Nisseluelandet—The Impact of Local Clothes for the Survival of a Textile Industry in Norway

ingridha på 22. juni 2018

Ingun Grimstad Klepp & Kirsi Laitala

Abstract

The article discusses the importance of local clothing for the survival of the Norwegian textile industry. It draws upon stakeholder interviews, as well as desktop research. Local clothes are discussed as they are understood by consumers, as knitted sweaters, bunads (Norwegian national costumes), and home-made clothing. The review shows how these products, and especially the materials used in their production, have been crucial for the continued existence of the Norwegian textile industry. We argue that the concept “local clothes” can contribute to showcasing resources outside the global “fast fashion” manufacturing system.

Click here to read the full article (tandfonline.com)

Use phase of apparel: A Literature review for Life Cycle Assessment with focus on wool.

ingridha på 24. februar 2018

Kirsi Laitala, Ingun Grimstad Klepp & Beverley Henry

Summary

This report presents a literature review of clothing use phase. The purpose is to support improved methodological development for accounting for the use phase in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of apparel. All relevant textile fibres are included in the review. However, the main focus is on wool. We ask whether the use of wool has different environmental impacts than clothes in other fibres. The report builds on a review of literature from the past 20 years. The review showed that clothing made from different materials are used, and reused in different ways. Wool is washed differently as it has about ten degrees lower washing temperature than the average laundry in Europe. Wool is also more likely to be either dry-cleaned or washed by hand than other textiles. Moreover, when dried, it is less likely to be tumble-dried.

When comparing the number of days between the washes of different types of clothes, we found that respondents were likely to use their woollen products about twice as long between washes compared to their equivalent cotton products. We also found that woollen products had a longer average lifespan and were more likely to be reused or recycled. There is a lot of research-based information available concerning the use and re-use of clothing, and we believe there are sufficient results available on which to base LCA studies. Furthermore, we believe that environmental tools that compare different fibres but exclude use phase provide misleading results. Including the use phase in fibre ranking benchmark tools will improve the rigour and accuracy of these tools for all fibres, compared to reporting results for fibre production only. However, we have also shown that there are several methodological, conceptual and empirical knowledge gaps in existing literature.

Click here to read the full report (researchgate.net)

Global laundering practices: Alternatives to machine washing

ingridha på 15. oktober 2017

Kirsi Laitala, Ingun Grimstad Klepp & Beverly Henry

Abstract

This article discusses laundering practices around the world including alternative methods such as washing by hand, airing, steaming, and dry-cleaning. These methods, which have received little attention in research, are often more suited toproducts made of wool, silk or other materials able to be cleaned using gentler techniques than more commonly used fibers such as cotton and synthetics. The material is based on extensive literature review from the past 20 years and reanalysis of previously unpublished survey data.The results show that washing by hand is common and that is the main laundering method in most rural areas of developing countries, but also significant for smaller portion of laundry in developed countries. Dry cleaning is less common, and mainly used for specific clothing items. Simple method such as airing can reduce the washing frequency, and thus reduce the environmental impacts resulting from the cleaning of clothes.

Click here to read the full article (oda.oslomet.no)

Opprinnelsesmerking av norsk ull

ingridha på 27. mars 2017

Gunnar Vittersø, Ingun Grimstad Klepp, Tone Skårdal Tobiasson og Kjersti Kviseth

Sammendrag

Hensikten med denne rapporten er å undersøke mulighetene for en opprinnelsesmerking av norsk ull. Et slikt merke kan bidra til økt bevissthet og oppmerksomhet om norsk ull både blant produsenter og forbrukere, og dermed styrke produksjon og salg av lokal ull. Rapporten diskuterer en rekke argumenter for en merkeordning. Blant annet at et offisielt merke kan være et hjelpemiddel mot en til dels uryddig markedsføring av ull som vi ser i dag. Dessuten kan det fremme ulike kvaliteter ved norsk ull.

Rapporten bygger på ulike data inkludert intervjuer med aktører i verdikjeden og forbrukerundersøkelser. Erfaringer med merkeordninger fra andre land samt ulike mat-og miljømerkeordninger er også diskutert. Rapporten kan fungere som et kunnskapsgrunnlag for en eventuell etablering av en merkeordning, og den utreder ulike alternative ordninger, men uten å ta stilling til hvordan en merkeordning faktisk bør organiseres.

