Juxtaposing Generation Z consumers’ consumption behaviour of local versus global sustainable fashion brands Open Access

Sustainable fashion has emerged as a potential solution to address the negative externalities associated with the fashion industry such as environmental pollution and labour exploitation (Niinimaki et al., 2020; Ronda, 2024; Thorisdottir et al., 2024). Sustainable fashion refers to apparel that is produced, consumed and disposed with minimum adverse impact on the natural environment (Niinimaki et al., 2020; Boyer et al., 2024). The global sustainable fashion market is projected to reach 15.17 billion by 2030 (McKinsey, 2021). Due to their higher level of environmental consciousness (Williams and Hodges, 2022; Boyer et al., 2024), Generation Z consumers are identified as important change agents in promoting sustainable fashion consumption. While the market for sustainable fashionable fashion is well established in developed economies (McKinsey, 2021), it is still at a nascent stage in emerging markets such as South Africa (Monyaki and Cilliers, 2023; Hodgkinson and Hoogendoorn, 2024). Due to its status as one of the largest economies in Africa, South Africa, the context of this study, is identified as a lucrative market for sustainable fashion (Monyaki and Cilliers, 2023; Madinga et al., 2024). South African consumers are exposed to both local brands and global sustainable fashion brands (Muposhi and Chuchu, 2024).

The South African sustainable fashion market is characterised as competitive pitting local brands such as Lukhanyo, SELFI, Africanswiss and global brands which include Hennes & Mauritz (H & M), Cotton On and Zara among others (Sekudu, 2023; Muposhi and Chuchu, 2024). The value proposition of local sustainable fashion brands is centred around cultural identity, social sustainability and preservation of national heritage (Sekudu, 2023). Global sustainable fashion brands such as H & M, Cotton On and Zara are revered for high quality and status, yet they are also criticised for not considering the cultural intricacies of the local market during the design process (May, 2019; Sekudu, 2023). Global fashion brands are perceived to be more appealing to Generation Z consumers who are embracing a global consumption culture (Djafarova and Foots, 2022; Chakraborty and Sadachar, 2023). At the same time, the influx of foreign fashion brands some perceived to be counterfeit, is blamed for collapsing South Africa’s once vibrant textile industry (Wasserman, 2012; May, 2019). Through, Brand South Africa, there are also concerted efforts, using campaigns such as “proudly South African”, to promote the consumption of homemade products (Sekudu, 2023). It is however not known whether the desire for preserving cultural identity, protecting local economy or the emergence of a global consumption culture influence the purchase behaviour of local and global sustainable fashion brands. This study therefore examines Generation Z consumers’ consumption behaviour of local versus global sustainable fashion brands.

Although sustainable fashion has attracted significant research interest in South Africa (e.g. Brand et al., 2023; Monyaki and Cilliers, 2023; Hodgkinson and Hoogendoorn, 2024; Duh et al., 2024; Madinga et al., 2024; Muposhi and Chuchu, 2024), Generation Z consumers’ consumption behaviour of local versus global sustainable fashion brands remain under researched. Prior research in South Africa has mainly focused on sustainable fashion adoption intention (Duh et al., 2024), motivating factors and impediments (Monyaki and Cilliers, 2023; Madinga et al., 2024), collaborative fashion consumption practices (Brand et al., 2023) and sustainable fashion as a business model (Hodgkinson and Hoogendoorn, 2024). A study focusing on local and global sustainable fashion brands is crucial to understand the multifaceted nature of sustainable fashion consumption behaviour (Niinimaki et al., 2020; Boyer et al., 2024).

Previous research on sustainable fashion (e.g. Bandyopadhyay and Ray, 2020; Williams and Hodges, 2022; Ronda, 2024; Boyer et al., 2024) has reported the prevalence of the attitude-behaviour and values-action gaps. In what has been dubbed the sustainable fashion paradox (Park and Lin, 2020; Williams and Hodges, 2022), these gaps are represented by consumers who express higher levels of environmental concern yet they remain reluctant to engage in the actual purchase behaviour of sustainable fashion. In particular, Generation Z consumers were reported to be grappling with managing the dual tension of sustainability and fashionability (Bandyopadhyay and Ray, 2020; Boyer et al., 2024). According to Williams and Hodges (2022), the prevalence of the attitude-behaviour and value-action gaps underscore the need for further research to understand the underlying factors that enable or constrain sustainable fashion consumption behaviour. This study therefore uses the practice theory and social cognitive theory (SCT) to examine additional factors that have the potential to bridge the attitude-behaviour and values-action gaps. Practice theory is used in this study because fashion consumption is regarded as a practice (Gurova, 2024; Thorisdottir et al., 2024). By using the practice theory, this study seeks to assess the perceived value and level of trust consumers attach to sustainable fashion practices such as green design, reusing, sharing and recycling among others.

