1

From fashion to ethical fashion: How political consumerist

movements change markets Philip Balsiger

University of Lausanne

Paper to be presented at the ECPR General Conference, Reykjavik, August 24-27 2011

Section: Contentious Politics in Times of Crisis

Panel: A New Rising Star? Political Consumerism and New Sustainable Community

Movements in a Comparative Perspective

DRAFT. PLEASE DO NOT QUOTE WITHOUT PERMISSION

Abstract

This is a comparative study of the transformations of the market for clothes under the impact of political consumerist movements in Switzerland and France. Recent studies on movements targeting market actors have identified different ways through which movements change markets: they market actors through campaigns, facilitate and enable individual actions of political consumerism, put in place new tools of private regulation such as labels, and create alternative niche markets such as markets for local or fair trade food. Consumption thus becomes a political issue in many different ways. My study on the market for clothes and its transformation to incorporate ethical issues – conditions of production, but also environmental questions such as organic cotton or recycling, addresses the articulation of such different tactics within a given market. On this market, I observe the rise of a niche for ethical fashion around a number of “social entrepreneurs”; the emergence of labels for fair trade and organic clothes; and the existence of antisweatshop campaigns fighting for global standards to improve working conditions in clothing factories. Using a variety of sources (interviews, participant observation, document analysis, archives), the paper discusses the social and political determinants for these different groups, shows the different frames they build on, and looks into the tensions the co-existence of these approaches produce. In particular, it reveals that there may be an inherent tension between creating an alternative market for activists keen on according their consumption practices with their ideology, which from one point of view can be seen as a form of exit, and changing the “mainstream” market through the expression of voice. Finally, the comparative perspective helps explaining why the “ethical” transformation of the market for clothes differs from one country to the other.

2

Introduction The supply for "ethical clothes" has grown exponentially in the past 10 years. Up to the

1990s, fair trade, organic, or other kinds of ethically responsible apparel could only be

purchased on a small niche market of fair trade shops, or by mail order from certain

environmental or development aid NGOs like WWF, Oxfam, or helvetas in Switzerland.

Outside this activist circle, the social and environmental quality of clothes was not an issue.

10 years later, fair, organic, and ethical labels, certifications, product lines, and brands are

thriving. Consumers who want to buy clothes "with a conscience" now have multiple choices.

And although the extent to which the available products incorporate strict social and

environmental criteria varies, they all belong to the newly created category of "ethical

fashion", celebrated in newspaper articles and fashion magazines as a new trend. Ethical

fashion, in this respect, is but one example of the mainstreaming of political, sustainable, or

ethical consumption; the politics behind products, to quote a French economic newspaper,

"has left the planet of the activist purchase to conquer the planet of the pleasure purchase"

(Les Echos, May 2 2006)

Often, this new market is attributed to the rise of politically conscient consumers, to which it

responds. In this paper, I suggest to look closer at the process that shapes these market

changes. How exactly do markets come to incorporate the issue of the "ethical quality" of

clothes, and what kind of change can one observe? For example, do labor and environmental

standards get set for all market actors and their products, or does this only concern some

specifically labeled product lines? Do the changes concern established market actors or newly

emerging start-up firms in niche markets? I argue that the kind of market change depends on

the specific configurations and interactions between social movements, firms, and the state. I

compare the transformation of the clothing markets in Switzerland and France in order to

show how ethical issues – considering social and environmental production conditions – are

differently incorporated. In Switzerland, an antisweatshop campaign conducted by NGOs

from the sector of development aid led big retailers to introduce ethical product lines, and

important collaborations between firms and NGOs for fair trade and organic clothes were

developed. In France, big retailers only very tentatively introduced ethical clothes in spite of

an important anti-sweatshop campaign. Instead, an alternative niche market for ethical fashion

rose with the help of a social movement entrepreneur and an active role of state subsidies for

“social” enterprises. The differences of market changes are thus traced back in this paper to

the different kinds of social movement activity and interactions between movements, market

3

actors, and the state. Thus, it is not just the rise of "ethical fashion" that can be explained by

the study of social movement activity, but the very forms this market takes depend on specific

actor configurations.

In the market for clothes, one finds a variety of social movement activities that can be broadly

classified into three different approaches (King and Pearce 2010). A first category is classic

social movement activity through contentious mobilization. In the case of the clothing sector,

this consists of public campaigns that target established market actors, shaming them for their

practices (in particular with regard to labor rights abuses) and making claims about the

adoption and independent monitoring of codes of conducts. This is generally referred to as the

anti-sweatshop movement. The second category consists of the rise of labels and multi-

stakeholder initiatives. Here, firms and social movement actors collaborate to put in place

what has been called "private regulation" (Bartley 2007). On the clothing market, this kind of

collaboration can be seen for example in the development of fair trade garments or the

establishment of monitoring initiatives for labor conditions such as the Fair Wear Foundation.

Third, movements can themselves become market actors or favor the development of new

organizational forms and niche markets; they may change the market for clothes (or any other

market) by developing an alternative offer on their own. This is the case for example with the

emergence of new ethical fashion brands. Most studies focus on one or the other of these

approaches. My suggestion in this paper is to see how they articulate on a given market,

where different kinds of movement actors interact with firms and the state. Comparing these

processes in two countries allows to show that differences in this articulation lead to different

market changes.

I start by discussing the theoretical framework of the study. It is based on a neo-institutionalist

approach to markets and builds on a view of social movements as consisting of different

"cultures of action" (Klawiter 2009). After a section on research strategy, the following

empirical part examines the different social movement actors and approaches one finds on the

market for clothes in Switzerland and France, and looks at the interaction between

movements, firms, and the state. A comparative discussion, finally, highlights the

diachronical and synchronical articulation of these approaches and how they shaped the rise

of ethical fashion in both countries.

4

Social movements and market changes How do movements change markets? One type of critical approaches usually turns the

question the other way round: what do markets do to movement goals? The answer is

appropriation. A lot has been written about capitalism's capacity to incorporate or "digest"

critical and subversive claims, by turning demands into commodifications and into its own

advantages. The story of movement – market interaction is thus mainly written as a story of

betrayal and co-optation, the selling out of movement goals to market actors (Chasin 2000)

(for a critique of such an approach, see Frank (1997). But capitalism is a very large analytical

concept. Most studies in economic sociology stress the variety of capitalisms, not only in its

functioning in different countries (Hall and Soskice 2001), but also between different markets.

Economic sociology views markets "as social arenas where firms, their suppliers, customers,

workers, and government interact" (Fligstein and Dauter 2007, p.109).

Markets are characterized by social embeddedness, and different traditions stress distinct

natures of it. Some authors, adopting a micro-sociological perspective, emphasize the

importance of social relations and networks that sustain market exchange (Granovetter 1985;

Granovetter and Swedberg 1992). Other authors take a more meso/macro approach. They put

forward the governance structure of markets and industries. In particular, neo-institutionalist

approaches conceptualize markets as organizational fields guided by sets of institutional

arrangements implemented by institutional entrepreneurs and organized interests (Powell and

DiMaggio 1991). The relations between firms, in this view, depend on rules, norms, and

cognitive aspects of the institutions governing the field. Fligstein’s political-cultural approach

to markets (1996, 2001) adopts Bourdieu's concept of fields to markets and adds power

struggles within fields as a defining feature: "Local market orders refer to a set of firms that

take one another into account in their actions and, in so doing, are able to reproduce

themselves on a period-to-period basis." (Fligstein 2001, p.111) Rather than seeking the

maximization of profit, as neo-classical economics has it, firms thus seek their survival in this

environment, by trying to establish stable relationships with competitors, suppliers, workers

and customers (Fligstein 1996, 2001). In this view, markets are politics because what happens

within markets is best described by political-cultural mechanisms. What characterizes markets

are two types of power struggles: within firms for the control of the firm, and across firms to

control the market. Firms can be incumbents or challengers, and incumbent firms can largely

impose the terms of exchange; the relations between firms are guided by institutional rules

and norms; and markets go through stages of creation, stability, and crisis (Fligstein 1996).

