Showing the long-term value of a garment at the point of sale can change what people buy. New research indicates that when shoppers see a cost per wear figure alongside the price, they choose the pricier, longer-lasting option more often. The study, led by Dr. Lisa Eckmann of the University of Bath’s School of Management and Bath Retail Lab with Lucia Reisch of Cambridge Judge Business School, was published in Psychology & Marketing. The findings suggest a potential shift in consumer behavior and retail marketing, encouraging a move away from disposable purchases and toward durable clothing.
What the Research Tested and Found
The researchers conducted six online experiments examining how cost per wear labels affect purchase decisions. Participants viewed a lower-priced, lower-quality item (such as a sweater) next to a higher-priced, higher-quality alternative. When cost per wear information was displayed, participants were more likely to select the more expensive, higher-quality option despite the higher upfront cost. The effect was strongest when the two items’ cost per wear could be compared directly, and when the purchase involved everyday apparel rather than occasion wear.
Trust proved important. Cost per wear data certified by an independent third party was more persuasive than a general durability claim made by a brand. Reference points—such as a market average cost per wear for a given product category—made these comparisons more effective.
“Cost per wear reframes sustainability as smart spending,” Eckmann said in a press release. “Cheap fast fashion suddenly appears more expensive due to its higher cost per wear and quality pieces are viewed as better financial investments – not just greener choices.”
Why Cost Per Wear Matters for Sustainable Fashion
Clothing wears out, making it reasonable to assess value on a unit basis. Yet most shoppers do not know how long a garment will last and, without a prompt online or in-store, often overlook longevity during purchase decisions. The research highlights how simple, comparable cost per wear labels can keep durability in focus, steering attention toward durable clothing.
The industry’s environmental footprint provides added context. The Geneva Environment Network reports that fashion is the second-largest consumer of water and accounts for up to eight percent of global carbon emissions, while producing millions of tons of textile waste. “Using cost per wear in shops or online retail spaces could reduce the environmental impact of fashion,” Eckmann wrote in an article for The Conversation. “And of course the longer that garment remains in use, the less often it needs to be replaced.” These points intersect with sustainable fashion goals and align with evolving consumer behavior.
How Cost Per Wear Labels Could Work
The approach borrows from the grocery aisle, where unit pricing enables quick comparisons. Standardized fabric-durability tests already exist, measuring how many abrasion cycles a textile withstands before showing wear. Retailers could use these tests to estimate longevity and generate cost per wear labels displayed next to the price, reinforcing clarity in retail marketing.
“Cost per wear could be used much like unit pricing in supermarkets, and could be a low cost, high impact tool for retailers and policymakers to reduce textile waste and the environmental and social impacts of fast fashion,” Eckmann added in a press release. Framing information this way keeps value and durability visible, nudging choices toward durable clothing while reflecting real-world consumer behavior.
Limits, Adoption, and Next Steps
Widespread change is not guaranteed. Without regulation, brands and retailers would need to opt in to display cost per wear labels, and higher-quality players may have more incentive to adopt them than fast fashion labels. Affordability remains a practical barrier: even when cost per wear makes premium items look better value over time, some shoppers still cannot cover the higher initial price.
The experiments measured stated preferences and intentions online. Future research could test cost per wear labels in physical retail settings to observe real consumer behavior. Additional work may explore how shoppers consider trade-offs between durability and broader sustainability concerns. The researchers hope the findings encourage real-world trials and greater interest in cost per wear labels among consumers, which could, in turn, influence retail marketing practices.
Overall, the study indicates that clear, comparable cost per wear labels can make long-term value easier to understand, support sustainable fashion decision-making, and guide consumer behavior toward items designed to last.
