Robertson's model: a framework for exploration of World War II conservation consumption policy...

Robertson’s model: a framework for exploration of WorldWar II conservation consumption policy influence on fashionin the USijcs_1036 1..11

Lauren Dalton1, Pauline Sullivan2, Jeanne Heitmeyer1 and Ann DuPont2

1Department of Retail Merchandising and Product Development, College of Human Sciences, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA2Department of Family and Consumer Sciences, Texas State University-San Marcos, San Marcos, Texas, USA

Keywords

Apparel, fashion, historic consumption,rationing, women, World War II.

Correspondence

Pauline Sullivan, Department of Family andConsumer Sciences, Texas StateUniversity-San Marcos, 601 University Drive,San Marcos, TX 78666, USA.E-mail: [email protected]

doi: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01036.x

AbstractThis paper studies pertinent materials related to the conservation of textile apparel andtextile-related natural resources that appeared in poster campaign communications pub-lished during the Second World War in the US. An examination of World War II postercampaign communications conveying the need for conservation efforts and rationing ascommunicated to consumers infers the historical context of the era. These poster campaigncommunications asked consumers to utilize fully of limited resources while maintaining asense of individuality and trend-setting creativity and fashion. World War II shortages andallocations influenced fashion innovations in women’s apparel in the US. This paperprovides a retrospective examination of innovative trends and the various conservationthemes associated with women’s fashion identify themes used to influence and to inspireAmericans to reuse and recycle in support of the war effort. At no other time in history wasvoluntary textile conservation as prevalent in mainstream American culture as it was duringthe 1940s.

Content analysis reveals reoccurring themes that appeared in the advertisements devel-oped by the War Advertising Council in the 1940s and used in their poster campaignadvertisements. Themes and conservation activities identified in their poster campaigncommunications included• ‘America’s New Role as Fashion Arbiters’;• ‘Conserve Time, Money, Materials for National Defense Program’;• ‘War Production Board General Limitations Order L-85 – Fabric Conservation onSilhouette Dimensions’;• ‘Fashion for Victory’;• ‘Beauty in Peace and War’;• ‘Fabric Conservation’;• ‘Teaching Consumers How to Conserve’;• ‘You’re In the War Too’;• ‘Wearing Clothes More’;• ‘Changing Materials for War [Nylon]’.In addition, print communications were categorized according to Robertson’s adoptionprocess model. This study found evidence that supports that Robertson’s adoption processmodel was a useful tool in studying these poster campaign communications relative toRobertson’s decision-making process.

IntroductionWorldwide, there is a community that continuously cultivates agenre of fashion within the context of the contemporary world(Azuma and Fernie, 2003). The fashion genre is supported by thepolitical, economic, artistic and cultural heritage of a region.

Fashion emerges from individual societies and consequentlyreflects the collection of societal norms and values at a given pointin time. Thus, US conservation policies during World War II(WWII) influenced the nation’s interest in efficient uses of naturalresources and recycled clothing in support of the war effort. Theextent and manner of support for these conservation policies by

International Journal of Consumer Studies ISSN 1470-6423

International Journal of Consumer Studies

© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

1

consumer behaviour provides a basis to explore how past textileand apparel recycling campaigns such as when textile recyclingand conservation of resources were mandated by the WWIIUS government policies and communicated through postercampaigns.

Although there is current interest in textile and apparel recy-cling, these practices are not as strongly supported now as theywere during WWII. During WWII, conservation of naturalresources for the war effort was considered a patriotic duty andsupported by government information programmes.

WWII was a time of product scarcity (Kim et al., 2007). DuringWWII, the US government enacted conservation policies to alle-viate shortages and to reallocate resources from consumers tomilitary use. Compliance with some of the policies was voluntarywhile others were mandatory. A rationing system was created torestrict the use of some goods and services through quotas. TheL-85 Regulation, which restricted the quantity of cloth that couldbe used in clothing and rationing, limited consumers to three pairsof shoes annually.