Governments play a crucial role in the establishment of markets, their regulation and

5

litigation. In sum, economic sociological conceptualizations make it possible to study the

distinctive structuration of markets by conceiving of them as political-cultural fields.

The emergence and transformation of markets has not been at the center of institutionalist

approaches to markets because scholars were more concerned with explaining their stability.

Nevertheless, recently many authors have started to look at the interactions between social

movements and markets/organizations, thus opening up the field of inquiry into the

transformation of markets through social movement activity (Davis et al. 2005). Fligstein

suggests that it is useful to adopt a "social movement metaphor" (emphasis mine) to explain

the rise of markets (Fligstein 1996, p.664). Just like social movements, new trends, practices,

and organizational forms like nouvelle cuisine (Rao et al. 2003), specialty brewers (Carroll

and Swaminathan 2000; Rao et al. 2000), recycling (Lounsbury et al. 2003), shareholder

value (Davis and Thompson 1994), the automobile (Rao 2009) or quality management (Cole

1999), often emerge and establish themselves through collective organizations and identities,

framing efforts, media-centered actions, with the aid of allies, etc. More than just a

metaphoric social movement process, authors thus often find "real" social movements, or at

least collective action and the rhetorical and organizational resources of movements, behind

the creation of new niche markets and organizational forms. More specifically, scholars have

studied various roles social movement actors can play in the shaping of markets (King and

Pearce 2010; Hiatt et al. 2009; Rao 2009; Zald et al. 2005):

- They can indirectly have an impact on markets by changing their regulative

framework or by changing policies that constitute opportunities or threats to

organizations or industries;

- they can directly affect the practices of existing organizations (firms) and thus

transform existing markets and organizations, by using "traditional" social movement

tactics to make pressure on firms, for example through the mobilization of consumers or

other stakeholders, or by publicly "shaming" companies, or by encouraging specific

companies through buycotts

- they can collaborate with market actors in joint initiatives of "private regulation" or in

"implementation regimes" around the monitoring of specific practices like quality

control or organic production

6

- or they can give rise to (or express themselves as) new organizational forms, and thus

create new (niche) markets.

Movements thus act from the outside and from the inside of markets. The first two approaches

identified correspond to movements acting from the outside, making indirect pressure through

the push for legislatory change or making direct pressure for corporations to change practices,

for example by shaming them publicly (Bartley and Child 2007; Den Hond and den Bakker

2007; Weber et al. 2009) or by mobilizing consumers (Balsiger 2010). In between, movement

actors collaborate with corporations to establish new forms of regulation (Bartley 2003,

2007). Finally, one must also see how the rise of new market actors and new markets can be

the very expression of social movements; activists may become entrepreneurs or give cultural

and material resources to entrepreneurs (Hiatt et al. 2009; Weber et al. 2008). New

organizational forms may be spin-offs from larger social movements, specific expressions of

general movements, or merely the inadvertent consequences of social movement activity.

The first perspective, looking at how movements pressure corporations, is the one privileged

by a social movement approach acknowledging that movements may also target corporations

(see for example Soule 2009). They challenge markets from the outside. However, limiting

oneself to this kind of contentious movement activity may lead us to adopt an all-too

schematic definition of social movements through the reiteration of a fundamental distinction

between insiders and outsiders, challengers and the polity. Instead one also needs to

acknowledge for the way processes within markets can be likened to social movements, how

movement actors collaborate with corporations and how movements may express themselves

as market actors.

Movements as heterogeneous entities

Taking into account the multiple tactics and approaches of movements that may provoke

market change requires one to adopt a view of social movements as heterogeneous actors.

One can conceive of social movements as arenas or “multi-organizational fields” (Curtis and

Zurcher 1974), populated by different collective actors pursuing similar goals, but

nevertheless having distinctive tactics, approaches, ideologies, and "cultures of action"

(Klawiter 2008). Movements consist of actors that come from different cultural and social

backgrounds, and are therefore more or less radical, opt for different tactical choices, and

have goals that can be placed on an axis going from radical transformation to moderate

reformation. While some actors radically challenge corporate practices, others are open to

7

collaboration with firms, and still others want to encourage the establishment of niche

markets. Approaches can be complementary, but they can also enter into competition or

conflict with one another. Reformative and radical fringes in movements often disagree over

the most appropriate tactics to achieve change. In the realm of fair trade, for example, a more

activist culture of action around the approach to fair trade in specialized stores is opposed to a

moderate approach, often advocated by development NGOs, around a label strategy. Such

different approaches often synchronically co-exist within one movement (for example, within

the environmental movement, there are many different organizations using different

strategies). They can also articulate diachronically, for example when the establishment of a

niche market for fair trade precedes the rise of fair trade labels. For one to understand the

transformations of a given market, it is necessary to acknowledge of this heterogeneity of

movement actors and to study the articulation, both synchronically and diachronically, of

different social movement actors and their tactics within the movement arena. It is the

interplay between these different approaches, and the reactions of corporations to movement

actions, that explain the market changes one observes.

Research strategy and methods To study how movements shape markets, the most adapted strategy given the heterogeneity of

movements and the importance of movement-target interaction is to focus on a given industry

or market. It is then possible to to see how different movement actors contribute to the

processes of market change over time. In this paper, I conduct such an analysis focusing on

the market for clothes and the integration of ethical criteria for production on this market. In

addition, I use a comparative research design. Comparing the transformations between

Switzerland and France, one can look at how different actor configurations, reactions of

targeted firms, and movement activity, produced different kinds of market changes.

The study covers the late 1990s until approximately 2008. It builds on a mixed-methods

qualitative fieldwork based on interview with key actors from movements, state agencies, and

corporations (around 20 for each country), the analysis of documents produced by social

movement actors and corporations, observation and participant observation, and secondary

sources. The goal of these multiple methods and data sources was to reconstruct social

movement activity in the clothing sector in both countries and to study the market changes

that resulted from this. Starting from an anti-sweatshop campaign that had taken place in

Switzerland and France, I then broadened the scope of the study to include other movement

8

actors and initiatives not linked to the campaign such as fair trade or organic labels, new

brands of ethical fashion, and so on, playing an important role in the transformation of the

clothing markets.

The scope of the market transformations studied here is limited in two ways. First, I only

discuss market transformations that are directly visible to consumers, in the forms of labels or

new ethical brands for example. Everything that leads to clear signals for consumers – what

can be called market equipment – is analyzed. This excludes from the study important

transformations on the markets for clothes that are not directly visible to consumers, but are

clearly linked to movement activity, too. These are market transformation upwards the

commodity chain; not signalling downwards, from producers to consumers, but moving up

the chain from brands to their contractors. In particular, an organizational field around the

conduct of social audits has emerged. Second, the scope is limited insofar as I focus on

markets for individual consumers. The market for clothes also contains an important segment

catering to collective consumers, notably in the production of uniforms or other working

wear. I do not consider this market here.

The empirical analysis proceeds in the following way: the different kinds of movement

activity and approaches with regard to ethical issues of clothing production are discussed one

after the other, each time comparing the two countries and explaining the different movement

cultures at stake and the different reactions by firms if necessary. The discussion starts by the

activities of the anti-sweatshop campaigns in both countries and the reactions by targeted

retailers. In then turns to instances of collaboration between NGOs and big retailers and more

generally to the way the issue of production conditions were incorporated by the mainstream

markets in France and Switzerland. Third, I discuss the rise (or lack thereof) of a niche market

for ethical fashion in both countries. The final section is dedicated to an overall comparative

discussion of the market changes observed, highlighting the role of actor configurations and

movement-target interaction for the shaping of markets.

