayground.no/en/environment

H&M Group, “…guide to designing more circular products.”

Three pillars, designing products to be:

  • used more
  • made to be made again
  • made from safe and recycled or renewable inputs

Looks and functionality:

According to H&M Group’s “Circulator Guide” they try to place each product in a “Frequency and Lifespan” diagram before they decide on materials etc. The default before they as themselves a few questions is wear monthly and lasting for 3 years. This is not particualary ambitious.

If we wear 6 garments (pants, undershirt, shirt, sweater, jacket + underwear/socks etc.) every day, one new outfit every day in the month, for 12 months a year that would mean you would have to buy and toss 2160 garments in 3 years. This is excluding pyjamas, home wear, workout clothes etc. If most of these clothes are then placed in H&M Group’s “Mid” category they are not that designed well for recyclability, and most will end up outside of that system anyways as recycling clothes is a very overwhelmed industry.

Quality

H&M Group has a different approach than Northern Playground when it comes to the quality of their clothes. They argue that clothes which are designed for being in the “Extensive” product category should have physical and some non-physical (eg. lovability) durability. However, products in the “Mid” and “Light” category should NOT be designed for durability, but rather recyclability. They at best put medium pressure on repairability and avoiding waste.

Supply chains:

Ad H&M Group is a giant in fashion is hard to get the overview of all the suppliers and working conditions. They are part of the Transparency Pledge.

Read more:

Design strategy of H&M Group: https://hmgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Circulator_Guide_v1.0.pdf

What to take from this?

  • Northern Playground is designing for “timelessness,” but will probably struggle to target people who want to express themselves through fashion with their muted colors and simple silhouettes.
  • Northern Playground designs every piece in the same spirit. This leads to transparency and trust for the customer
  • H&M Group design with different strategies for how to reduce the overall environmental impact. For as long as we produce clothes ment to only last a short while this is probably a good thing as it reduces emissions. ““Focusing on developing all products to be more durable could potentially lead to us using more resources than a garment requires.” However, this makes it more unclear for the customer what type of garment they are buying. It also drives prices down which lead to overconsumption.

by anine.hallen -

Precedent study of Northern Playground

In this post I will study how Northern Playground, a small clothing company, makes their production and business as little un-sustainable as possible. They belive no clothing company can be fully sustainable, but of course they can be better or worse. This is how they try to be better:

“Sustainable materials do not exist. Period.” This is how the text starts if you make two simple clicks (Menu > Environment) on the webpage of Northern Playground. This is surprisingly honest when we have gotten used to green labels with “Conscious” written all over on fast fashion giant H&M and many more. Northern Playground is a Norwegian company who is trying to change the textile industry in a way that has real impact.

One click on the menu button and Products and Environment is the equal size.

In the beginning of the company’s life Jo Egil Tobiassen, the brain behind it, thought sustainability was complicated, he tells E24. However, after educating himself he found that it isn’t “how” we produce clothing that is the main issue, it is “how much.” But if his company wants to have a real impact, they also need to grow. This is a real paradox for small, “sustaiable” brands. Tobiassen explains that one way they are doing this is avoiding sale and avoiding middle men. This way the earn more on fewer articles on clothing. (https://e24.no/det-groenne-skiftet/i/8Qkd4r/klesgrunderen-som-vil-at-du-skal-kjoepe-mindre-vil-vokse-mer)

Reducing clothing consumption

Lifetime service: Repairs are made easy by providing knowledge and tools to repair the garment yourself or it can be executed for free by the company. Northern Playground also takes care of recycling when the garment is truly worn out. Producing in only wool makes recycling much easier as this is a highly recyclable material. (https://www.northernplayground.no/en/lifetime-service)

Their business model includes the users: Northern Playground was tired of the guessing game most companies do when deciding on product design and the amount to produce. This leads to massive overproduction, and never-used garments ends at landfills. Northern Playground have developed a big user group who they get feedback from in the design, testing and decision phase. (https://www.northernplayground.no/en/content/our-model)

A clothing company requesting environmental tax: In addition to having put a self-imposed environmental tax on themself (to spend on repairing etc.) Northern Playground is also working part politically to request for an environment tax to be put in place in Norway. (https://www.northernplayground.no/en/content/letter-to-the-government-4, https://www.northernplayground.no/en/content/environmental-tax)

Slow fashion: Producing classic designs who lasts a long time and not releasing a new collection just because a new session arrived keeps the new for bying new things all the time down. Of course this is easier for a company producing wool garments to be used as basics. However, Northern Playground is actively working for owning garments who can serve multiple purposes to become a more accepted standard. (https://www.northernplayground.no/en/content/we-dont-need-collections)

In addition Northern Playground has an open communication about overconsumption as a problem, avoids discounts and design for high quality as a priority over low prices.