Klikk her for å lese hele rapporten (oda.oslomet.no)

Summary

The purpose of this report is to examine the possibilities of a labelling scheme for origin of Norwegian wool. A label can help to raise awareness about Norwegian wool among both producers and consumers, thus strengthening production and sales of local wool. Norwegian wool has many properties that seen both from a quality and environmental perspective are favorable. A labelling scheme could also contribute to a more trustworthy marketing of wool. The report builds on diverse data such as interviews with stakeholders in the value chain as well as consumer surveys. Experiences with labelling schemes from other countries as well as different food and environmental labelling schemes are also discussed. The report serves as a knowledge base for the potential establishment of a new labelling scheme. It investigates various alternative arrangements without taking a definite stand on how a labelling scheme actually should be organized.

The full report is only available in Norwegian.

What’s the Problem? Odor-control and the Smell of Sweat in Sportswear

ingridha på 18. oktober 2016

Ingun Grimstad Klepp, Madeline Buck, Kirsi Laitala & Marit Kjeldsberg

Abstract

Sport and fitness are increasing in popularity, and so is awareness of body odor. Both are aspects people wish to gain control over, as promised by the marketing of sportswear with odor-controlling properties. This article discusses how the heightened awareness of body odor has developed, and how unpleasant odor varies between textiles made of different materials. A sensory analysis by a consumer panel was used to evaluate the odor intensity of 13 different fabric samples taken mainly from sportswear.

The so-called odor-control textiles smelled less intense than similar polyester samples without such treatment. Wool and cotton smelled significantly less intense than both odor-control and polyester when the samples were sweaty or aired. After washing, the odor-control textiles had a level of odor intensity that was in between that of the cotton and woolen samples. The odor-control treatment reduced the smell, but not enough to make a difference on laundering frequency, and the textiles smelled still more strongly than wool.

Click here to read the full article (tandfonline.com)

«Ullne» fakta om strikking og klær. Hjemmeproduksjon og gamle klær i velstands-Norge

ingridha på 6. september 2016

Ingun Grimstad Klepp & Kirsi Laitala

Hjemmeproduksjon og gamle klær i velstands Norge» av Ingun Klepp og Kirsi Laitala inngår i et større prosjekt om grønn vekst gjennom kunnskap om bærekraftige klær i lokale verdikjeder med fokus på utnyttelse av norsk ull (KRUS). Studien viser at bruk av ull er utbredt i hele befolkningen. Det er imidlertid klare kjønns- og inntektsforskjeller i befolkningens forhold til ull. Kvinner kjøper og bruker ullplagg oftere enn menn. Noe under halvparten (43%) av kvinnene har selv strikket eller laget plagg og andre produkter av ull i siste året. Kun 4 prosent av mennene oppga det samme. Det er også en større andel av kvinner som har bunad enn menn. Superundertøy (syntetisk) er imidlertid mer populært for menn enn kvinner (hhv 78% og 67%). Respondenter med høy inntekt eier flere dyre ullplagg enn respondenter med lavere inntekt. Det er også slik at ullklær brukes lengre enn andre typer klær og mange av de eldste plaggene som fortsatt er i bruk er av ull. Interessen for hjemmeproduksjon og strikking er stigende i den norske befolkningen, spesielt blant yngre kvinner. Artikkelen konkluderer med at for å få en omlegging henimot bærekraftig klesforbruk er det viktig å fokusere på lang levetid, hjemmeproduksjon og verdier – både pekuniære og affektive – knyttet til klær.

Klikk her for å lese hele bokkapitlet (researchgate.com)

Wool as an Heirloom: How Natural Fibres Can Reinvent Value in Terms of Money, Life-Span and Love

ingridha på 24. august 2016

Ingun Grimstad Klepp, Tone Skårdal Tobiasson & Kirsi Laitala

Abstract

This paper addresses a main challenge for natural fibres; falling prices and increased focus on quantity versus quality. This is a challenge not only related to economic issues and profit, but is also unsustainable in an environmental perspective and in light of the challenges the textile sector and the world face. The paper uses wool as an example and in a surprising approach links the history and century-old traditions of natural fibers to an environmental thinking which supplements the traditional thinking around circular economy and LCA. Fabrics with a long life are the ones that have the lowest environmental impact (Fletcher and Tham2015; Laitala2014). Longevity or lifespan is a complex phenomenon in which both technical and social, or aesthetic aspects, are intertwined.