The SCT (Bandura, 1986) is used herein to argue that sustainable fashion consumption is influenced by the interaction of personal factors, external environment and the behaviour of interest. Materialism was found to be one of the individual factors that influence Generation Z consumers’ fashion consumption behaviour (Bandyopadhyay and Ray, 2020; Boyer et al., 2024). Thus, this study examines the role of the personality trait of materialism in the consumption of local and global sustainable fashion brands. The consumption of sustainable fashion is also known to be embedded in a socio-cultural context (Boyer et al., 2024; Thorisdottir et al., 2024). Consistent with this view and drawing from the SCT, this study further examines the role of social influence and cultural mindfulness on the consumption of local and global sustainable fashion brands. Understanding the potential influence of cultural mindfulness is particularly important for Generation Z consumers who were raised in a marketplace characterised by a global consumption culture (Khalil et al., 2021). Global fashion brands are often criticised for failing to integrate cultural elements valued by local consumers during the design process (Strizhakova and Coulter, 2013; Brown and Vacca, 2022). At the same time, Generation Z consumers, who are identified as the major market for sustainable fashion, were reported to exhibit a global fashion consumption culture (Bandyopadhyay and Ray, 2020; Chakraborty and Sadachar, 2023; Boyer et al., 2024). Thus, the role of cultural mindfulness in the consumption of local and global sustainable fashion brands in South Africa, a market typified with a mosaic cultural orientation is of interest to this study.

Global fashion brands operating in developing economies have also been criticised for approaching sustainability from the perspective of self-regulation (Aureli et al., 2020; Jestratijevic et al., 2024). This approach has fuelled the perception that global fashion brands are selectively implementing sustainability practices that are linked to profit maximisation (Aureli et al., 2020). The desire for investment in developing economies has also resulted in a more liberal approach by national governments when it comes to the enforcement of environmental laws. As a result, some unscrupulous fashion brands are using unsubstantiated sustainability claims, a practice known as greenwashing, to market their products (Niinimaki et al., 2020; Jestratijevic et al., 2024). Undoubtedly, perceptions of greenwashing have adversely affected consumer trust and perceived value of sustainable fashion, with some consumers reluctant to pay the premium price associated with sustainable fashion (Niinimaki et al., 2020; Djafarova and Foots, 2022).

Based on the foregoing discussion, the overarching research question central to this study is: What are the factors influencing Generation Z consumers’ consumption behaviour of local versus global sustainable fashion brands in South Africa? The following sub-questions were formulated to address the main research question:

This study contributes to sustainable fashion literature by proposing an integrated model that combine variables from practice theory and SCT. The findings of this study are expected to provide valuable insights to address the attitude-behaviour and values-action gaps. Moreover, this study contributes to literature by examining the role of cultural mindfulness as a novel construct in the consumption of global and local sustainable fashion brands. The next section reviews literature on local and global sustainable fashion brands.

The transition to sustainable fashion is regarded as a long-term strategy to re-orient the fashion industry towards sustainability (Gazzola et al., 2020; Ronda, 2024). Minimising waste, effluents and pollution is central to the value proposition of sustainable fashion as a business model (McNeill and Moore, 2015). Sustainable fashion which is also known as slow fashion, eco-fashion or ethical fashion, is positioned as an alternative to fast fashion (Chakraborty and Sadachar, 2023). Sustainable fashion seeks to foster sustainability by reducing the fashion industry’s carbon footprint as well as promoting social justice through ethical sourcing of raw materials and fair labour practices (McNeill and Moore, 2015; Kim et al., 2020). Sustainable fashion is also expected to contribute to the world economy through eco-innovations from sustainability oriented fashion designers (Gazzola et al., 2020; Khalil et al., 2021).

Consistent with the growing trend towards sustainability, young consumers are embracing environmentally products, indicating a paradigm shift in consumption behaviour (Gazzola et al., 2020; Khalil et al., 2021). In the context of sustainable fashion, young consumers, belonging to the Generation Z cohort, are identified as a key market segment (Chaturvedi et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2020; Williams and Hodges, 2022). Generation Z consumers are expected to drive the sustainability agenda because they were born during the era of a heightened sense of environmental consciousness (Bandyopadhyay and Ray, 2020). Consistent with literature (Chaturvedi et al., 2020; Khalil et al., 2021), the terms young consumers and Generation Z are used interchangeably in this study, while the years 1995–2010 are used as age markers for this cohort (Chaturvedi et al., 2020; Williams and Hodges, 2022). The Generation Z cohort is regarded as more consumption oriented than other cohorts which makes it a lucrative target market (Williams and Hodges, 2022).

