Subscription services are evolving.
The traditional model provides one type of product at regular intervals in a convenient way – think of magazines or the milkman. A new iteration of the model, subscription boxes, uses this process with an added value service: the business curates a tailored selection of products.
Subscription services for clothing are in the early stages. Beauty, accessories and food work well in a subscription box because they’re relatively small compared to bulky clothing. Unfortunately, too, it feels a bit like a mail order catalogue way of shopping – despite subscription businesses having engaging ecommerce, social media and online content.
Despite its youth, two main models for subscription clothing services have emerged: ownership and rental. In both models, customers pay a variable monthly fee, but in the first one you keep the items you receive.
Rental services for clothing – like Moss Bros suit hire – are more widespread than rental subscription and the key difference is the monthly fee. The well-known UK business Girl Meets Dress hires out designer gowns without tying you to a contract, and wouldn’t be considered a subscription service.
The strongest USP for subscription clothing services is their curation of items to suit customers’ lifestyles, provided in a way that’s convenient and regular. Time is a precious commodity in the lives of working women, so subscription clothing services promote this flexible, personal USP quite strongly: “Get totes [deliveries] as often as you like” or “Return what you want, when you want”.
An overview of subscription clothing services
- In the early stages of business development
- Predominantly centred in the US
- Several focus on a specific market e.g. plus size, luxury, designer
- Customers can rent or own the clothing they receive
- Limited number of items in each ‘box’
- Varied price points
- Includes styling, shipping and cleaning services
Are subscription clothing services sustainable and ethical?
I’m interested in the sustainable and ethical (S&E) qualities of subscription clothing services – especially rental – because they offer a very different way of approaching and consuming fashion. There’s a huge opportunity to radically change how we perceive clothing ownership, but there are also a number of S&E issues inherent to the business model.
| POSITIVE S&E IMPACT | NEGATIVE S&E IMPACT |
| Significant increase in garment’s lifespan | Significant transportation costs and energy use |
| Encourages limited garment ownership | Potential environmental damage caused by dry cleaning |
| Reduces use of personal and public transport | Lots of material items needed to keep consumer options fresh |
| Reduces exposure to physical retail (including tactics which encourage spending) | Abundance of packaging |
| Encourages limited spending on clothing | Supply chain is not always transparent, e.g. where the clothes come from and who the stylists are |
Let’s look at a couple of the S&E impact areas in more detail.
Transport and packaging
Subscription clothing services rely on a network of transporters and distributors to make sure customers get their garments regularly and conveniently. Customers also need to use good transport systems to send clothes back, whether it’s rental or ‘try before your buy’.
The combined CO2 emissions from this sort of transportation could have a significant impact on the S&E credentials of a subscription clothing service business. Most are based in the US, with air and ground shipping options; for international customers, there’s added transport to a US address, then air or sea shipping. Frequent ‘swaps’ for rental mean frequent transport, and frequent emissions.
Packaging for shipping varies but there’s a recyclable element – the original cardboard box – and an un-recyclable element, the plastic returns bag. In itself it’s not a lot, but it could present an S&E issue if customers are maximising the service with multiple shippings each month.
Is transport and packaging an S&E problem for these businesses? They might not have any deeper negative impact than normal online shopping, nor might one full truck have as many emissions as hundreds of customers taking individual cars to the mall. But it’s still an area of higher consideration compared to high-street shopping (where packaging is opt-out and transport can be public).
Dry cleaning
Most of the services use dry cleaning at some point in the lifecycles of their garments. It’s more prevalent in rental subscription services, where items are destined to be worn by another person. Ownership subscription services might also use it to keep tried-on garments as clean as possible.
Traditional dry cleaning uses chemical solvents, which can cause physical damage to people handling them, and produces a range of chemical by-products, some of which are classified as hazardous waste in the US.
H&M estimates more than 30% of a garment’s climate footprint occurs post-purchase {1} due to care and disposal. It’s clear how the scale of dry-cleaning in subscription clothing service businesses could have serious S&E impact through the use of chemicals, production of toxic waste, and energy expended during the process.
Clothing care is also a key area of re-education for consumers. Critics argue we wash and dry clean clothes too often, and consume significant amounts of water in the process: about 15% of the water we use in our homes is on washing clothes. Could subscription clothing services do more to educate their consumers about this high-impact S&E issue?
Garment lifespan
One of the biggest S&E struggles of the fashion industry is what happens to clothing after it’s been worn – a garment’s ‘end-of-life’. Currently, huge numbers of garments are moved into second-hand shops, recycling centres, developing countries or landfill.
The rental subscription clothing services significantly increase a garment’s lifespan because clothing is sent back to be re-worn. When multiple customers wear the same garment, it reduces the need to produce lots of garments; one garment can serve many people. The lifespan of a garment increases compared to the traditional lifespan of purchasing, owning and discarding clothing.
When it comes to end-of-life, rental garments may have had more wear and could be easier to break down or recycle. One of the subscription clothing services offered consumers the opportunity to buy clothing no longer in the right condition to stay in the rental service, and donated others. End-of-life industries are widespread (like ragging) and subscription services could maximise their use.
Fast fashion, which relies on short garment lifespan, gives consumers the buzz of always having something new. What’s exciting about rental subscription clothing services is that buzz is still there – you can swap your garment for a new one whenever you want – but without the detrimental S&E effects that have been traditionally associated with the feeling.
Garment ownership
Another struggle for the fashion industry – and the individual – is the sheer volume of clothes purchased and owned by consumers. In a previous article, I mentioned ASOS had 25m orders in 2014. Inditex (owner of Zara and seven other brands) produces 948m garments each year {2}.
On an industrial scale, this can result in swathes of waste and vast amounts of energy expenditure in producing and disposing of those clothes. On an individual scale, more clothing means less space, more choice and more frustrating decision-making. Both rental and ownership subscription clothing services reduce this waste and stress through actively encouraging limited garment ownership.
The services’ different price banding gives you a set number of items each month (from one to five, on average), forcing consumers into limited spending and limited ownership. Compare this to an average shopping trip where, as we’ve all experienced, you’re likely to come away with much more than you intended.
Naturally, the rental subscription clothing services have a stronger S&E impact in this area than ownership models. By allowing customers to enjoy new fashions, while shedding the pre-conceived idea of ‘ownership’, consumers can take part in fashion without contributing as much stress and waste to the industry or the individual.
Conclusion
Subscription clothing services are an evolving offer with each branded service providing a slightly different experience; however, the key qualities of curation, delivery and efficiency all remain the same.
They have the potential to be sustainably and ethically sound, but their newly-developing business models and processes might need to be reconsidered. Some examples could be:
- Setting up local distribution centres to minimise transport
- Using recyclable packaging wherever possible
- Investing in cleaning technologies which aren’t environmentally damaging
- Educating customers on sustainability, especially in garment care
The key sustainable and ethical benefits of subscription clothing services are most apparent in rental business models: a garment’s lifespan is increased, reducing the end-of-life problems plaguing the industry, and the need for clothing ownership is decreased, reducing levels of individual and industrial stress.
Like many fledgling businesses, subscription clothing services either aren’t able to or choose not to report on their sustainable and ethical practices. However, for a business model (especially rental) which has such scope to demonstrate real impact in these areas, it might be worth considering.
As consumers have less time, less energy and less space, the idea of owning three beautiful garments for a month, chosen by a professional and easily swapped for a pleasurably-new item, is as appealing to customer interested in sustainable living as it is to a trend-led fashionista. For one or two subscription clothing services, this could become their USP.