9

The rise of ethical fashion in France and Switzerland

1. Anti-sweatshop campaigning and reactions by firms

In both Switzerland and France, anti-sweatshop campaigns started targeting clothing retailers

in the mid- to late 1990s. Both campaigns belonged to the European-wide coordinated

network of the Clean Clothes Campaign (Sluiter 2009). The organizations behind the

campaigns were classic social movement organizations. In Switzerland, the Bern Declaration

is an advocacy group for development politics founded in the late 1960s. It is joined at the

beginning of the campaign by two development aid NGOs – Bread for all (a protestant

organization) and Lenten Fund (a catholic one). In France, the campaign is launched by

Artisans du monde, the country’s largest fair trade association, and builds on a very large

coalition with member organizations from the sector of international solidarity (most

importantly, the CCFD, a catholic development aid organization), unions (most importantly

the CFDT) and, to a lesser extent, consumer associations. Thus, in both countries the

campaign is carried by a coalition of professional social movement organizations. At first,

these organizations fought for the introduction of a social clause to international trade

agreements; facing poor success perspectives, they decided to focus directly on brands and to

use consumer power in order to make corporations change.

Mostly through petitions and ratings, they made pressure on corporations in order to have

them adopt codes of conduct about the issue of conditions of production in clothing factories,

and urged them to join so-called multi-stakeholder initiatives to have the application of codes

independently monitored. The targets of these campaigns were the biggest sellers of clothes in

each country – in Switzerland, two general retailers and many more specialized clothing

firms; in France, especially the big retailers like Carrefour or Auchan, and sports retailers.

With their actions, the campaigns thus publicly shamed retailers for their practices; but they

also gave them positive incentives by educating consumers and giving them the tools to

become political consumers (notably through ratings of firms). Adopting codes of conduct

and becoming part of an independent monitoring initiative, then, would be potentially

rewarding to companies, as more and more consumers care about ethical issues – at least this

was the story the campaigns told.

The anti-sweatshop campaigns were thus rather similar in both countries, considering their

tactical action repertoires, framing, their demands and targets. However, the reactions by

targeted retailers to these demands differed. In Switzerland, three of them (Switcher and

10

Veillon, both specialized clothing retailers and Migros, the biggest general retailer in

Switzerland) rapidly agreed to collaborate with the campaign makers, and a pilot project on

code monitoring was started. Although this institution proved difficult to maintain once the

initial pilot stage was over and firms started developing other strategies to partially take up

campaign demands, it signifies that firms did take the issue of production conditions and

consumers' interest in the topic seriously. Different reasons account for this partial success of

the campaign (see Balsiger forthcoming): considering the three companies that participated in

the pilot project, characteristics of the firm and their position in their respective markets

(organizational fields) certainly played an important role. Two of them saw an opportunity in

positioning themselves as "ethical" brands, while the third one (Migros) was in an "ethical"

competition with its main competitor on the retail market, Coop. Furthermore, the proximity

between the campaign actors and the firms was important – there had been similar campaigns

before and also forms of collaboration. Finally, the campaign hit at a time when the market

for ethical products had already started to develop in Switzerland (with organic and fair trade

goods available at the big retailers, for example), giving signals to retailers that ethical issues

can pay off.

While there were some short-lived initial attempts of collaboration between retailers and the

French campaign, the situation then changed rather dramatically and the dynamic of the

French campaign was one of escalating antagonism. In fact, the French retailers, through their

interest group Fédération des entreprises du commerce et de la distribution (FCD), launched

their own monitoring project building on social audits, and more and more actively opposed

the campaign. Under these circumstances, collaboration was out of question. The French

campaign then ceased its activity in 2005 because of a lack of resources (a new demand for

European funding was rejected), but also because of very strong internal strategic disputes.

The retailers' tactic of shielding away from movement demands by developing their own

initiative and holding the issue away from competitive demands, had payed off. The strength

of the business organization FCD, experienced in ferociously defending the common interests

of the retail sector, had decidedly shaped the dynamics of the French campaign. But it is also

significant that ethical products in general had only been very marginally introduced in

French retailers until the mid 2000s; the appeal of "political consumers" thus seemed rather

limited to retailer executives.

11

2. Changes on the mainstream markets

Big retailers, big NGOs, and state support in Switzerland

The market strategies by Swiss retailers are characterized by the fact that they were developed

early on in the campaign, were conducted on a large scale, and in many cases involved state

and NGO sponsored initiatives. The three most important initiatives of this kind are (a)

Coop's clothing line called “naturaline”, (b) a state-sponsored organic cotton project

conducted by the NGO helvetas, and (c) Max Havelaar certified fair trade cotton. Social

movement actors from outside of the Clean Clothes Campaign thus play an important role in

the transformations on the market for clothes and the emergence of an offer of "ethical"

clothes. While the CCC gives voice to and creates a consumer demand, other actors more

immediately contribute to shaping the ethical offer. These actors come from inside the social

movement arena, but also include the state and private market actors.

Naturaline is produced by a Swiss firm called Remei AG. Initially a conventional cotton

trader, Remei started to cultivate organic cotton in the early 1990s. The origin of the project is

very much associated to the founder of the firm, P. Hohmann, who gets interested in organic

agriculture, thinks it's beneficial for cotton farmers, and decides to start a small experiment in

India – at first, in his own words, as a "hobby". In an interview, Hohmann presents himself as

someone who has always had a somewhat alternative lifestyle: at home, they eat organic

vegetables, do not give antibiotics to their kids and send them to a private school devoted to

the anthroposophist principles of the humanist Rudolph Steiner.

At the time of the launch of the project, organic cotton is at its pioneering stage. Coop quickly

becomes Remei's main business partner and buyer of the organic cotton; for the retailer, the

mid 1990s corresponds to the time where it starts developing its offer in organic food –

vegetables, fruit, diary products, and meat. The mid to late 1990s also correspond to a first

boom in organic cotton where in addition to Coop some other brands start selling organic

clothes. But this trend is not long-lived, and after a couple of years, organic products

disappear again from shops (Interview Hohman). This is not the case with Coop, which stays

committed and slowly expands the Naturaline offer; the Coop salesperson who supported

Remei from the beginning would later be elected to the retailer's executive management. In

the course of the years 2000, Remei converts fully to organic cotton and launches its own

label, called BioRe, which takes into account both organic and social standards. BioRe was

12

recognized for its practice by a number of awards, and Coop became one of the world’s

biggest seller of organic clothes.

The organic cotton project from helvetas, the biggest Swiss development aid organization, is a

development aid project. The form the promotion of organic cotton takes in the project is part

of a strategic renewal within the organization: rather than developing local markets or

producing for niche markets, the idea is now to support projects that allow underprivileged

farmers from developing countries to access mainstream markets in the West. The launch of

the Max Havelaar label in Switzerland in the early 1990s, where helvetas played a driving

part, was a first step towards this new philosophy; organic cotton is another way to pursue on

this track. The basic idea is to find commercial retail partners in Switzerland who are ready to

market the products from the development aid projects and thus to fund them. This means

collaborating with Swiss firms, a strategy that was met with some criticism within the

organization. Critics object that directly associating Swiss firms to development aid project is

a return to remote times, when development aid meant foremost the defense of the interests of

Swiss industries in developing countries. The danger that such projects might serve the

powerful Swiss retail partners more than farmers in developing countries is pointed out1.