Conservation poster campaigns about the use of resources forthe war effort as they relate to apparel fashions were launched inthe New York Times during WWII. These appeals were officiallysanctioned by the government (Kim et al., 2007). The posterspromoted the US core value of frugality though thriftiness andrecycling (Witkowski, 2003). These communications targetedconsumers to motivate adoption of mandated resource conserva-tion edicts. Robertson’s model of the adoption process was uti-lized in this research to study the apparent impact of thesecommunications on consumers, adoption and integration patternsin the period. Although there has been discussion of WWII con-servation campaigns (Witkowski, 2003; Kim et al., 2007), addi-tional exploration of the topic is necessary to cast light on therelationship among conservation policies, communication cam-paigns and fashion. During WWII, there was a patriotic rationalefor conservation of the natural resources in support of the military.War patriotism was an effective emotional appeal in support ofconservation.

Conservation contributes to sustainability that satisfies theneeds of individuals without compromising the resources neededfor future generations (United Nations, 1987). Sustainabilityknowledge will help shape the next 100 years (AAFCS, 2010).Identification of WWII poster campaign themes and practicesrelevant to the adoption of conservation related to fashion mayinfluence producers and retailers by providing an understanding ofthe potential impact of communication on sustainable consumerbehaviour. During the current economic downturn, policy makersmight also develop campaigns with messages that communicate toshoppers a need for sustainable consumption by changing therationale from national patriotism to global social responsibility.

Adoption of innovation is a process wherein an idea spreadsamong a social group (Rogers, 1971). Robertson’s adoptionprocess model is used to study the influence of conservation-related policies on fashion consumption among consumers. Thispaper explores conservation campaigns related to apparel fashionsappearing in the New York Times during WWII. First, contentanalysis was used to examine communications developed by theWar Advertising Council in the 1940s to identify themes andpractices that promoted compliance with various resource conser-vation programme mandates. Second, communications were cat-

egorized according to Robertson’s (1971) adoption process modelto demonstrate stages of consumer adoption relative to the diffu-sion of US conservation poster campaigns communications duringWWII.

Themes in conservation communicationThe literature review describes the different influences on conser-vation communications and consumers’ adoption of these prac-tices during WWII. The topics are Advertising and WarConsumption, Price Ceilings and Product Rationing, Importanceof American Designers during WWII, Women’s Fashion Innova-tions: WWII and Female Fashion Consumption, and Influence ofConservation Communication on Fashion.

Advertising and war consumptionMedia campaigns shape the culture of consumers through com-munication of messages to social groups. During WWII, severalagencies of the US government organized poster campaigns tar-geted to the ordinary consumer to promote compliance withvarious programme conservation mandates (Witkowski, 2003).One example of a combined business/government regulatory bodywas the War Advertising Council. It was established in 1942 andconsisted of representatives from advertising agencies, the mediaand businesses (Fox, 1975). These organizations created coordi-nated public service campaigns focusing on the war effort andengaged in public relations for the home front. All organizedelements of advertising and public relations were used by the WarAdvertising Council to promote conservation among consumers athome during WWII. This was reported as an outstanding exampleof government and business working together for a commonpurpose to conserve resources for war needs (Dudley, 1947).

These poster campaign communications were intended toinform people about various conservation programmes and, whennecessary, enlist their support for the many fundraisers andprojects created to support the war efforts. The massive endeavour,coordinated by the Office of War Information (OWI), helpedmould public opinion and behaviour during WWII (Dudley, 1947).

During this time, the US government encouraged the frugal useof scarce goods that were needed for the war effort. Advertisingand propaganda during the WWII were being positioned as a‘wartime tool’ (Covert, 2003). The activists and the media lobbiedfor prudent spending as a patriotic duty (McGovern, 2006).

WWII was a period when government persuasion was perceivedas effective in promoting frugal consumption as a motivator forUS citizen’s conservation of supplies needed for the war effort.Five frugal themes communicated in these campaigns were(1) conserving, (2) recycling, (3) preparing food at home,(4) rationing, and (5) saving through war bonds (Witkowski,2003). Hundreds of poster campaign communications depictedthese themes. They were a key form of advertising governmentpublic policy during WWII.