Generation Z consumers’ consumption behaviour of sustainable fashion has been characterised as intriguing, paradoxical and complex (Bandyopadhyay and Ray, 2020; Boyer et al., 2024). One stream of research (e.g. Francis and Hoefel, 2018; Chaturvedi et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2020; Khalil et al., 2021) found that Generation Z consumers are more willing to buy sustainable products, prefer to buy from companies with a focus on sustainability and value shared services than ownership. A preference of shared services implies that Generation Z consumers are more likely to support sustainable fashion consumption practices such fashion rental and swapping. Conversely, another stream of research (e.g. McNeill and Moore, 2015; Park and Lin, 2020; Djafarova and Foots, 2022; Boyer et al., 2024) found that Generation Z consumers consider sustainable fashion to be expensive, unfashionable and of lower quality. Moreover, Generation Z consumers were also reported to be low in brand loyalty as they are still in the brand identity seeking phase (Francis and Hoefel, 2018; McNeil and Venter, 2019). The foregoing insights suggest the need to further examine Generation Z consumers’ consumption behaviour of local and global sustainable fashion brands.

The consumption of sustainable fashion is regarded as a social practice which is embedded in a socio-cultural context (Zollo, 2024; Boyer et al., 2024). Based on this reasoning, this study is underpinned by the SCT (Bandura, 1986) and practice theory (Reckwitz, 2002). This is a departure from the common approach in literature of relying on rational theories such as the theory of planned behaviour and the theory of reasoned action. The SCT was used in this study because it was applied in previous studies on sustainable consumption such as eco-labels (Roxas and Marte, 2022) and food waste reduction (Young et al., 2024). The SCT posits that the interaction of personal and social context is central to behavioural performance (Bandura, 1986). Drawing from the SCT, we argue that consumers’ decision to purchase local or global sustainable fashion brands is influenced by personal factors such as perception of perceived value, trust and materialism.

The SCT further posits that individuals learn to engage in promoted behaviours through observation and positive reinforcement (Bandura, 1986). Fashion consumption is characterised as a form of visible behaviour that occurs in the social context (Khalil et al., 2021; Williams and Hodges, 2022). Thus, based on the proposition of the SCT and existing literature, social influence and cultural mindfulness are considered as social context specific factors that influence consumers’ purchase intention of local or global sustainable fashion brands. Consistent with the proposition of SCT, the interaction of personal and social context factors is expected to trigger favourable behavioural intentions. Based on the proposition that intention is the most immediate predictor of behaviour (Ajzen, 1991), intention is used in this study as a proxy of behaviour.

The consumption of sustainable fashion is also regarded as an integrative practice that evolves with time (Niinimaki and Durrani, 2020; Vladimirova et al., 2022). This is so because it involves the performance of practices aimed at enhancing the life span of fashion items (Niinimaki and Durrani, 2020). Consistent with this characterisation, this study also uses the practice theory (Reckwitz, 2002) to compare Generation Z consumers’ consumption behaviour of local and global sustainable fashion brands. Practise theory posits that behavioural practices are influenced by the interaction of mental processes, motives and meanings (Reckwitz, 2002). Practise theory was used in this study because it was also applied in previous sustainable fashion studies (e.g. Vladimirova et al., 2022; Gurova, 2024). The utility of the practice theory emanates from its integrative ability and flexibility (Shove et al., 2012; Vladimirova et al., 2022). The aim of practice theory is not to include all factors that predict behaviour, but rather the critical few (Reckwitz, 2002).

Drawing from the practice theory, we argue that consumers’ mental processes trigger a heightened sense of environmental concern which results in the formation of attitudes towards sustainable fashion. Meanings are construed as the symbolism associated with the performance of behavioural practices (Reckwitz, 2002). Thus, cultural mindfulness and materialism are included in this study to capture the symbolic meaning associated with sustainable fashion consumption. Practice theory further argues that cognitive metal processes play a critical role in the performance of practices (Reckwitz, 2002). Consistent with this view, green perceived value is regarded as a rational factor that influences the consumption of sustainable fashion. Finally, practice theory argues that when practices are intricately combined, a practice or behaviour is established (Reckwitz, 2002). Informed by this view, this study argues that the interaction of mental processes and symbolic cues results in consumers’ intention to buy sustainable fashion. By using the practice theory, this study examines factors that drive or constrain the consumption of sustainable fashion as a practice.

Environmental concern measures an individual’s degree of environmental consciousness as indicated by the level of environmental knowledge and environmental involvement (McNeill and Moore, 2015; Golob and Kronegger, 2019; Dhir et al., 2021). Although Generation Z consumers were found to be concerned with environmental challenges such as global warming and climate change (Chaturvedi et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2020), mixed results were reported on willingness to engage in sustainable behaviours (e.g. Kim et al., 2020; Salnikova et al., 2022; Carmona et al., 2024). According to Salnikova et al. (2022), the psychological and geographical distance attached to the value propositions of local versus global fashion brands may elicit different responses from consumers. In the context of emerging economies such as South Africa, there is also a perception that environmental sustainability is not an urgent issue (Muposhi and Mugwati, 2024). Thus, it is hypothesised that:

Cultural mindfulness measures the extent to which local and global sustainable fashion brands embody cultural elements that are valued by consumers (Chakraborty and Sadachar, 2023). Fashion is regarded as an art and its uniqueness is measured, to a greater extent, by its ability to integrate the cultural symbols and artefacts that resonate with the cultural identity of the target market (Williams et al., 2019). Sustainable fashion brands are accentuating cultural identity by claiming that their raw materials are locally sourced from community projects (Brown and Vacca, 2022). In South Africa, cultural identity is also reinforced through the use of culture themed initiatives that promote local sustainable fashion, a typical example being the MaXhosa Africa Sustainability Fashion Festival (Sekudu, 2023). Cultural mindfulness was found to play a crucial role in enhancing market appeal and acceptance of fashion (Williams et al., 2019; Chakraborty and Sadachar, 2023). Similarly, previous research (Strizhakova and Coulter, 2013; Gürhan-Canli et al., 2018; Salnikova et al., 2022) found that cultural identities significantly influence consumers’ attitudes towards local and global brands. In particular, the personality trait of mindfulness was found to influence Generation Z consumers’ sustainable consumption behaviour (Errmann et al., 2021; Kaur and Luchs, 2022). Thus, it is hypothesised that:

Green perceived value refers to consumers’ overall assessment of the benefits associated with the consumption of sustainable products (Chen and Chang, 2012). Consistent with prior studies (e.g., Chen and Chang, 2012; Chen et al., 2016), green perceived value is operationalised as a unidimensional construct in this study. Mixed findings were reported on the perceived value attached to sustainable fashion by Generation Z consumers. For example, Boyer et al. (2024) found that Generation Z consumers perceive sustainable fashion as expensive, while a study by Kim-Vick and Cho (2024) revealed that young consumers are willing to pay the premium price associated with sustainable fashion as it signals their status. Previous studies (e.g. Kumar et al., 2019; Amoako et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021) found the evaluation of the perceived value associated with sustainable products is a precondition for understanding attitudinal dispositions. This is relevant to this study as the perceived value attached to local and global fashion brands tends to vary (Salnikova et al., 2022). Drawing from the foregoing discussion, we argue that green perceived value is a key antecedent of consumers’ attitude towards sustainable fashion. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

The consumption of fashion as a practice is situated in a socio-cultural setting with consumers as social actors (Kim et al., 2020; Zollo, 2024; Boyer et al., 2024). Social influence is used in this study to examine the role of social networks and peers in promoting the consumption of sustainable fashion. Generation Z consumers are known to be susceptible to peer influence especially on social media platforms and online brand communities due to their desire for social approval and belongingness (Kim et al., 2020; Djafarova and Foots, 2022; Al-Sharafi et al., 2023). At the same time, Generation Z consumers’ desire for uniqueness is well documented in literature (Williams and Hodges, 2022; Boyer et al., 2024). Local and global sustainable brands are associated with identities which are shaped by perceptions of ethnocentrism, global mindedness and cosmopolitanism (Strizhakova and Coulter, 2013; Gürhan-Canli et al., 2018). This study therefore examines the influence of social influence on attitude towards local versus global fashion brands. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

In this study, trust measures the extent to which consumers perceive that the sustainability claims used to market sustainable fashion are authentic (Liu et al., 2021). Lack of consumer trust is identified as one of the major barriers that constrain the purchase behaviour of sustainable fashion (Liu et al., 2021; Neumann et al., 2021; Ronda, 2024). Credence attributes are commonly used to differentiate sustainable fashion from fast fashion (Kahraman and Kazancoglu, 2019; Policarpo et al., 2023). This presents a challenge to consumers including Generation Z because, often, they lack the environmental knowledge and technical expertise required to verify the authenticity of sustainability claims (Lundblad and Davies, 2016; Liu et al., 2021; Ronda, 2024). This exposes consumers to greenwashing which is the act of using unverified sustainability claims to market products and services (Policarpo et al., 2023). Moreover, lack of value chain transparency also fuel consumer cynicism (Liu et al., 2021; Ronda, 2024). Previous studies (e.g. Lundblad and Davies, 2016; Neumann et al., 2021; Policarpo et al., 2023; Zollo, 2024) found that scepticism and perceptions of greenwashing influence consumer attitudes towards the consumption of sustainable fashion. Thus, it is posited that:

Attitude in this study refers to favourable or unfavourable feelings associated with the consumption of sustainable fashion. It is established in theory that favourable attitudes towards behaviour positively influence behavioural intention (Ajzen, 1991). However, in the context of sustainable fashion consumption, individuals were found not to always act based on their reported intentions, resulting in the attitude-behaviour gap (Bandyopadhyay and Ray, 2020; Williams and Hodges, 2022; Ronda, 2024). Materialism related to the desire for fast fashion is identified as one of the potential causes of the attitude-behaviour gap among young consumers (McNeill and Moore, 2015; Kim-Vick and Cho, 2024). Materialism is a personal value orientation that predisposes individuals to value the acquisition of possessions (Kim-Vick and Cho, 2024). Materialism is regarded as an antithesis to the ethos of sustainable fashion because it promotes rapid acquisition and disposal of fashion items (McNeill and Moore, 2015).