The project starts off once it finds commercial partners (Migros and Switcher) who guarantee

a long-term commitment to buy the organic cotton the project's farmers produce. It is strongly

subsidized and supported by the Swiss government. On the one hand, the State Secretariat for

Economic Affairs (seco) and the Direction for Development and Cooperation2 fund the

project to develop organic cotton production; on the other hand, the seco also funds a center

for organic cotton situated within helvetas, with the task of promoting organic cotton in

Switzerland and contributing to its development. This center with two employees puts up an

Internet platform and organizes international seminars and conferences on the topic. The idea

of this center is thus not just to support the development of the Swiss organic cotton project,

but to contribute much more broadly, and on an international level, to the promotion of 1 Indeed, for a long time the dominant view in the progressive sector of development aid was that Western firms are not a vector of development, but a cause for a lack thereof. .This is the basic premise of dependency theory, the dominant development aid ideology from the 1970s about the exploitation of the South through the capitalist North. The objections raised do not bring down the project, but they have some symbolic effects: notably, no money from private donors is used to finance the project, because in a way, this might be interpreted as giving donations to retailers such as Migros. 2 Public development aid in Switzerland is foremost the domain of the direction for development and cooperation, which is part of the foreign ministry. However, there has traditionally been an office within the ministry of economy pursuing development aid. In the past, it was especially this kind of aid which was criticized as being mostly about defending Swiss economic interests, and the office still pursues a market-based approach to development aid, notably through the promotion of labels.

13

organic cotton. For the seco, this strategy again meets the policy objective of promoting

market-based solutions to development and sustainability issues. In sum, the project

promoting a market-based approach to development is a close collaboration between an NGO,

the Swiss government, and commercial partners in the form of clothing retailers. Helvetas

organic cotton will first be sold by Migros and Switcher in the mid 2000s.

Max Havelaar (MH) fair trade cotton, finally, is developed at around the same time. The first

MH cotton is sold by Switcher, Migros, and Manor in 2005. MH certified fair trade cotton

will come to constitute yet another alternative for retailers to demonstrate their social

commitment, although its success remains rather limited compared to other MH products. In

spite of its NGO background (MH Switzerland is launched by the country’s six most

important development aid NGOs, among them Bread for all, Lenten Fund, and Helvetas), the

functioning of MH is very much business-oriented. Firms are licensees and have to pay MH a

fee in order to carry the label; in exchange, they benefit from the legitimacy and the high

profile of the name Max Havelaar. As such, it resembles the helvetas organic cotton project,

with which it actually collaborates since part of the organic cotton is also certified as fair trade

by MH. Again, this collaboration is facilitated since helvetas is also a member of MH, and the

person responsible for the organic cotton project at helvetas is at the same time member of

Max Havelaar’s board. Both organizations, MH and helvetas, pursue a similar agenda and

turn to a business strategy to achieve their political development goals.

The case of MH textiles most explicitly shows the potential conflict between different

approaches within the social movement arena. Indeed, the launching of MH fair trade cotton

involved a clash with the Swiss CCC campaign around the question of the concept of

"fairness" on the supply chain. Members of the campaign coalition – with two of them being

concomittantly members of MH Switzerland – were very critical with regard to fair trade

cotton, because they perceived it as a potential competitor to their campaign. Firms could put

forward their ethical commitment for a limited range of products, and then “forget” to do

something about the rest of the clothes they sell. In addition, the development of an offer for

ethical clothes might demobilize consumers from the anti-sweatshop campaigns. For these

reasons, the Swiss CCC campaign tried to lobby, within MH, against the launch of fair trade

cotton, but without success.

Together, these three projects (Naturaline, helvetas organic cotton, MH) constitute the main

supply for ethical clothes in Switzerland. They cover environmental and social issues, take the

14

form of labels, and are available at the big retailers targeted by the Clean Clothes Campaign.

In particular, the three companies Coop (biore), Migros (helvetas organic cotton and Max

Havelaar), and Switcher (helvetas organic cotton and Max Havelaar) are their main partners.

In sum, what is thus striking in the changes occurring on the Swiss market is the role played

by NGOs, retailers/clothing firms, and the state, in the development of an alternative offer.

Retailers commit to ethical clothes, especially to organic clothes, and they are ready to

financially support initiatives in their beginnings, in the organic cotton case facilitated by

subsidies from the state. As a result, the offer of ethical clothes consists of organic and fair

clothes from a limited number of sources, representing three big projects. Behind these

projects stand NGOs or social entrepreneurs pursuing a strategy where markets, if working

according to certain (mostly privately settled) standards, are a motor of development. The

solutions advocated are institutional and incorporated into the normal functioning of markets.

Marginal development of ethical fashion on the French mainstream market

French clothing retailers also make use of some visible signs for the ethical quality of clothes

– that is, either related to their conditions of production or to ecological aspects. But they are

scarce and only appear towards the middle of the years 2000, that is, mostly after the

temporary ceasing of the campaign. Monoprix is the first big retailer to offer ethical clothes

(up from 2003), working with the Swiss firm BioRe. Some organic clothes can be found in

the offer of many retailers (Carrefour in 2005, Décathlon in 2008, Leclerc in 2008, Système U

in 2008, Casino in 2009). And in 2005, Max Havelaar France launches fair trade certified

cotton, and a number of retailers become partners. La Redoute, in particular, offers the biggest

fair trade collection, but also other retailers like Leclerc, Cora, Système U, and Celio sell

some products certified by Max Havelaar. Globally, there are thus some changes in the form

of new product lines and labels; but these changes come late; they do not, except in the case

of Max Havelaar France, involve NGOs; and they do not benefit from state subsidies either.

All in all, there is thus a striking difference to the Swiss case. The mainstream market for

clothes in France, the very market that was targeted by the ESE coalition for over a decade,

only developed a very small offer of “ethical” product lines. The absence of ethical clothes,

however, is only true if one looks at the big retailers. In their shadow, a niche market for

ethical fashion developed in the second part of the years 2000.

15

3. The rise of niche markets for ethical fashion

Ethical fashion in France The market for ethical clothes emerged through an indirect relationship with the French CCC.

The CCC somehow prepared the soil; it had raised the issue in a first time and made the

production of conditions of clothes a public issue. But the emerging market and the actors that

are behind do not have any direct ties to the organizations behind the ESE coalition; they

belong to a different universe. The general goals of the campaign – fair conditions of

production and transparency – are translated by actors who are outside of the SMOs carrying

the campaign; they serve as the basis for the creation of a niche, but not necessarily in a self-

conscious way. Rather, in the course of the diverse political consumerist movements – of

whom the CCC is but one part, alongside with fair trade and organic agriculture movements,

in particular (Dubuisson-Quellier 2009, 2010) – the idea of ethical conditions for the

production of goods has become a "natural part of the social fabric"; they are "cultural tools

that can be used in many different social settings" (Haveman et al. 2007, p.120). Because it is

a process of translation that occurs in a different social context, the analysis will show that

these goals are also considerably stretched to accommodate different logics and respond to the

needs and goals of a different set of actors at the origin of an emerging market.

The creation of markets on a micro-level involves "the creation of a stable social

organization between the participants in exchange, producers and consumers". (Weber et al.

2008, p. 531); the emergence of new markets or niches3 thus poses three challenges: what

prompts new producers to enter an emerging market segment, how do they establish a

collective identity, and how are relationships between producers and consumers and rules of

exchange established? (Ibid; p. 533). The creation of markets requires cultural work of

legitimation through the creation of collective identities and trust among producers and

between producers and consumers (Granovetter 1985) and the framing of products in a way

that appeals to a certain segment of consumers (Zelizer 1983). It further requires resources,

institutions and material infrastructures such as distribution channels, which allow and

stabilize the encounter between consumers and producers.

3 The terms new markets, niches, or niche markets, are used as a synonym. The idea is that firms choose in which part of the market they want to compete, a process called niche partitioning by Carroll (Carroll 1985). It is about avoiding competition in a broader market, through the creation of a specialized niche with specific characteristics. I do not make any assumptions about the stability and longevity of the niche, but rather look at how political and economic entrepreneurs attempt to create one.