Reducing their footprint

Norther Playground of course design for reducing the enviornmental impact from each garment in other ways than ensuring a long lifetime for each garment. They also:

– produce partially (very) locally in Oslo, partially in Europe (at the only manufacturer in the world who fulfills Greenpeace’s environmental standards
– only use (partially organic) natural materials
– use recyclable packaging and no plastic
– ensure a sustainable culture among employees
– believes in and acts with transparency
(https://www.northernplayground.no/en/environment)

by anine.hallen -

Little progress among the giants largely because of lack of accountability and poor-quality data

This and the previous blog post are looking into two major reports about the state of sustainability in the fashion world. “The Business of Fashion Index 2022” is looking at the 30 largest companies in fashion and how they are doing over a variety of fields of sustainability.

“The Business of Fashion Index 2022” by The Business of Fashion

The Business of Fashion Index 2022 “examine the performance of the industry’s 30 largest publicly traded companies by revenue across three market segments: luxury, sportswear and high street (ed. ordinary clothes).” Although the original 15 companies from the last years report had some progress, this was “eclipsed” by the new additions’ inaction.

Business of Fashion (BoF) points at “limited accountability within the sector, poor-quality data and a lack of investment“ as some of the biggest obstacles. This is very clear when BoF writes that “some of the industry’s biggest players — including URBN, Skechers, Fila Holdings, Anta and HLA Group — provided little or no public detail about plans to tackle their environmental and social impact.”

Although this is quite dark, there are also positive news. Fast retailing had the biggest improvement (of 11 points) from last years report, showing some of the “technological innovation, policy cues and standardised reporting frameworks” in action. If the fashion industry can do more of this, if can lead to real change.

”The Index assesses companies’ progress towards ambitious 2030 goals across six impact categories: Transparency, Emissions, Water & Chemicals, Waste, Materials and Workers’ Rights.”

As we see in the figure, waste is one of the areas that has the lowest score overall. This is something “very easy” to work on by not overproducing (resulting in landfill material before it has even been in the store) and to use scrap products and cuttings in a mindful way. Transparency is also something that is also obvious to focus on as a smaller company as this is one of the advantages of being smaller.

For me it would be interesting to read the full report (behind a paywall) as a designer to make sure that I follow the parameters given by BoF. To take part in the politics of fashion would also be an impactful way of taking part of this world.

Source:

https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/sustainability/widespread-inaction-on-sustainability-eclipses-progress-at-fashions-biggest-companies/

by anine.hallen -

The richest are both the problem and the solution

As I have gotten more into the topic of the sustainability of fashion, I have found some interesting reports with different takes. This and the next blogpost will summarize and highlight some of the most important finds of two reports. I will also mention how I can use these finds further on.

“Unfit, Unfair, Unfashionable” by Hot or Cool

Hot or Cool’s report “Unfit, Unfair, Unfashionable” showes the divide in consumption between high and low income countries and people. They found that “the richest 20% in the UK emit 83% above the 1.5-target.” At the same time, “74% of people in Indonesia live below sufficiency consumption levels of fashion.” On average the fashion footprint need to be reduced by 2030 by 60% among the high income countries of G20, 40% by the upper-middle income countries while the low income countries are already below the 1.5-degree limit. This divide between high and low income is both clear between countries and within countries.

Within a representative sampling of G20 countries they found that the lowest and second to lowest income quintile is responsible for respectively 6-11% and 10-13%. The second to highest and highest on the other hand is responsible for respectively 24-26% and 36-42%. In simpler words: “On average, the fashion consumption of the richest 20% causes 20 times higher emissions than that of the poorest 20%. This ratio varies substantially across countries, following levels of income inequality.” This debunks the idea that the poor is responsible for the emission because they by “cheap” clothes. They often get blamed in discussion about the emissions of fashion, but it is time that the rich scale down on their consumption.

As reducing the number of purchases of new clothes much (respectively 4 and 3 times) more effective than increasing the use time or (what is considered achievable through) decarbonization of the fashion industry, this should be the focus. (https://hotorcool.org/unfit-unfair-unfashionable/)

Consumtion/emission with no action taken and a sufficient scenario
Consumption within countries differs very much relating to income level

In a way this is positive news. Reducing the amount of garments of high income people is a task possible to asses for small companies. This can be done by producing high quality, interesting and lovable pieces that can play many parts in a person’s wardrobe. If we can produce such pieces they can replace the feeling if need of new pieces. The other end, producing lower-emission garments for persons with low income, is a much more complex task. This needs to be assessed by the fast fashion companies and the fashion culture itself. This also needs to be done, but it won’t be as effective as changing the behavior of high income persons.

Another interesting find to consider is that in the UK, Italy and Germany the richest 20% need to reduce their footprint of fashion consumption by respectively 83%, 75% and 75%. However, in the fashion nation France this number is substantially lower, “only” 50% (https://hotorcool.org/unfit-unfair-unfashionable/). This point to the issue that fashion consumption is highly dependent on culture. “French women” is a trademark in fashion, known and praised for using fewer, versatile and timeless pieces instead of indulging in micro and fast trends.

Source:
https://hotorcool.org/unfit-unfair-unfashionable/

Full report:
https://hotorcool.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Hot_or_Cool_1_5_fashion_report_.pdf

by anine.hallen -

Why design outerwear?