These poster campaign communications were the responsibilityof the OWI: Bureau of Graphics, which reviewed campaign pro-posals submitted by other federal agencies, supervised creation ofgraphic materials, gave advice on how to solve printing and dis-tribution problems, and distributed posters for the OWI and otheragencies (NARA, 2002). Posters that included slogans and bold

Exploring World War II conservation and fashion L. Dalton et al.



2

graphic images featuring ordinary US citizens reinforced writteninstructions about conservation for consumers. Figure 1 belowprovides a pictorial explanation and poster example of informationthat was provided to the US home front to increase their conser-vation efforts.

Price ceilings and product rationingRationing, shortages and the daily anxiety of urban living duringWWII grated upon Americans (Blum, 1976), but citizens sup-ported the war effort through reduced consumption and conserva-tion, as well as through sending gifts to those fighting abroad.

In addition to the advertising and public relations campaigns,government policy influenced consumer behaviour of those on thehome front through suspension of normal market operations fora range of commodities and products; for example, the Officeof Price Administration (OPA) fixed many product prices andrationed items such as gasoline, coffee, butter, shoes, sugar andmeat. On June 19, 1941, the Office of Production Managementplaced rubber under full priorities control, which limited availabil-ity to the consumer (Staff Writer, 1942). The rationing systemrequired cooperation from retailers, public schools and regionalmedia to disseminate information about compliance.

A well-known example of frugal consumption was the effort toeconomize on fabric. For example, women’s hats became smaller,and women’s skirts became shorter (Williams, 1972). Rayonreplaced silk and nylon in hosiery until it too became almostnon-existent due to war efforts. In Fig. 2, the New York Timesarticle clearly suggested the collection of enough nylon and silkhosiery to produce 100 000 powder bags. The article explainedthat 15 pairs of stockings could produce one gunpowder bag. Itclearly suggested that conservation at the end of 1942 was provingbeneficial to the war efforts (Staff Writer, 1942).

Importance of American designersduring WWIIAs well as rationing of textiles produced for apparel products,there was a scarcity of fashion innovation resulting from the fall of

Paris, the design capital of the world, to Germany in June 1940 of.This cut America and other allies off from the inspiration andfashion leadership of the haute couture (Nolan, 1999). When theWWII broke out, the fashion houses in Paris were threatened.During this time, many French designers, such as Coco Chanel,closed shop, while other designers stayed open and worked pri-marily for wealthy collaborators or exported designs to Germany(Bayley, 2007). In response to the German occupation of Paris, USdesigners began to look inward for inspiration (Givhan, 2005). Itwas during this period that two major fashion catalysts emerged:American designers and American sportswear. Magazines such asVogue and Harper’s Bazaar redirected emphasis from Frenchdesigners to talented US designers in an effort to enhance theircredibility (Tortora and Eubank, 2005). The chairman of the boardof Coty, a leading perfume company in the early to the mid-1940s,announced that an annual American fashion critic’s award wouldbe given to a US women’s apparel designer who created a newsilhouette and advanced New York’s position in the industry(Pope, 1942).

As a direct result of WWII, US residents had restrictions placedupon their clothing resources, and this made it necessary fordesigners to comply with a number of regulations, including thosepassed by the American War Production (AWP) Board that appliedto the construction of garments (Givhan, 2005). Such regulationsincluded the ‘L-85 Regulations’, which restricted the amount ofcloth that could be used to construct a garment (Tortora andEubank, 2005). The L-85 regulations rationed natural fibres andforbade designers from changing apparel styles drastically, allow-ing US apparel consumers to better maintain a sense of ‘being infashion’.