16

The ethical fashion market develops around the Ethical Fashion Show (EFS), a fashion fair

where clothing brands exhibit their collections. The organizers of this show, which can be

envisioned as a social movement entrepreneur, played a crucial role in the emerging market

for ethical fashion in France, by creating a collective identity, framing a new niche, and

facilitating the physical encounter of producers and consumers. EFS takes place for the first

time in 2004 and its creation is closely tied to its founder, I. Quéhé. Quéhé worked for an

advertisement agency and a fashion magazine in the 1980s. She then started creating her own

clothes and, confronted with the difficulties to find distribution channels for them, she put in

place a network of direct distribution together with some fashion designer friends. She created

an association called Universal Love and started organizing the "Free Market". From 1995 to

2002, these markets constituted an opportunity for small producers of clothes to present their

collections and sell them. The EFS builds on this idea, but whereas the Free Market was open

to all small fashion designers, EFS puts the ethical dimension at its center.

For the first EFS in 2004 around 20 designers present their collections under the banner of

ethical fashion, and in the four subsequent years, this number goes up to 100. Participants

have to subscribe to the "charte de la mode éthique", and in later years, respond to a

questionnaire regarding their social and environmental commitments. Ethical fashion is

conceived very broadly according to these guidelines. In addition to the respect of minimal

labor standards, ethical designers have to have an environmental, developmental, or "ethnic"

commitment. Concretely, this means that the EFS actually unites under the banner of ethical

fashion a variety of approaches and goals.

I did observation at the fourth edition of EFS in 2007, taking place at the Tapis Rouge, an ancient grand magasin in Paris' 10th district. The event lasted for three days. It consisted of an exhibition space taking over three floors of the sublime 19th century building, several runway shows, and a number of conferences on specific issues linked to the ethical production of clothes and on ethical consumers. Every exhibitor had a little sign on which its commitments were listed according to the following categories: organic, social project, traditional skills, recycling, and fair trade. Exhibitors could carry one or several of these qualifications. Globally, the visitor could find three kinds of styles: expensive and exclusive couture occupied the smallest, but most prominently placed part. The biggest part was occupied by what could be termed ethical-chic: young and fashionable clothes and accessories for medium-range prices. Finally, a last style can be characterized as ethnic fashion. This category usually refers to the preservation of traditional skills – for example Indian style batik skirts, African tissues, or wools. They were somehow separated from the rest of the exhibitors, banned to the third floor, and seemed to correspond more to an ancient form of ethical fashion, which does not care a lot about having a fashionable image. In spite of this diversity, a common and rather astonishing feature for an observer with some expectations after studying the transformations of the mainstream market, was the comparatively stunning absence of the numerous labels, logos, certifications etc. that attest for the ethical qualities of products. The majority of the exhibiting brands relied mostly on self-declaration.

17

For example, they claimed being fair trade, but often did not have any kind of fair trade certification. Or they adopted the organic label without presenting some kind of independent "proof" for it. In addition, many of the producers put forward social projects in which they are involved: for instance, collaborations with NGOs in Brazil or India, which can either be linked to their product (for example a collaboration with an NGO that works with underprivileged women who produce clothes), or have no direct relation to the production process. In other words, it is striking to see that often these small producers embrace practices that are somehow at odds with established standards and which correspond to what many social movement actors would criticize as paternalistic tactics and mere self-declaration.

Many of the exhibitors at EFS were small start-up firms, explicitly founded as "ethical"

clothing brands. Some of them (like Veja, Tudo Bom, Ideo) have become fairly famous

brands, were decorated with prices for sustainable or social business practices, and their

success stories have been related in the media and are recounted on their websites. They were

founded by young entrepreneurs, some of them graduates from France's elite business schools

HEC Paris or Dauphine4, who wanted to launch a business model "with a conscience". They

are thus part of a trend which has seen a growth in organizations identifying themselves as

belonging to the sector of social economy or fair trade in the beginning of the years 2000 in

France, and at the same time a growing specialization of these organizations, and an

increasing business-orientation of existing organizations (Huybrechts 2008). This growth goes

along with an increasing acceptance of such business models within the conventional business

world. One sign of this process of achieving cultural legitimacy can be seen in the creation of

a major in "altermanagement" at HEC Paris and a chair for the study of social economy at

ESSEC business school in Paris. Beforehand, the teaching of social economy was reserved to

smaller, less prestigious universities. Being taught at the most important business schools of

the country signals a growing interest for this kind of economy within the economic

establishment, and stands for the change in the perception of social economy and fair trade.

Such processes of cultural legitimation are identified as crucial for the rise and stabilization of

new organizational forms in population economy (Amburgey and Rao 1996; Fligstein and

Dauter 2007; Haveman and Rao 1997); the peculiarity here is that whereas beforehand, such

organizational forms benefited from legitimacy in certain social circles, they seem to have

achieved a broader social acceptance recently with the adoption of courses in elite

management schools.

The goal of these "ethical" businesses is not foremost to raise awareness among consumers

and to mobilize them, and they have very different backgrounds and organization structures

than the organizations in the traditional alternative circuit of fair trade. They are not 4 This is true for the founders of Veja and Ideo.

18

associations or non-profits, but most of the time conventional firms; but in spite of this, they

may benefit from financial or symbolic (through awards) support by the DIESSES (the

government agency responsible for the promotion of the "third sector", that is the non-profit

sector of the economy (traditionally, associations and co-operatives)5. But the business-

models of the ethical start-ups do not correspond to traditional third sector non-profits.

Rather, they create new fluid forms of "social" enterprises, reflecting the evolution of the

category of social economy through the thriving of new forms of fair trade and sustainability

business models (Robert 2007): conventional for-profit corporations, social entrepreneurs,

labeling organizations, associations, and NGOs co-exist (Becchetti and Huybrechts 2008;

Huybrechts et al. 2006). This dilution of organizational forms and the cultural legitimation of

both business within the political consumption universe and, inversely, "ethical" business

models within the business world of management schools, have created new possibilities for

young entrepreneurs to conceive of new ways of linking social and political commitment with

professional careers; one could make the hypothesis that people who would have joined

humanitarian organizations in the decade before might now create ethical businesses6.

The Ethical Fashion show is also an important actor to give new meaning to ethical fashion

and thus foster a collective identity. This process consists of two distinct moments of framing.

The first one consists in framing the ethical qualities of clothes – the social conditions of

production, the environmental consequences of production – as a component of the product,

just as their cut or color. Many actors do this cultural work, first and foremost the CCC, but

also fair trade labels or the new ethical fashion brands. The reframing of clothes in terms of

their conditions of production is aimed at producers (and retailers) and at consumers, whose

values and behavior the movement aims to change. The specific framing effort of the EFS,

through its different categories and its ethical chart, and the individual framing work done by

ethical fashion brands, are destined to differentiate the offer of the niche from what

5 The DIESSES not only supports financially the EFS, it also co-produced with EFS the memento of ethical fashion, which can be read as a guide for producers of ethical fashion; in addition, it instituted an award comporting three categories: fair trade, solidarity trade, and social economy. 6 To be sure, this pattern of young entrepreneurs is only an impressionistic analysis based on publicly available accounts of the most visible actors. A more thorough analysis should be led to nuance this picture, and it would very likely reveal more diverse profiles. This can especially be expected given the observation of different universes within the participants of the Ethical Fashion Show. The actors belonging to the ethnic category being, most likely, less recent and possibly closer to an activist culture of action. However, the profile of young entrepreneurs "with a conscience" very much corresponds to the collective framing put forward by the EFS, which aims at revamping ethical fashion from its traditional activist image. The consumption of ethical clothes ends up being presented as something essentially non-political and hip.

19

consumers can find on conventional markets. Ethical fashion is different from conventional

fashion because it incorporates ethical aspects. The second moment of reframing builds on the

first one and is at the core of the EFS' activities. It does not aim at differentiating; instead, its

goal is to present ethical fashion as just as fashionable as conventional fashion. Clothes do not

only have ethical qualities, but ethical fashion is also hip. The activist image needs to be

stripped off ethical clothes. Marketing language rather than activist language is used. Ethical

clothes don't have to look wretched and old-fashioned; they can be just as trendy as brands on

the fashion circuit. Everything around the Ethical Fashion Show is designed to transmit this

image of hipness: from the choice of the venue to the printed bilingual catalog to the brands

exhibited: it is not sufficient to produce ethically; the collections must also satisfy the

aesthetic expectations of the show's organizers. The brands themselves promote this image

too, through their websites, flyers, and advertisement. The consumers targeted, finally, are not

necessarily politicized consumers shopping at alternative fair trade stores and organic shops.