The fear of missing out was found to drive materialistic consumption tendencies among Generation Z consumers (Good and Hyman, 2020; Gentina and Tang, 2024). Peer comparison was particularly found to lead Generation Z consumers to experience a sense of envy (Manchanda et al., 2023). To gratify this sense of envy, Generation Z consumers often resort to buying more products which are perceived to offer self-expressive benefits (Manchanda et al., 2023). Previous research in fashion consumption (e.g. McNeill and Moore, 2015; Kim-Vick and Cho, 2024) found that materialism has a moderating effect on the consumption of sustainable fashion. As the desire for material possessions was reported to significantly influence cotemporary consumer consumption culture (Manchanda et al., 2023), it is important to examine the extent to which materialism influence Generation Z consumers’ purchase behaviour of local and global sustainable fashion brands. Hence, the following hypotheses are proposed:

Drawing from the practice theory and posited hypotheses, attitude towards local and global sustainable fashion brands is predicted to be influenced by environmental concern, cultural mindfulness, green perceived value, social influence and trust. In turn, attitude, under the moderating influence of materialism is expected to influence consumers’ intention to buy local or global sustainable fashion brands. Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework.

This study is based on the proposition that the consumption behaviour of local and global sustainable fashion brands may be examined using competing models. To test this proposition, two distinct studies were conducted. Study 1 examined the consumption intention of local sustainable fashion brands while Study 2 also examined consumers’ intention to consume global sustainable fashion brands. The two studies followed similar procedures. As both studies examined sustainable fashion consumption albeit of two brands with different value propositions, they collectively provide a more comprehensive understanding of sustainable fashion consumption behaviour.

A positivist research philosophy and correlational research design were utilised. Purposive sampling was used to select Generation Z respondents aged between 18 and 28 years. Generation Z consumers were chosen as respondents because they are recognised as the most profitable segment for fashion products with a strong inclination towards sustainable fashion (Chaturvedi et al., 2020; Arora and Manchanda, 2022). Generation Z consumers were also reported to be more concerned with sustainability issues than other cohorts (Bandyopadhyay and Ray, 2020; Masserini et al., 2024). The choice of the Generation Z cohort to understand consumption intention of local and global sustainable fashion brands is also consistent with previous studies (Kim et al., 2020; Williams and Hodges, 2022; Masserini et al., 2024). In this study, Generation Z consumers were defined as individuals who were born between 1995 and 2010 (Chaturvedi et al., 2020). When data was collected in 2023, the upper age limit for this cohort was 28 years.

All study constructs were measured using validated scales that were adapted from previous studies. With the exception of attitude towards sustainable fashion which was measured using a sematic differential scale, all other variables were operationalised using a five-point Likert scale ranging from (1) strong disagree to strongly agree (5). To measure environmental concern, a four-item scale adapted from Mazzocchi et al. (2021) was used. Cultural mindfulness was measured using a three-item scale developed by Niinimaki and Durrani (2020). We used five statements adapted from Kumar and Yadav (2021) to measure the role of social influence on the consumption of sustainable fashion.

A four-item scale developed by Yu and Zheng (2022) was used to measure green perceived value. To measure the degree to which consumers trust local and global sustainable fashion brands, we used three statements adapted from Policarpo et al. (2023). Attitude towards sustainable fashion was measured using five sematic differential statements adapted from Lang and Armstrong (2018). A four-item scale adapted from Lang and Armstrong (2018) was used to measure materialism. Finally, intention to consume sustainable fashion brands was measured using a 4-item scale adapted from Park et al. (2023). To minimise common method bias, multiple response formats such as the use of reverse worded scale items, semantic differential and Likert type questions were used. Prior to data collection, as recommended by Hair et al. (2019), the questionnaires were evaluated using a sample of 50 respondents who shared the same characteristics with the target population. Using the pre-test results, minor corrections were effected on the measurement scale items for materialism and cultural mindfulness.  Appendix provides the scale items that were used to operationalise the study constructs.

An online questionnaire survey was used to collect data from Generation Z consumers who buy local and global sustainable fashion brands in South Africa. Following the granting of the ethical clearance by the University of the Witwatersrand’s School of Business Sciences Ethics Committee (CBUSE2108), respondents were recruited from website blogs of three companies promoting sustainable fashion in South Africa, which include Fashion Revolution, Twyg and SA Fashion Week. Fashion consumers aged between 18 and 28 years who had purchased sustainable fashion within the preceding five months were selected. A screening question was used to recruit respondents. Only Generation Z consumers who managed to identify at least two local and two global sustainable fashion brands marketed in South Africa were considered for the for the study.

Data for Study 1 and 2 was collected from the same target population by a reputable South African research company in two separate intervals. In the first wave, data was collected for Study 1 for a period of three months from March–May 2023. After waiting for a period of two months, data for Study 2 was collected for a period of three months from August–October 2023. A total of 800 questionnaires were administered, 400 for Study 1 and 400 for Study 2. There were no major changes that occurred in the business environment that may have affected the stability of data during the two phases of data collection.