Figure 1 World War II efficient use of resources poster.Source: Office of War Information (1943)

Figure 2 World War II conservation article.Source: New York Times (27 December 1942)

L. Dalton et al. Exploring World War II conservation and fashion



3

The emergence of US designers such as Claire McCardell,Norman Norell and Adrian Greenberg shaped the style of Ameri-can fashion during this period. These designers introduced a newsilhouette that used ‘sharp-shouldered suits reminiscent of men’stailoring’ (Schmidt, 2005, p. 1). McCardell was viewed not only asthe driving force behind the ‘American Look’ but also as thefounder of the US sportswear movement. McCardell designedclothes in simple fabrics like cotton and wool for the active,working woman. Norell was deemed the first US fashion designerto compete successfully with the French couturiers and effectivelyfill the void in the American market that was cut off from Frenchfashion (Nolan, 1999).

Women were driven to fill jobs left unoccupied by theirhusbands, which created a new market for professional apparel.Adrian responded by designing boxy, square-shoulderedsuits (Givhan, 2005). Each designer worked to produce garmentsthat could be worn by the new working woman. Stanley Marcus,of high-end, Texas-based department store Neiman Marcus,was the apparel consultant to the War Production Board atthe time and argued that designers had a patriotic duty todesign fashions that would be stylish for several seasons (Nolan,1999).

A number of new styles emerged during this period. Designershad to adapt to the limitations of materials and the restrictionsenforced upon them by the AWP Board and the L-85 Regulations.Suit styles also included the bolero with short-curving jacketsending above the waist and the Eisenhower look, which copied thestyle of military jackets (Tortora and Eubank, 2005). As thenumber of women joining the workforce increased, wardrobes hadto be tailored to fit this new environment, and designers had toproduce practical clothing (Schmidt, 2005). Women covered theirheads with turbans or snoods to keep from getting their hair caughtin machines (Tortora and Eubank, 2005). Leather shoes wererationed, so shoes made of cloth with synthetic soles like theespadrille became popular (Tortora and Eubank, 2005). Whilewomen coped with the lack of frills and new American designs,they came up with ingenious ways to create fashion within theseimposed restrictions.

Women’s fashion innovations: WWII andfemale fashion consumptionRetrospective insight into creative consumption during the WWIIera reveals how rationing and the scarcity of goods cultivated an

inspired consumer population challenged to maintain their senseof fashion. Historically, women have used fashion to help definethemselves in terms of economic and social status (Gregory, 1947;Kaiser, 1990). Pre-WWII years had brought a rise in the standardof consumption. Thus, women were not willing to sacrificefashion, despite the focus on conservation in the US during theSecond World War (Lauterbach, 1944). Although supporting thewar cause was a dominant theme in consumer education, womenfound creative solutions for fashion alternatives. The fashionsector strived to make sure that all available textiles were used inthe production of war goods (Walton, 1943). US fashion designerschallenged themselves to use less textile materials and to substi-tute other materials in garments.

Consumers were told about unpicking and re-knitting garments,darning clothes, and even how to make a corset last longer (Officeof War Information, 1943). The ‘Make Do and Mend’ campaignencouraged women to recycle textiles using only the minimumamount necessary. The campaigns were announced in everythingfrom songs, women’s fashion magazines, the radio and in the dailynewspaper.

Bundles for America, Inc. started a nationwide campaign tocollect unused textile material and clothing with the goal ofturning them into garments for the families of men at war (StaffWriter, 1942). Examples of how this organization recycled goodsincluded turning a leather pocketbook into a boy’s hat, turning apillowcase into a child’s jacket or turning drapes into dresses.Nothing was wasted as slipcover cording was turned into fasten-ers, and buttons were reused.

Robertson’s (1971) adoption process model provided the theo-retical framework in which to study communications targeted toconsumers as they adopt a new idea or practice. Robertson arguedthat understanding consumer psychology can lead to increasedproduct or innovation adoption, increased speed of adoptionand/or decreased non-adoption within the marketplace. Heasserted that it is necessary to show a distinct flow of events ratherthan instant change. As Robertson acknowledges, his model is aconvergence of previous models on both innovation and adoptionprocesses (Fig. 3).