Rather, they are imagined as a hip, young, and urban clientele.

The EFS, in addition to being a platform where the shaping of the category of ethical fashion

takes place and ethical fashion is framed as a hip form of consumption, also constitutes an

important infrastructural venue. It allows producers to come together at an event and to

exchange; and it allows consumers to discover a variety of ethical brands. Such physical

encounters are just as crucial to the creation of markets as the cultural shaping and

differentiating of the niche. Consumers and producers must find each other, and this takes

place through intermediaries. In addition to the EFS, some of the brands present at this event

can also be seen at other fairs for "political consumption", like fair trade fairs. Other

important intermediaries favoring the encounter between producers and consumers are the

media. The phenomenon of ethical fashion received wide media attention in different press

outlets: the textile industry press, the specialized press on alternative consumption (magazines

like ekwo or altermondes), fashion magazines, but also in the general press. Finally, new

markets need distribution channels to organize the exchange. The new ethical brands are sold

through both existing and newly created, specifically "ethical" channels. Many have put in

place direct distribution channels through their websites. Some brands are sold in general

high-end retailing stores, not specialized in ethical clothes. But besides that, specialized

retailers have emerged selling ethical clothes; in part, this development is part of the effort of

creating a new image for ethical products, away from the activist image. Altermundi is an

example of such a physical store. As one of the new generation fair trade companies, it

opened its first fair trade store in 2002. In September 2006, the company then opens a

20

"concept store" in Paris, exclusively dedicated to ethical fashion. Working as a franchise,

altermundi stores now exist in several French cities. They are situated in trendy

neighborhoods and look like any hip fashion or gift store, but they only sell clothes and other

products from ethical and fair trade brands. More such specialized stores can be found on the

Internet, where in addition to the websites of individual brands, there exist also specific

ethical online stores. In sum, consumers are encountered through various means: both on the

mainstream market and through specific channels of a niche market: fair trade fairs and

distribution channels, specific ethical clothes stores, and an offer on the internet where

different producers of ethical clothing belong to a network of websites linked to one another.

Ethical fashion thus benefits both from circuits of alternative consumption that are already in

place and builds up new networks.

Attempts to create a niche market in Switzerland

One can also find attempts by movement entrepreneurs in Switzerland to foster an alternative

ethical niche market for clothes. My fieldwork identified two such attempts, but mainly the

analysis suggests that such attempts have been much less successful in the Swiss case than in

France. I will focus the discussion on one social movement organization active in the

Switzerland’s French-speaking part, called Nicefuture, which organized the first Swiss Ethical

Fashion Show in Geneva in 2008. Nicefuture exists since 2004 and is dedicated to the

promotion of sustainable development. It was founded by two graphic designers who in

parallel run a communication agency specialized on “green” communication and clients. It

has used a tactical repertoire including the organization of a yearly festival for sustainable

development; the web publication of evaluations of corporate practices rating festivals or gas

stations; the print publication of an "ethical shopping guide" (the first appearing in 2007) in

collaboration with Edelweiss, a Swiss fashion magazine; or the advocating of changes in

individual everyday practices, in particular through a facebook group.

I met one of the founders at the Paris Ethical Fashion Show in 2007, where he was gathering information and making contacts with the goal of creating a similar event in Geneva for the following year. Because, as he said to me, ethical fashion in Switzerland was still fairly unknown. When I pointed to the fact that the big Swiss retailers had important offers in organic and socially "fair" clothes, he didn't link this to the idea of ethical fashion: for him, ethical fashion was made by independent designers creating specifically ethical brands, built on the model of the niche market developing in France. The approach and political background of nicefuture is close to the French EFS. The

association presents a change in consumer behavior as desirable not only because it is good

21

for the planet, but also because it’s easy and hip. Nicefuture's approach is one where

ecological principles of sustainable development are a matter of individual change. Creating a

more sustainable society does not require political and systemic change, or at least this is not

the path they privilege. They defend an individualized ecology where a more sustainable

society originates from individual and moral change.

Nicefuture's activities to promote ethical fashion grow out of the ethical shopping guide and

their observation of the development of a market for ethical clothes in France. Through an

online shop on the association website, nicefuture also sells some of the brands they

discovered at the Ethical Fashion Shows in Paris. From the observation that no similar market

exists in Switzerland, the association decides to organize the first Swiss EFS, in Geneva in

2008. The event should show the public that there is an offer of ethical clothes, a variety of

small brands, and that this offer does not limit itself to old-fashioned hippie clothes. And

second, it should demonstrate Swiss designers that they can do something with natural

materials, through an award launched together with Edelweiss magazine – something that

should enroll Swiss designers and brands to the segment of ethical fashion. Thus, nicefuture is

disposed to play very much the role EFS played in France as a facilitator to the creation of a

new market, by uniting producers and consumers under a specific label – ethical fashion – and

by reframing ethical fashion as trendy and hip:

"In France there are a lot of shops that only sell ethical fashion; tens of it. In the French-speaking part of Switzerland, there are only two or three. Besides the network of third world shops, helvetas and so on, this is something else, this is not our target. It exists, it is known by a part of the population which has already bought into these problems. We really want to extend all this, show that clothing shops also have ethical clothes and brands, shops open with an offer in ethical clothes in addition to their usual offer." (Interview with Nicefuture founders)

Like the French EFS, they want to distinguish ethical fashion from its image as activist

fashion, and make it attractive to new kinds of customers, interested by the ethical issues

raised, but equally having high expectations concerning the clothes' style:

Discussion: Campaigns, movement arenas, and market change In both Switzerland and France, social movement campaigns mobilizing consumers have

taken place around the issue of production conditions in the clothing industries. Markets for

“ethical fashion” have risen, yet they are shaped very differently in the two countries. In

Switzerland, a limited number of labels involving large clothing retailers, NGOs, and the state

22

have come to dominate this market, while in France, the most striking development is the

emergence of a niche market for ethical fashion.

Co-existence of different movement approaches

Social movement organizations can use a variety of tactics to achieve market change, and

often different organizations within the social movement arena pursue different strategies and

tactics. These tactical choices, in turn, reflect different cultures of action (Klawiter 2009) that

movement actors belong to and which can be identified within the social movement arena.

Table 1 resumes the different approaches one observes on the market for clothes in

Switzerland and France.

Outside pressure Collaboration Niche markets S W I T Z E R L A N D

Major initiatives Actors "Culture of action"

Clean Clothes Campaign NGOs activist culture political claims

- pilot project for code monitoring - helvetas cotton - Max Havelaar cotton (- Coop Naturaline) NGOs Incumbent firms No political claims Consumer-oriented

Geneva ethical fashion show Volunteer association Consumer-oriented Not necessarily political

F R A N C E

Major initiatives Actors "Culture of action"

Clean Clothes Campaign NGOs activist culture political claims

no collaboration between campaign and firms marginal role of NGOs for transformation of mainstream markets

Rise of ethical fashion Ethical fashion show social or "ethical" entrepreneurs non-activist culture no political framing "ethical"

Table 1: Social movement approaches on the market for clothes in Switzerland and France

One can basically distinguish between three kinds of social movement actors. First, there are

the anti-sweatshop campaigners that can be found in both countries. They carry a very similar

23

campaign in both cases building on outside pressure, attacking the reputation of brands and

mobilizing consumers. The culture of action of the campaigns in both countries is activist,

their framing political and their tactics partly contentious. These actors publicly raise the issue

of production conditions in the clothing industry and contribute to raise the awareness of

consumers for this question.