The statistical package of social sciences (SPSS) version 28 was used to compute descriptive statistics for the sample, Cronbach’s alpha, common method bias assessment and correlation analysis. SmartPLS version 4 was used to test the measurement and structural models. SmartPLS is recommended for testing complex models encompassing moderated relationships (Hair et al., 2019), which was the case in this study.

A total of 246 and 258 questionnaires were valid for analysis for Study 1 and 2, respectively. This represents an effective response rate of 61.5% (Study 1) and 64.5% (Study 2). Table 1 provides the sample profile.

This study utilised self-reported data which made it to be susceptible to common method bias. Harman’s single factor test was computed for the two competing models to assess the possibility of common method bias. The variances that were accounted for by one factor for Study 1 (local sustainable fashion brands) and Study 2 (global sustainable fashion brands) were 36.2% and 38.3%, respectively. The results indicate that the data was free from common method bias as the variance explained by a single factor for the two models was below the recommended threshold of 50% (Podsakoff et al., 2012).

The measurement and structural models were assessed using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). The use of PLS-SEM is recommended for testing complex models encompassing moderated relationships (Hair et al., 2019), which was the case in this study. First, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the measurement models. As shown in Table 2, the fitness of the measurement models was confirmed as all goodness-of-fit indices surpassed the recommended thresholds (Bagozzi and Yi, 2012).

Reliability of measurement scales was assessed by computing the Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability coefficients. As shown in Table 3, the coefficients for both Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability surpassed the acceptable cut-off point of 0.7 signalling reliability of measurement scales (Hair et al., 2019). Convergent validity was evident as factor loadings for all scale items and the average variance extracted were all above 0.5 (Bagozzi and Yi, 2012). Table 3 shows the reliability and convergent validity indicators.

Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) criterion was used to assess discriminant validity. As shown in Table 4, the square root of AVE values (in bold) for Studies 1 and 2 are all above the highest correlation coefficient of r = 0.623 (Study 1) and r = 0.625 (Study 2), indicating the attainment of discriminant validity (Bagozzi and Yi, 2012). Table 4 shows the discriminant validity indicators.

The structural model for Study 1 fitted well with the data: X²/df = 2.68, CFI = 0.922, TLI = 0.911, RMSEA = 0.040 (Bagozzi and Yi, 2012). For study 1, environmental concern, cultural mindfulness, green perceived value and social influence were shown to have a positive influence on attitude towards sustainable fashion in support of H1, H2, H3 and H4. Refuting H5, trust was found to a negative influence on attitude towards sustainable local fashion brands. In confirmation of H6, attitude towards sustainable fashion was found to have a positive influence sustainable fashion consumption intention.

The fitness of the structural model for Study 2 was also confirmed: X²/df = 2.54, GFI = 0.868, CFI = 0.914, TLI = 0.910, RMSEA = 0.038 (Bagozzi and Yi, 2012). Environmental concern, and green perceived value were shown to have a positive influence on attitude towards sustainable global fashion brands. Hence, H1 and H3 were supported. Cultural mindfulness, social influence and trust were found to have a negative influence on attitude towards sustainable global fashion brands. Hence, H₂, H₄ and H₅ were not supported. In support of H₆, attitude towards sustainable fashion was found to have a positive influence sustainable fashion consumption intention. Table 5 presents the hypotheses testing results for Studies 1 and 2.

The path coefficients for Studies 1 and 2 are provide in Figures 2 and 3.

To test whether materialism moderates the relationship between attitude towards local sustainable fashion brands and local sustainable fashion brands consumption intention (Study 1), Hayes’ (2018) regression-based method was used. Moderation for Study 1 was tested using the regression equation: Y= i1 +β1X + β2M + β3XM + e1 Where I = intercept; β (1, 2, 3) = regression coefficients; X = Independent variable (attitude towards local sustainable fashion brands); M = moderator (materialism); Y = Dependent variable (local sustainable fashion brands consumption intention); e1 = standard error. The same procedure was followed to test whether materialism moderates the relationship between attitude towards global sustainable fashion brands and global sustainable fashion brands consumption intention (Study 2). Table 6 provides results of moderation analyses for Studies 1 and 2. As shown in Table 6, the moderating effect of materialism was confirmed with a p-value of < 0.05 (Hayes, 2018) for both Studies 1 and 2.

Environmental concern was found to have a significant positive influence on Generation Z consumers’ attitude towards both local and global sustainable fashion brands. This result aligns with previous research (e.g. Salnikova et al., 2022; Boyer et al., 2024; Ronda, 2024) that found that environmental concern is one of the motivating factors for the consumption of sustainable fashion. In particular, environmentally concerned consumers are enticed to consume sustainable fashion by the eco-friendly production processes that improve societal welfare through waste reduction and efficient resource utilisation (Ronda, 2024). Contrary to the perception that environmental issues are perceived as not urgent in developing economies (Salnikova et al., 2022), this result suggests that the consumption of sustainable fashion is perceived as important by Generation Z consumers in South Africa.