Robertson’s model suggests that there is no single form towhich the adoption process must conform. There is no specificnumber of stages in which the process might occur, although thereseems to be a need for at least two stages. The adoption processdoes not follow a set list of stages (Robertson, 1971). Furthermore,consumers may backtrack or skip certain stages in the adoption

Figure 3 Robertson’s (1971) adoption pro-cess model as a framework for exploring ofWorld War II conservation communications.

Problem Perception

Awareness

Comprehension

Attitude

Legitimation

Trial

Consumer Support Conservation for War Efforts≥2 Poster

Campaign CommunicationThemes




4

process: for example, they may complete a ‘trial’ stage and thenreturn to the ‘interest’ stage to find more information.

The theoretical model that frames this content analysis isRobertson’s (1971) adoption process model. This has seven com-ponents: (1) problem perception – the consumer or society recog-nizes that there is a problem; (2) awareness – first knowledge of anew idea, practice or product; (3) comprehension – seeking andobtaining further information about new idea or product; (4) atti-tude – amount of feeling for or against a new product or idea;(5) legitimation – consumer has come to a stage where he or shebelieves that the idea or product has worth or merit; (6) trial –limited testing of the new idea or product; and (7) adoption/dissonance – deciding whether or not to continue the use of thenew idea or product. Each of these components will be exploredwithin the context of communications about the conservation andrationing of textiles messages during WWII. The theoretical modelprovides a basis for examining how the innovation or change, inthis case, conservation for WWII effort, was communicated toconsumers at different stages of the adoption process.

Research question and objectivesThe question that was central to the study was what conservationthemes and practices were communicated to consumers throughWar Production Board and retail poster campaign communicationsduring WWII.

To answer this question, content analysis was used to studyconservation poster campaign communications appearing in theNew York Times during WWII and to identify communicationsthemes developed by the War Advertising Council. In addition, thethemes were categorized according to the seven components inRobertson’s (1971) adoption process model to describe what mes-sages were communicated at different stages of the diffusionprocess.

MethodsContent analysis is an appropriate method for systematically,objectively and quantitatively analysing communications (Ker-linger, 1986), such as those developed by the War AdvertisingCouncil in the 1940s. Recent studies of print advertisements usedcontent analysis to examine communications (Turley and Kelley,1997; Seitz, 1998; Harris and Attour, 2000). Content analysisprovides a systematic method to identify themes used in postercampaign messages and to count the number of times these mes-sages were used in WWII communications.

The sampleThe sample in this study was systematically selected from the WarProduction Board and retail poster campaign communications thatappeared in the New York Times and advertisements between 1941and 1944. This time period reflects the entrance of the US into thewar effort as well as the end of the poster campaign communica-tions for conservation of natural resources. During WWII, the NewYork Times was considered a leader among US daily newspapers(Gerbner and Marvanyi, 1977). The sample was limited to posteradvertisements that appeared in this leading daily newspaper. Akeyword search for fashion, conservation, rationing, apparel and

textiles, and women in the New York Times database was used tocollect advertisements included in this sample.

The unit of analysis in this study was an individual postercampaign communication. Because the period of this studyspanned from the beginning of the US war efforts to the victory inEurope, advertisements and articles were systematically sampledat 6-month intervals beginning in 1941 and ending in 1944. Thisperiod was chosen because it reflected the period when the WarProduction Board concentrated its communications campaigntowards consumers. A total of 25 poster campaign communica-tions were analysed in this study.

New York Times war production boardand retail communicationsContent analysis of text is an appropriate method for this studybecause it is an objective, quantitative and descriptive means ofdrawing conclusions about written communications (Kassarjian,1977). First, a set of rules and procedures were established ascriteria for the trained experts to use in recording poster commu-nications. In this case, the observable message was the posterslogan.

The trained experts studied each poster campaign communica-tion and categorized a poster according to its predominant themeof conservation. Redundant poster campaign communicationthemes were grouped together by occurrence (Turley and Kelley,1997; Seitz, 1998; Harris and Attour, 2000). Trained experts usedtriangulation to reach consensus regarding the categories for thewritten messages. In cases when two experts disagreed about themeaning of a poster theme, triangulation allowed the third personto bring about majority agreement about the categorization ofitem. Lastly, the frequency of occurrence for each poster campaigntheme was counted (shown in Table 1.) Poster campaign themesare in the first column between 1941 and 1944, and the frequencyin which they occurred is shown in the second column (Table 2).