A second category consists of the forms of collaboration that take place between firms and

social movement organizations. This is foremost developed in Switzerland. First, a

collaboration takes place between the Swiss anti-sweatshop campaign and three firms, leading

to an independent monitoring initiative. Second, two important collaborations between firms

and NGOs lead to the development of cotton that is labeled as fair trade or organic. The

culture of action of these initiatives is not contentious and activist as in the first category, but

one of collaboration in order to enhance the social and environmental conditions of

fabrication for clothes. The instruments used are consumer-oriented and market-based; the

framing is not contentious, but one of development and fair trade that can be achieved with

the contribution of established firms. The case of naturaline, the “ethical” clothing line sold

by Coop, builds on a very similar model but it does not rely on a collaboration between NGOs

and firms. It could therefore also be classified in the third category, the emergence of new

organizational forms in niche markets; however, because it concerns an established retailer

from the mainstream market, it figures in the second category.

The third category consists of the emergence new clothing brands producing ethical clothes

and situating themselves on a niche market. In France, the Ethical Fashion Show played an

important role in bringing together new fashion brands and uniting them under a common

label of ethical fashion, while similar attempts in Switzerland were less successful. The actors

that drive this culture of action are mostly economic entrepreneurs that see themselves as

“social” or “ethical” firms. They are consumer-oriented but want to make fashion “with a

conscience”. While they may be inspired by anti-sweatshop campaigns or other “political

consumerist” movements, they do not explicitly promote such goals, nor do they explicitly

endorse an alternative economic exchange such as for example the classic fair trade

movement. Their culture of action can therefore not be characterized as activist or political in

the same sense as anti-sweatshop campaigners. Their organizational structure is business-

oriented, although this business is driven by an ethical approach. The boundaries between

social movement actors and market actors are thus blurred. Examples of this blurring could be

the association nicefuture, which also acts as distributor for some brands of ethical clothes, or

24

some of the brands themselves, which make business but are inspired by social movement

goals of using a different kind of business philosophy.

It is not always easy to situate actors in these different categories, as they may overlap

sometimes. But the purpose of the analysis was to show that different approaches co-exist,

and that they may sometimes be conflicting. This is the case, for example, campaigns from

the outside and forms of collaboration between firms and social movement actors. While

these two approaches can be complementing – pressure through public campaigning is built

up in order to push companies to collaboration – they can also enter in conflict, as when other

movement actors, not part of the campaign, collaborate with firms and thus create potential

alternatives to direct responses to campaign activity. This is the case, for example, with the

development of Max Havelaar fair trade cotton in Switzerland. Similarly, the rise of

alternative niche markets can also be seen both as complementary to campaign activity and as

a potential competition to them. From the point of view of campaigners, it may push

consumers to opt for consumption exit strategies (buying at ethical stores) and thus

demobilize them from the voice strategy of campaigns.

Configurations and articulation of movement approaches

Hiatt et al. (2009), analyzing the consequences of the American temperance movement in the

19th century, have shown how this movement, by delegitimizing the consumption of alcohol,

has (often inadvertently) favored the development of the soft drink industry. They identify

three mechanisms that explain this process: Market push, i.e. motivating a class of

entrepreneurs who share the movement’s values to develop alternatives more consistent with

those values than current products; market pull, i.e. motivating consumers to change their

consumption patterns; and the encouraging of shifts in resources from one set of activities to

another (Hiatt et al. 2009, p. 644). The cases of the transformations of the markets for clothes

equally highlight the mechanisms of market push and pull, and add the importance of the

strategic interactions between movements and their targets. The CCC certainly played a role

(together with other movements denouncing conditions of production and fighting for

alternative forms of consumption) in the changing of consumers’ values and preferences, by

contributing to the construction of political consumers, which constitutes the market pull

mechanism. But they also motivated a class of entrepreneurs to develop ethical business

alternatives (again, together with other actors and developments such as the role played by the

DIESSES, university programs, and other movement actors), constituting the mechanism of

market push. While resource shift does not appear to be a pertinent mechanism in this case, a

25

final factor that appears to be very important and is revealed thanks to the comparison with

the Swiss case is the reaction of the big retailers to the campaign’s claims. It seems that room

for a niche market for ethical fashion was there because the targeted retailers largely ignored

the demands and avoided to make an issue of market competition out of it. This meant that

there was no real offer for ethical clothes to respond to the demand created, in part, by the

ESE coalition’s campaigns. The niche for ethical fashion could fill this void. In Switzerland,

where this wasn’t the case and on the contrary the big retailers quickly occupied the niche, no

such alternative niche emerged, in spite of some efforts by ethical entrepreneurs to do so.

Thus, the very result of the strategic interaction between the campaigns and their targets had

important implications for the broader structuration of the markets for ethical clothes.

It is the combination of different movement actors and their approaches – provoking change

as a result of outside pressure or of actions within markets, as market actors – that explain the

market changes one observes. The main difference between the French and Swiss case is the

extent to which the market for ethical clothes is already developed within the mainstream

retailers in Switzerland. This transformation of the mainstream market makes it difficult for a

niche market to rise, for there is no specific niche to occupy. In France, because the

established clothing brands – both general and specialized retailers – developed ethical

fashion only on a very marginal scope, the niche market could develop as an alternative. In

Switzerland, there is already a mainstream offer for ethical clothes that occupies the field, and

thus less room for a niche market emerging in opposition.

In addition to this, what constitutes another important difference between the French and the

Swiss case is the role of the state and its policies regarding the encouragement of ethical

business in general and ethical fashion in particular. In Switzerland, state subsidies are

channeled towards big NGOs and their label initiatives, not toward creation of small

businesses. This is different in France, where, as Huybrecht and collaborators have shown

(REFE) there has been an important growth of “social enterprises” in the early 2000s, with the

help of both national and regional policies of support to alternative business models, a

phenomenon for which there is no equivalent in Switzerland. The market-push mechanism,

thus, was more directed in France towards small entrepreneurs and the creation of new

organizational forms, whereas it was directed towards big retailers and NGO-firm

collaborations in Switzerland. In addition, the fact that big retailers “occupied” the ethical

niche in Switzerland before small manufacturers, seems to make it more difficult for social

movement entrepreneurs to frame ethical clothes as hip and fashionable. A report based on a

survey of small clothing brands in the Zurich area actually reveals that the label “ethical

26

fashion” does not serve as a positive form of identification. It is not viewed as an opportunity

to reach new consumers, but rather as potentially stigmatizing. "Green fashion" (Ökomode)

and fair trade fashion is associated, by the brands interviewed for the study, with a negative

image, "certainly not with "fashion" or "design"" (Starmanns 2009, p. 27) None of them

actively seeks to position itself as a brand of ethical fashion. Finally, it must also be said that

the markets for clothes in both countries are different in their size and regarding the

importance of the fashion industry. Paris is famous worldwide for its fashion shows, and the

EFS draws on this tradition to reach publicity and a wide audience. Together, the different

reactions by big firms and the favorable conditions for small ethical entrepreneurs in France

constituted a soil where the development of a niche market for ethical clothes was more likely

in France.

Conclusion Ethical fashion is a relatively new phenomenon that can be linked to the rise of ethical

consumption as a form of political participation. Although for a great deal of clothes, very

few information regarding production conditions are publicly available, it is nevertheless

possible today for politically conscious consumers to find clothes that respond to specific

ethical concerns, such as environnementally-friendly fiber and production processes or the

respect of minimal labor standard on the production chain. Such aspects are designated by

specifically developed labels and product lines, or by clothing brands that position themselves

explicitly as “ethical” fashion. In this paper, I have suggested to look closer at the

structuration of markets for ethical clothes and to explain distinctive structuration patterns

through a detailed study of social movement activity and configurations and interactions

between movements, firms, and the state. Comparing the rise of markets for ethical fashion in

Switzerland and France, I observe that whereas in the former country, ethical clothes can

foremost be found on the mainstream market in the form of labels or specific product lines,

ethical fashion in France has mostly been characterized by the emergence of a niche market

populated by mostly newly founded firms. I explain this different structuration by the

different dynamics of anti-sweatshop campaigns in both countries and in particular by the

different reactions by mainstream firms to these campaigns, and by the different incentives by

states, turned towards creation of small ethical firms in France and towards developments of

NGO-firm collaborations in Switzerland. Together, this produced a favorable condition to the

development of a niche market in France, of which a social movement entrepreneur could

take advantage, whereas it meant that the field of ethical clothes was occupied by big retailers

27

in Switzerland.