Click here to see the full paper in the book Advances in Science and Technology Towards Industrial Applications (springer.com)

Wool you wear it? – woollen garments in Norway and the United Kingdom

ingridha på 24. august 2016

Marie Hebrok, Ingun G. Klepp & Joanne Turney

Abstract

This article was developed from the project ‘Valuing Norwegian Wool’ initiated by the Norwegian National Institute for Consumer Research to generate knowledge on how wool can contribute to sustainable textile consumption, and how value creation can be increased in the Norwegian wool industry. The article will compare consumer perceptions, attitudes, practices and knowledge concerning wool as a material and as garments in Norway and in the United Kingdom, through a case study of wardrobes owned by six middle-class families.

The aim is to generate knowledge about the diverse web of aspects that influence consumption of woollen garments. The wardrobe study as a method aims to include the materiality of garments in clothes research in a more direct way. Analysing the materiality in connection with the social and cultural aspects of clothes gives us a better understanding of the relations between materiality and practice.

Click here to read the full article (southampton.ac.uk)

Why Cotton as Linen? The Use of Wool in Beds in Norway

ingridha på 22. august 2016

Ingun Grimstad Klepp, Tone Skårdal Tobiasson & Kirsi Laitala

Abstract

Cotton is the “natural” choice and the dominating material in bed linen and sleepwear in Norway as in many other European countries. Regulation of temperature and humidity are important for good sleep, but they are not cotton’s strong points. There must have been other than the functional reasons which made cotton the winner in the bedding market. This article builds on literature about bedding in Norway from the 1800s and survey questions from 1951. We ask the question: what materials have been used and why? Wool was used in all bed textiles, both closest to the body and the layers over and under, from the cheapest chopped rags to the most costly textiles. The decline was seen throughout the 1800 and 1900s, but only in the 1960s does wool become totally absent as a next to skin bed textile. The cheap imports of cotton made cottage industry and home production unprofitable and the new emphasis on cleanliness gave cotton a clear leverage.

Click here to read the full article (tandfonline.com)

Klærs levetid – LCA på liv og død

ingridha på 24. januar 2016

Ingun Grimstad Klepp & Kirsi Laitala

Innledning

Et av de mest fremtredende trekkene ved de siste 50 års tekstilforbruk er veksten i mengde. Import av klær har økt med 67 % i de siste tjue årene, og ligger nå på 15 kg per innbygger i Norge (SSB, 2014). Vi vet lite om denne veksten, men at den henger sammen med en nedgang i priser og en oppgang i kjøpekraft, er åpenbar. I samme periode har andelen av husholdningenes forbruk av klær og sko falt fra 6,6 % til 5,4 % av utgiftene (SSB, 1999, 2013). Til tross for denne nedgangen har klesforbruket målt i volum økt. Dette har ikke skjedd uten miljøkonsekvenser. Carbon trust (2011) har estimert at 3 % av globale klimautslipp, målt i CO2-ekvivalenter, stammer fra produksjon og vask av klær. I tillegg kommer utslipp av skadelige kjemikalier, uetiske arbeidsforhold, problemer med dyrevelferd, og høyt forbruk av energi, vann og land-arealer (Fletcher, 2008).

Livsløpsanalyser (LCA) blir brukt for å skaffe informasjon om de totale miljøpåvirkningene av et produkt eller en aktivitet. LCA-studiene brukes blant annet som grunnlag for ulike typer verktøy som gir råd til bedrifter, designere og forbrukere om hvordan de kan produsere og handle mer miljøriktig (for oversikt over slike verktøy, se f.eks. Klepp et al., 2015; Kviseth, 2011). Et viktig element i disse verktøyene er at de rangerer ulike fibre mot hverandre. Dette kan få store konsekvenser fordi det brukes som grunnlag for beslutninger om hva klær og andre tekstiler produseres av. Mange bedrifter, designere og forbrukere ønsker jo å ha «miljøriktige» klær, som lett forstås som klær i bestemte materialer. Den store vinneren har så langt vært resirkulert polyester. I dette kapitlet diskuterer vi hvorfor de LCA-studiene verktøyene bygger på er lite relevante, og hvorfor de dermed kan få store miljømessige konsekvenser.

Klikk her for å lese hele kapittelet (researchgate.com)