In this post I will clarify and define my own motivations going into this project. It will be useful for me by checking with this post during the process to see if I am true to my own passions and wishes. As mentioned in the previous blog post I wish to research if designing “yet another clothing piece” can ever be called ethical and sustainable. This is because I have a personal wish to design outerwear that is flexible in use, comfortable and seen as something fun instead of something dreadful.

Since I was little I have been fascinated with clothing and how it affects us. When choosing a direction of study, I chose to not study fashion/textile because I could not see a way I could get into that industry with my ethics and sustainable responsibility. Now I find myself constantly “gliding towards” wanting to get into the designing and production of clothing, but being conflicted by the sustainable matter.

I have two main issues to address if I want to get into the clothing industry:
– how can I design clothing with a clear conscience regarding the climate crisis?
– how can I, as an industrial/interaction designer, contribute in the “fashion world” without a fashion degree?

I need an answer or at least an indication of something positive in these questions before I get into the actual designing of clothing. These questions will therefore be focused on by me in first phase of this project. To find answers I will look into similar phenomenons to see if I can draw any parallel lines.

Eventually I can also look into more specific ways to design clothing in more sustainable ways and how I as a non-fashion designer can help in these aspects.

by anine.hallen -

Deciding a on a topic between two opposites

For my first talk with Mr. Fabry we mainly talked about the topic of designing a digital tool as an aid before and during therapy agains depression. This is clearly an interaction design project and could be very interesting. Still, I have a passion project of designing more instrumental and lovable outerwear for winter. This is a project I know I want to execute at some point, but to me it does not scream interaction design. We still took the time to talk about it for five minutes, but that was not enough to decide what to do research on for a whole semester and if it would make sense in our field. Therefore I present both here as a way to process what I would prefer to do this semester.

Topic option 1 – Designing a digital tool for assistance before and during therapy against depression

Depression is one of the leading health struggles in the world. Even though there are good ways to effectively treat this condition for many cases, people with depression often find them self in a vacuum waiting for treatment. How can we make this waiting time more manageable and less likely to create worse mental struggles? Can a digital tool help a depressed person start their treatment before they receive traditional therapy? What does the tool need to consist of to be effective and manageable for someone who is already struggling to be productive in their everyday life? These are the questions I want to answer in this project.

Many people who experience depression also experience extreme waiting times before they are able to get the help that they need. There is clearly a gap between the demand and the supply of traditional therapy. For example, WHO has created a Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) to aid countries to increase services for people with mental […] disorders from non-specialist in mental health. I want to research if we can also help and train loved ones to better help their family member, partner or friend who struggle with depression before they get professional help.

There are many recognized methods depressed people can use as part of their journey to a healthier mind. To get started with these methods is often one of the first thing a therapist will help the patient with to make their life more manageable to deal with quite quickly. If a digital tool was successful in teaching people with depression about these methods this would have a dual positiv effect: the waiting time before therapy would be less destructive and more manageable, and the patient would already have startet their treatment when they arrive at their first therapy session. This could result in a more effective start of therapy, thereby shorter treatments and less waiting time for the next patient.

In this research there will be multiple answers that need answering:

  1. Does this type of tool already exist and why is it not more successful?
  2. What methods could/should or should not be used by a patient without professional supervision?
  3. How should a digital tool present these methods to make them accessible and manageable for a depressed person to deal with?
  4. How do other digital tools used for observation/follow-ups of other groups by professionals and non-professionals work? For example in relationships between athlete-trainer, patient-doctor or parent-teacher.
  5. Can this type of digital tool also be used during therapy or will it interfere with the therapist?

It is estimated by WHO that 5% of adults suffer from depression at any point globally. In some countries the number is even higher. Between 6% and 12% of the population is depressed at any point. There every sixth person is expected to experience depression in their lifetime. The tool would therefore be very impactful if it creates just a slight net positive.

Topic 2 – Designing outerwear for a more pleasurable experience in winter commuting

As the winter creeps upon us, so does the conversations about how horrible it is with all the layers and all the clothing we need to put on. Going to, being on and walking from a bus can leave you sweaty yet cold. If you have a car, would you be more likely to drive in the winter because of this uncomfortableness? Do you buy a new clothes every year in hopes of finding slightly less uncomfortable outerwear? I want to research how our winter clothing affects us and our decisions to find out whether or not I should put effort in making a perfect outerwear clothing line or if this would just be yet another empty promise in the name of the environment and wellness.

There are indications that uncomfortable clothing can lead to temporary increased stress and blood pressure (American Heart Association) and clothing we associate with smart people can lead us to solve difficult tasks better (Social Psychological and Personality Science). Personally I have both experienced and heard about others experiences of clumpy, ugly, wrongly tempered clothing when the colder weather comes. I can’t help but wonder how this makes ut feel and if our outerwear could help us make better decisions for ourselves and the environment.

In this research it will be relevant to explore:

  1. What do we already know about psychology and clothing/fashion? Does our clothing affect or mood or behavior?
  2. How do people experience their own outerwear? Are there some similarities between the clothing items that are experienced as successful/comfortable or the ones that are not?
  3. What characteristics is needed for someone to buy an item vs. to keep them and repair/perceive/love them for a long time?