1941War Production Board and retail communications started offslowly in 1941 with two messages, ‘America’s New Role asFashion Arbiters’ and ‘Conserve Time, Money, Materials forNational Defense Program’.

1942In 1942, five new conservation messages were added. They were‘War Production Board General Limitations Order L-85 – FabricConservation on Silhouette Dimensions’, ‘Fashion for Victory’and ‘Victory-Minded Woman’, ‘Piece Ceilings’, ‘Consulting Cus-tomers for Modifications in Service Offerings’, and ‘KeepingFashion Constant to Conserve/Avoid Obsolescence’.

1943The greatest number of War Production Board and retail com-munications occurred in 1943 (Table 1). The 1943 communica-tions included ‘America’s New Role as Fashion Arbiters’,‘Conserve Time, Money, Materials for National DefenseProgram’, ‘War Production Board General Limitations Order L-85




5

– Fabric Conservation on Silhouette Dimensions’, ‘Fashion forVictory’, ‘Victory-Minded Woman’, ‘Beauty in Peace and War’,‘Anti-Hitler’, ‘Fabric Conservation’, ‘Teaching Consumers Howto Conserve’, ‘You’re In the War Too’, ‘Wearing Clothes More’,‘Changing Materials for War [Nylon]’, and ‘Differences b/nAmerican and Other Countries’ Efforts’. Only two themes fromthe 1942 communications campaigns were used again. They werePrice Ceilings and ‘Keeping Fashion Constant to Conserve/AvoidObsolescence’. More messages relating to the changes in fashionwere found in 1943 than any other year. This is most likely due tothe extensive impact that the war was having on the Americanpublic at this time. There were 1943 poster campaign communi-cations about conservation of resources and consumer educationin addition to messages about patriotism and compliance withL-85 Regulations.

1944There was only one War Production Board and retail communica-tion in 1944. It was ‘America’s New Role as Fashion Arbiters’.This message was communicated in all 4 years, 1941–1944.

This content analysis clearly shows the changing messagesfrom the War Production Board and the retail segment as the warprogressed. Interestingly enough, little to no germane advertise-ments or articles could be found after 1944. Figure 4 shows the useof poster campaign messages between 1941 and 1944.

The chart of the number of poster communications clearlyreflects a distribution curve associated with the diffusion of inno-vations among a social system. The innovation in this study wasthe conservation poster communications appearing in the NewYork Times. The diffusion curve is skewed to the right and sug-gests that conservation communication efforts peaked slightlybefore the end of the war in Europe. Production Board and retailconservation communications peaked in the third year of WWIIand decreased as the war drew to an end.

The situation context for conservationcommunicationsFour key problems related to conservation were created when theUS entered WWII in 1941. First, US citizens faced a number of

Table 1 Content analysis of war production board and retail communi-cations in the New York Times (1941–1944)

Message 1941 1942 1943 1944

America’s new role as fashion arbiters 1 1 1 1Conserve time, money, materials for

National Defense Program1 1

WPB general limitations order L-85 –fabric conservation on silhouettedimensions

4 3

Fashion for victory and victory-mindedwoman

2 2

Price ceilings 1Consulting customers for modifications in

service offerings2 1

Keeping fashion constant to conserve/avoid obsolescence

2

Beauty in peace and war 1Anti-Hitler 1Fabric conservation 3Teaching consumers how to conserve 1You’re in the war too 1Wearing clothes more 1Changing materials for war [nylon] 2Differences b/n American and other

countries’ efforts1

Table 2 Content analysis of war production board and retail communi-cations themes in the New York Times by year 1941–1944

Year Themes

1941 • ‘America’s new role as fashion arbiters’• ‘Conserve time, money, materials for National Defense

