4.7 Article

Risk and benefits brought by formal sustainability programs on fashion enterprises under market disruption

Journal

RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING
Volume 104, Issue -, Pages 348-353

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.08.005

Keywords

Sustainability programs; Market disruption; Business performance; Fashion enterprises; Risk

Funding

  1. Hong Kong Polytechnic University [G-YJ23]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The recent global 2008 financial crisis created a big market disruption to the fashion industry. Since then, it has seriously hurt the performance of many companies in the fashion industry. It is known that implementation of formal sustainability programs of most fashion companies relate a lot to their resource management as well as supply chain structure. A natural question on how the formal sustainability program affects the fashion enterprises under the market disruption hence arises. To answer this question, we collect publicly available real data of 45 listed fashion enterprises and conduct an empirical statistical study. To be specific, we compare the business performances of the fashion groups with and without formal sustainability programs before and after the market disruption. We find some statistically significant results which reveal that fashion enterprises which have not established formal sustainability programs perform relatively well under the market disruption. After that, we drill deeper and show that the fashionable fashion groups (SFFGs) which have developed sustainability programs suffer a drop in ROE and there is no enhancement in any other dimensions. For the basic fashion groups (SBEGs), their sales drop after market disruption but actually they can reduce cost and maintain profitability. We further discuss our findings and generate important managerial insights. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available