Social influence was found to have a positive impact on Generation Z consumers’ attitudes towards local sustainable fashion brands, while its impact on attitude towards global sustainable fashion brands was not supported. This result is consistent with previous studies (Korsunova-Tsaruk et al., 2021; Al-Sharafi et al., 2023; Zollo, 2024) which affirm the positive role of social influence in the marketing of sustainable fashion brands. Local sustainable fashion brands were theorised to be anchored by value propositions of cultural identity and social equity (Sekudu, 2023). The desire for social identity may be the most plausible reason why consumers are more susceptible to social influence when making purchase decisions of local sustainable fashion brands than global alternatives.

Cultural mindfulness was found to have a positive impact on attitudes towards local sustainable fashion brands while its influence on global sustainable fashion brands was negative. This result resonates with findings from previous studies (Salnikova et al., 2022; Seock et al., 2024; Chakraborty and Sadachar, 2023; Zollo, 2024). Wherein cultural mindfulness was found to significantly influence consumers’ attitudes towards local and global brands. Consumers who buy local sustainable brands were found to be enticed by the perceptions of cultural identity, craftsmanship and authenticity (Zollo, 2024). Similarly, a study by Salnikova et al. (2022) showed that sustainable fashion brands should be aligned to the values, symbols and customs of the target market to elicit favour ale attitudes. In the same vein, Chakraborty and Sadachar (2023) underscored the importance of using cultural cues as a way of eliciting favourable attitudes towards local sustainable fashion brands. Thus, this result suggests that marketers of sustainable global fashion brands may need to adopt the think global but act local strategy when designing sustainable fashion.

Green perceived value was found to have a positive impact on Generation Z consumers’ attitudes towards both local and global sustainable fashion brands. This result is consistent with the findings of previous studies (Kim et al., 2020; Arora and Manchanda, 2022). However, it is important to note that global sustainable fashion brands were rated higher than local sustainable fashion brands. This result suggests that global brands are perceived to be of higher quality than local brands. To enhance green perceived value of local sustainable fashion, marketers may need to consider Arora and Manchanda’s (2022) recommendation. They emphasise the importance of assuring consumers about the quality of the material used and specific sustainability attributes embodied. According to Arora and Manchanda (2022), this will go a long way in allaying greenwashing concerns among consumers.

Trust was found to have a negative influence on consumers’ attitude towards both local and global sustainable fashion brands. Lack of consumer trust in sustainable fashion is fuelled by greenwashing perceptions (Seock et al., 2024). Lack of consumer trust in sustainable fashion brands was also reported in previous studies (e.g., Kahraman and Kazancoglu, 2019; Policarpo et al., 2023; Ronda, 2024). In particular, Policarpo et al. (2023) note that consumers lack expertise in evaluating the sustainability claims that are used to market sustainable fashion. In the same vein, Kahraman and Kazancoglu (2019) as well as Ronda (2024) found that perceptions of green washing erode consumer trust in sustainable fashion including constraining purchase behaviour.

Finally, materialism was found to have a moderating effect on the relationship between attitude towards sustainable fashion and consumption intention for both local and global fashion brands. This finding which suggests the prevalence of materialistic values among South Africa Generation Z consumers, aligns with previous research (Williams and Hodges, 2022; Kim-Vick and Cho, 2024). In particular, Williams and Hodges (2022) note that Generation Z consumers are still enticed by fast fashion attributes of trendiness and affordability. Overall, this result underscores the importance of aligning Generation Z consumers’ fashion consumption values with sustainability. According to Huh and Kim (2024), this may be done by leveraging on the green signalling effect of sustainable fashion to target materialistic consumers. To achieve this, the premium price associated with sustainable may be harnessed and used as a tool to assuage the social status valued by materialistic-oriented consumers.

This study extends the application of the SCT and practice theory to the sustainable fashion context. As far as we can establish, no previous study has applied these theories to compare purchase behaviour of local and sustainable fashion brands. Thus, this study enriches literature on sustainable fashion by proposing an integrated model. The proposed integrated model showed reasonable predictive power as it managed to explain 58% and 56% variance in attitude towards local and global sustainable fashion brands, respectively.

This study also sheds more light on Generation Z consumers’ sustainable fashion consumption by identifying trust and materialism the major impediments. This study also revealed intriguing results indicating that social influence fosters favourable attitudes towards local sustainable fashion brands whilst its influence on global alternatives was insignificant. Moreover, previous studies investigated Generation Z consumers’ consumption behaviour of local and global sustainable fashion brands in isolation, while this study examined consumers’ consumption intentions for both brands concurrently. This study is also one of the pioneering studies in South Africa, an emerging market to examine the influence of cultural mindfulness on sustainable fashion consumption, which is a novel contribution to extant literature.