Program’.1942 • ‘War production board general limitations order L-85 – fabric

conservation on silhouette dimensions’• ‘Fashion for victory’• ‘Victory-minded woman’• ‘Piece ceilings’• ‘Consulting customers for modifications in service offerings’• ‘Keeping fashion constant to conserve/avoid obsolescence’

1943 • ‘America’s new role as fashion arbiters’• ‘Conserve time, money, materials for National Defense

Program’• ‘War production board general limitations order L-85 – fabric

conservation on silhouette dimensions’• ‘Fashion for victory’• ‘Victory-minded woman’• ‘Beauty in peace and war’• ‘Anti-Hitler’• ‘Fabric conservation’• ‘Teaching consumers how to conserve’• ‘You’re in the war too’• ‘Wearing clothes more’• ‘Changing materials for war [nylon]’• ‘Differences b/n American and other countries’ efforts’

1944 • ‘America’s new role as fashion arbiters’

1944

1943

1941

1942

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Figure 4 Number of war production board and retail communications(1941–1944).




6

shortages including food, natural resources and textiles. Forexample, leather and rubber were heavily rationed, and cobblershad to find alternative materials to use in the construction of shoes.Second, with the German occupation of Paris, the US was effec-tively cut off from the fashion capital of the world and had to lookinward for inspiration. This led to a rise in prominent US designerspreviously mentioned such as Claire McCardell, Norman Norelland Adrian. Third, the rising demand for soldiers left thousands ofjobs unoccupied. Women filled in where their husbands, brothersand sons no longer could. Finally, there was a lack of monetaryfunds that led to the creation of war bonds.

The government, using propaganda through a number ofvarious outlets, urged consumers to economize on goods and ser-vices, recycle waste and scrap, comply with price controls andrationing laws, and put discretionary income into war bonds(Dudley, 1947; Fox, 1975; Witkowski, 2003). A number of gov-ernment organizations were formed to execute effectively theseactions. The OWI used posters and radio broadcasts to inform thepublic of war news, worked to promote patriotism and attemptedto recruit women into war work. The AWP Board regulated spend-ing and production of textiles and enforced the L-85 regulations,which specified restrictions for every item of women’s clothing.The OPA set price ceilings and rationed scarce items such as tires,shoes, nylon, sugar, gasoline and meats among a number of otheritems.

Retailers, town hall and community meetings were used todiscuss conservation issues. Comprehension of the issues enabledindividuals to participate and commit to helping out with the wareffort. This need for understanding was crucial to effectively makeconservation and rationing a realization.

The OWI suppressed visual material that it feared wouldthreaten domestic unity (Dudley, 1947; Fox, 1975; Witkowski,2003). It communicated messages about patriotism in which vol-unteerism surged with the need for manpower and financialsupport. The second attitude was that of accomplishment. Indi-viduals were encouraged to plant ‘Victory Gardens’ and can theirown vegetables.

The wartime years were a time in American history that citizenssacrificed and pulled together for the common purpose of winningthe war (Leff, 1991). The compelling reason in the US to conservetextiles and other materials used in manufacturing apparel dimin-ished as WWII neared its end and then disappeared. Perhaps thisforeshadowed victory for the Allied forces.

Conservation communications themesinterpreted according toRobertson’s modelThe seven components of Robertson’s (1971) adoption processmodel were used in this study to explore conservation and ration-ing of textiles themes used in communications during WWII. Thefirst step in the Robertson’s (1971) model is to identify a problemor a problem perception. Messages that addressed shortage and thelack of Parisian design inspiration are seen in 1941communica-tions published in the New York Times. The importance of acommunity that continuously cultivates a genre of fashion inno-vation within the context of the contemporary world (Azuma andFernie, 2003) is supported by the theme ‘Fashion for Victory’ and‘America’s New Role as Fashion Arbiters’, which appeared in War

Production Board and retail communications from 1941 to 1944.Stages in Robertson’s adoption process model with related postercampaign communications and a historical context previouslydescribed in the paper are shown in Table 3.