Considering the phenomenon of political consumerist movements, this study suggests to look

at the diversity of political consumerisms that one can find and at their articulation, from

forms that stress consumer mobilization and contention to forms of collaboration between

social movement actors and firms to the development of alternative markets, be they animated

by alternative modes of exchange (such as in fair trade) or by conventional ones (such as in

the case of ethical fashion). In particular, it emphasizes that social movements can be actors

of change for markets and themselves become market actors, an often overlooked aspect of

movement activity. In terms of market sociology, the comparative study suggests that the

development of markets and their structuration can be better understood if one looks at actor

configurations and processes of interaction that shape market change and the rise of new

markets.

References Amburgey, T. L. and H. Rao (1996). "Organizational Ecology: Past, Present, and Future Directions." The Academy of Management Journal 39(5): 1265-1286. Balsiger, P. (2010). "Making Political Consumers: The Tactical Action Repertoire of a Campaign for Clean Clothes." Social Movement Studies 9(3): 311-329. Balsiger, P. (Forthcoming) “How Corporations Fight Back: An Interactionist Approach of the Outcomes of the Anti-Sweatshop Movement in Switzerland and France”, under review Bartley, T. (2003). "Certifying Forests and Factories: States, Social Movements, and the Rise of Private Regulation in the Apparel and Forest Products Fields." Politics & Society 31(3): 433-464. Bartley, T. (2007). "Institutional Emergence in an Era of Globalization: The Rise of Transnational Private Regulation of Labor and Environnmental Conditions." American Journal of Sociology 113(2): 297-351. Bartley, T. and C. Child (2007). Shaming the Corporation: Globalization, Reputation, and the Dynamics of Anti-Corporate Movements, Indiana University. Becchetti, L. and B. Huybrechts (2008). "The Dynamics of Fair Trade as a Mixed-form Market." Journal of Business Ethics 81: 733-750. Carroll, G. R. (1985). "Concentration and Specialization: Dynamics of Niche Width in Populations of Organizations." American Journal of Sociology 90(6): 1262-83. Carroll, G. R. and A. Swaminathan (2000). "Why the Microbrewery Movement?

28

Organizational Dynamics of Resource Partitioning in the American Brewing Industry after Prohibition." American Journal of Sociology 106(3): 715-762. Chasin, A. (2000). Selling Out. The Gay and Lesbian Movement Goes to Market. Houndsmills, Basingstoke New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Cole, R. E. (1999). Managing Quality Fads: How American Business Learned to Play the Quality Game. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Curtis, R. L. and L. A. Zurcher (1973). "Stable Resources of Protest Movements: the Multi-Organizational Field." Social Forces 52: 53-61. Davis, G. F. and T. A. Thompson (1994). "A Social Movement Perspective on Corporate Control." Administrative Science Quarterly 39(1): 141-173. Davis, G. F., D. McAdam, et al., Eds. (2005). Social Movements and Organization Theory. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. den Hond, F. and F. G. A. de Bakker (2007). "Ideologically Motivated Activism: How Activist Groups Influence Corporate Social Change Activities." Academy of Management Review 32(3): 901-924. Dubuisson-Quellier, S. (2009). La consommation engagée. Paris, Presses de Sciences Po. Dubuisson-Quellier, S. (2010). "From Consumerism to the Empowerment of Consumers: The Case of Consumer Oriented Movements in France." Sustainability 2: 1849-1868. Fligstein, N. (1996). "Markets As Politics: A Political-Cultural Approach to Market Institutions." American Sociological Review 61: 656-673. Fligstein, N. (2001). The Architecture of Markets. An Economic Sociology of Twenty-First-Century Capitalist Societies. Princeton, Oxford, Princeton University Press. Fligstein, N. and L. Dauter (2007). "The Sociology of Markets." Annual Review of Sociology 33: 105-128. Frank, T. (1997). The Conquest of Cool. Business Culture, Counterculture, and the Rise of Hip Consumerism. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. Granovetter, M. S. (1985). "Economic Action and Social Structure : The Problem of Embededness " American Journal of Sociology 91(3): 481-510. Granovetter, M. S. and R. Swedberg (1992). The Sociology of economic life. Boulder, Westview Press. Hall, P. A. and D. Soskice (2001). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press. Haveman, H. A. and H. Rao (1997). "Structuring a Theory of Moral Sentiments: Institutional and Organizational Coevolution in the Early Thrift Industry." American Journal of Sociology 102(6): 1606-1651.

29

Haveman, H. A., H. Rao, et al. (2007). "The Winds of Change: The Progressive Movement and the Bureaucratization of Thrift." American Sociological Review 72(1): 117-142. Hiatt, S. R., W. D. Sine, et al. (2009). "From Pabst to Pepsi: The Deinstitutionalization of Social Practices and the Creation of Entrepreneurial Opportunities." Administrative Science Quarterly 54: 635-667. Huybrechts, B. (2008). Lʼévolution du paysage organisationnel du commerce équitable en France et en Belgique. 3e colloque internationale sur le commerce équitable. Toulouse. Huybrechts, B., S. Mertens, et al. (2006). "Les interactions entre l'économie sociale et la responsabilité sociale des entreprises: illustration à travers la filière du commerce équitable." Gestion 31(2): 65-74. King, B. G. and N. A. Pearce (2010). "The Contentiousness of Markets: Politics, Social Movements, and Institutional Change in Markets." Annual Review of Sociology 36. Klawiter, M. (2008). The Biopolitics of Breast Cancer. Changing Cultures of Disease and Activism. Minneapolis, London, University of Minnesota Press. Lounsbury, M., M. Ventresca, et al. (2003). "Social movements, field frames and industry emergence: a cultural-political perspective on US recycling." Socio-Economic Review 1: 71-104. Rao, H., C. Morrill, et al. (2000). "Power Plays: How Social Movements and Collective Action Create New Organizational Forms." Research in Organizational Behavior 22: 239-282. Rao, H., P. Monin, et al. (2003). "Institutional Change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle Cuisine as an Identity Movement in French Gastronomy." American Journal of Sociology 108(4): 795-843. Rao, H. (2009). Market Rebels. How Activists Make or Break Radical Innovations. Princeton, Oxford, Princeton University Press. Robert, V. (2007). L'irrésistible montée de l'économie sociale. Un projet, une culture, des valeurs. Paris, Editions Autrement. Sluiter, L. (2009). Clean Clothes. A Global Movement to End Sweatshops. London New York, Pluto Press. Soule, S. A. (2009). Contention and Corporate Social Responsibility. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Starmanns, M. (2009). Ethical Fashion - Made in Switzerland? Eine Marktstudie. Zürich, Geographisches Institut, Universität Zürich. Weber, K., K. L. Heinze, et al. (2008). "Forage for Thought: Mobilizing Codes in the Movement for Grass-fed Meat and Dairy Products." Administrative Science Quarterly 53: 529-567. Weber, K., L. G. Thomas, et al. (2009). "From Streets to Suites: How the Anti-Biotech Movement Affected German Pharmaceutical Firms." American Sociological Review 74(February): 106-127.

30

Zald, M. N., C. Morrill, et al. (2005). The Impact of Social Movements on Organizations. Social Movements and Organization Theory. G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. R. Scott and M. N. Zald. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Zelizer, V. (1983). Morals and Markets: The Development of Life Insurance in the United States. New Brunswick, NJ, Transaction Books.