This study provides three valuable insights to marketers of local and global sustainable fashion brands on how to appeal to Generation Z consumers. Firstly, trust emerged as the major impediment that weakens the formation of favourable attitudes for both local and global sustainable fashion brands. This result challenges marketers to address consumers’ perceptions of greenwashing by providing credible and accurate information to consumers in a manner that builds trust. To enhance consumer trust, Johnstone and Lindh (2022) emphasise the importance of improving on supply chain transparency and the use of trusted fashion influencers to communicate the sustainability attributes of sustainable fashion. Consumer trust may also be enhanced through the use of independent eco-labels that assure consumer confidence that, indeed, the sustainability claims used by sustainable fashion brands are authentic. To avoid any suspicion of greenwashing, Policarpo et al. (2023) stress the importance of refraining from the use of unverified and ambiguous sustainability claims. Marketers may also provide quick response (QR) codes at the point of sale to empower consumers to evaluate sustainable fashion attributes. This will go a long way in enhancing consumer confidence in sustainable fashion.

Cultural mindfulness emerged as one of the major factors that positively influence consumers’ attitudes towards local sustainable fashion brands. This result amplifies the importance of cultural mindfulness in the design of sustainable fashion with a focus on integrating cultural symbols and artefacts valued by the target market. Marketers of local sustainable fashion brands may strengthen consumer demand by using cultural heritage laden marketing propositions. Local sustainable fashion brands may also be positioned as enablers of societal well-being as they are linked to cultural preservation, job creation, resource preservation and climate change mitigation. Credible and sincere opinion leaders may also be recruited to endorse and evoke favourable perceptions towards local sustainable fashion brands. For global sustainable fashion brands that scored low on cultural mindfulness, this result challenges fashion designers and marketers to extend the concept of think global but act local concept to sustainable fashion. According to Chakraborty and Sadachar (2023), this may be achieved by having a deep appreciation of the marketing environment to develop the brand image and value propositions that imbue the cultural values of the target market.

Local sustainable fashion brands were rated low on green perceived value as compared to global sustainable fashion brands. This result implies that marketers of local sustainable fashion brands need to implement robust strategies to build brand equity. This may be done by generating more awareness of the benefits associated with local fashion brands such as social sustainability and social equity. By supporting local communities through local sourcing of raw materials the brand image can be significantly enhanced. Manufacturers of local sustainable fashion brands should also improve product quality to compete with global brands. This may be done by adopting internationally recognised quality management systems. Also a genuine commitment to sustainability by addressing the social ills traditionally associated with the fashion industry such as environmental pollution and labour exploitation is imperative to enhance consumer confidence.

The results of this study revealed that Generation Z consumers are high in materialism. This result challenges marketers to develop effective marketing communication messages that compel Generation Z consumers to switch to sustainable fashion. Marketers may leverage Generation Z consumers’ heightened sense of environmental concern to highlight the benefits associated with the consumption of sustainable fashion and the dark side of fast fashion. Marketers may also tap into the growing literature that positions the consumption of sustainable fashion as a status symbol (Huh and Kim, 2024). This can be done by accentuating the attributes of sustainable fashion, such as social status, versatility and quality in marketing communications. Marketers may also promote the consumption of sustainable fashion by evoking its contribution to consumer well-being. Simplicity, reduction in environmental pollution, efficient utilisation of resources and employment equity may be vocalised in marketing communications as enablers of consumer well-being.

This study has some limitations that suggest avenues for further research. This study utilised self-reported survey data that was collected from Generation Z consumers in South Africa. To enhance the generalisability, future studies may need to collect data from other cohorts to have a holistic understanding of the underlying drivers of sustainable fashion consumption in South Africa. To address the social desirability bias associated with the use of self-reported data, future studies may use other more objective methods of data collection, such as field experiments. To unravel the complexities associated with sustainable fashion, future studies may consider using more robust methods of data collection such as field experiments. Finally, the competing models tested in this study explained 46–48% variance in sustainable fashion consumption intention. To improve the predictive power of the models that were tested in this study, future studies may consider the potential influence of control variables such as age, fashion expenditure and gender.

Competing models were tested to compare the consumption behaviour of local versus global sustainable fashion brands. Environmental concern, cultural mindfulness and social influence were found to positively influence Generation Z consumers’ attitude towards local sustainable fashion brands. Attitude towards global fashion brands was also found to be favourably influenced by environmental concern, and perceived value. Lack of trust was found to be a major challenge for both local and global sustainable fashion brands. This result underscores the importance of addressing consumers’ perceptions of greenwashing. This may be done through the use of independent eco-labels that assure consumer confidence that indeed the sustainability claims used by sustainable fashion brands are authentic. Global sustainable fashion brands were rated low by Generation Z consumers on cultural mindfulness. This result challenges fashion designers and marketers to extend the concept of think global but act local concept to sustainable fashion.

The authors contributed equally to the development and finalisation of this study.

The authors are grateful to the reviewers whose comments improved the quality of this study.