Renting a dress for the holidays or slacks for an interview is, on paper, a more sustainable choice than purchasing these pieces brand new. But is that really the case? A new qualitative and quantitative study by European academics claims to have found the answer.
It’s not great.
Joëlle Vanhamme, a marketing professor at the Edhec Business School in France, and Valerie Swaen, a marketing and corporate social responsibility (CSR) professor at the Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain) in Belgium, examined the “hidden effects” of using access-based services (ABS)—like Nuuly, for example—instead of owning clothes on consumer behavior.
Related Stories
Their recent The Conversation-published article, titled “Yes Folks, Clothing Rentals Can Actually Encourage Increased Consumption Among Certain Consumers,” is the result of a more extensive study, entitled “Exploring rebound effects in Access-Based Services (ABS).” This study was completed by Vanhamme and Swaen as well as Pauline Munten, a researcher focused on product obsolescence, consumer behavior and sustainable marketing.
“These issues are part of a wider debate on the limits of solutions perceived as ecological and how consumers and businesses can react to avoid the pitfalls of overconsumption disguised under a different name,” reads the article. “ABS are built on a simple idea: instead of owning a good, the consumer benefits from it temporarily in exchange for the payment of a monetary contribution. Possession is no longer an imperative.”
This collective paradigm shift was made possible, the researchers explain, by the triumphant rise of using ABS platforms for everything: entertainment (Netflix), transportation (Uber) and leisure accommodation (Vrbo); even online storage has embraced the “access-over-ownership” mentality. It’s not a far reach, then, to understand how clothing rental options began with Rent the Runway—launched in 2009 and intended to be used for special occasions— but today consists of various options designed for everyday wear.
For consumers, the access-over-acquisition is an “intuitively” greener choice, per the research paper. Plus, renters can keep up with trends without the closet space commitment. On the supply chain side, ABS theoretically helps designers close the material cycle, ultimately reducing waste and optimizing lifespan.
What seems like a win-win for everyone—including the Earth—is muddied by consumer behavior and underlying psychological concepts.
“Textile production is among the most polluting industries, especially with the rise of fast fashion,” the article reads. “In principle, subscribing to a clothing rental service should not only limit the quantity of clothes produced, but also extend their life by offering them to several successive users.”
The team interviewed about 30 users of Franco-Belgian clothing rental platforms, revealing multiple and sundry of (in)directly positive and negative “rebound effects” challenging the idea that renting is inherently more sustainable than buying.
“The easy access—variety and low cost of rented clothes can encourage a more frequent use of the service, or even lead to buying clothes impulsively (some people even buy clothes they initially rented)—can cancel out the expected environmental benefits of renting instead of buying (direct rebound effect),” the article reads. “On the other hand, someone who saves money by renting clothes may use those funds to buy other goods or services in other product categories (high-tech products, travel, household equipment, etc.), thereby increasing their total consumption and their ecological footprint.”
These “rebounds” happen when “efficiency gains or practices that are supposed to be sustainable paradoxically lead to an increase in consumption,” per the paper.
In the context of ABS, “negative rebound behavior” is in reference to the phenomenon where users, after initially reducing their consumption of a product via an ABS model, start to consume more of that product, potentially negating the environmental benefits of the ABS system.
“Ultimately, the findings challenge the assumption that ABS unequivocally and consistently drive positive behavioral adjustments,” the article reads. “Instead, a non-negligible portion of ABS consumers exhibit increased consumption, with detrimental environmental implications.”
The subsequent segmentation study with about 500 ABS users confirmed this suspicion. In fact, it established five consumer segments to exhibit varying levels of direct, indirect, positive and/or negative rebound effects. Of those five clusters, the study focused on two distinct psychological patterns “particularly prone” to negative rebound effects.
“Consumers from the negative rebound Cluster 5 express higher optimal stimulation levels (OSL) than consumers in any other clusters. They also demonstrate stronger hedonic motivations than renters in Clusters 2 and 4,” per the research paper. “Providing empirical evidence for our conjectures in Study 1, OSL and hedonic shopping motivation have important effects on the occurrence of negative rebound effects.”
Cluster 4, the “thrill and pleasure seekers” group (7 percent), is characterized by a strong search for stimulation and hedonistic motivations. For this cluster—which is mainly men—renting clothes doesn’t reduce their overall consumption; on the contrary, it may increase it by “stimulating their desire for novelty and diversity.”
Cluster 5, the “contextually apathetic spenders” (18 percent), displayed paradoxical behavior. While this segment isn’t motivated by pleasure or stimulation—and reduces their clothing consumption by renting—they increase their purchases in other product categories after renting, the research found. They are also the least frugal, which the team said “reinforces their propensity” for indirect rebound behavior. This group is also largely male, often young, single and educated.
“Although ABS have the potential to promote more sustainable consumption habits, they can also encourage behaviors that negate these benefits—or worse, exacerbate environmental impacts,” Vanhamme and Swaen wrote. “This research, therefore, challenges the assumption that clothing rental services are inherently sustainable.”
Findings aside, the global clothing rental market is expected to surge over the next decade, Research and Markets found. How will the rental apparel market, anticipated to hit $7.5 billion by 2026, affect the environment? It largely depends on consumer behavior.
“The implications for managers and policymakers are clear: it is not enough to promote clothing hire as a sustainable solution,” per the article. “With around a quarter of users of clothing rental services likely to exhibit negative rebound behavior, it is essential to identify these consumers and provide them with appropriate information and incentives to limit these effects.”