The second step in Robertson’s (1971) adoption processmodel is awareness, which was addressed by the US governmentin 1942 poster campaign communications. The third step ofRobertson’s (1971) adoption process model is comprehension.Results from the content analysis indicate that government rulesand regulations were understood by retailers who had workshopsto educate consumers about conservation. The fifth componentof Robertson’s (1971) adoption process model, legitimation(where the consumer enters the stage of believing the idea hasmerit), is illustrated by actions taken on the home front. Ameri-cans took a stand during 1942 and supported their troops byconserving and taking on their workforce roles in society whilethey were abroad. These messages were communicated in 1941and in 1943.

Robertson’s (1971) adoption process model’s sixth component,trial, meant that Americans had to act on a number of issues, asthey had to decide to participate or not to participate in these newideas and strategies. These issues included but were not limited towomen joining in the workforce, saving and turning in grease,recycling men’s suiting, the ‘Make Do and Mend’ campaign, andthe issuing of coupons for rationing purposes. The 1943 message,‘Wear Clothes More’ communication, supports Robertson’s sixthcomponent.

In the final component of Robertson’s (1971) adoption processmodel, Americans could either adopt (adoption) the change forconservation or discard it (dissonance). The 1944 message,‘America’s New Role as Fashion Arbiters’, suggests that US con-sumers adopted a new perspective on US fashion. All seven com-ponents in Robertson’s (1971) adoption process model appear tobe evident in examination of conservation themes and practicescommunicated to consumers through War Production Board andretail communications during WWII, as well as the actions takenby consumers after receiving the messages.

Influence of conservation policycommunication on fashionDuring WWII, the OWI communicated information about con-servation policies to consumers through retail poster campaigncommunications that appeared in The New York Times. Theposter for 1941–1944 campaign message, ‘America’s New Roleas Fashion Arbiters’, seemingly encouraged substitution ofscarce resources in fashion product development with availableresources. US designers began to look inward for inspiration(Givhan, 2005).

‘Conserve Time, Money, Materials for National DefenseProgram’ was a 1941 campaign message. A rationing systemlimited US consumers to three pairs of shoes a year. Fashionconservation efforts are noted in the use of cloth and wood, othernon-strategic materials substituted for leather in shoe uppers(Tortora, 1997) and the use of clunky, wooden-soled shoes bywomen during WWII (Brady, 1995). ‘Keeping Fashion Constantto Conserve/Avoid Obsolescence’ was a 1942 poster campaignmessage that prompted Stanley Marcus, of Neiman Marcus, theapparel consultant to the War Production Board, to suggest that




7

Table 3 Conservation themes interpreted according to Robertson’s model

Stage Year and message Historical context

Problemperception

1941: ‘America’s new role asfashion arbiters’ and ‘conservetime, money, materials forNational Defense Program’.

• US citizens faced a number of shortages including food, natural resources and textiles.• US effectively cut off from the fashion capital of the world; had to look inward for

inspiration.• Messages that addressed shortage and the lack of Parisian design inspiration are seen in

1941 communications published in the New York Times.• Rise in prominent US designers Coty Awards started for designers advancing New York’s

fashion leadership position (Pope, 1942).• Increased demand for soldiers left thousands of jobs unoccupied, and women filled these

position.• Lack of monetary funds led to the creation of war bonds.

Awareness 1942: ‘War production boardgeneral limitations order L-85 –fabric conservation onsilhouette dimensions’ and‘price ceilings’,

• The government, using propaganda in various outlets, urged consumers to economize ongoods and services, recycle waste and scrap, comply with price controls and rationinglaws, and put discretionary income into war bonds (Witkowski, 2003).

• A number of government organizations were formed to execute effectively these actions.The Office of War Information used posters and radio broadcasts to inform the public ofwar news, worked to promote patriotism and attempted to recruit women into war work.

• The American War Production Board regulated spending and production of textiles andenforced the L-85 regulations, which specified restrictions for every item of women’sclothing.

• The Office of Price Administration set price ceilings and rationed scarce items such astires, shoes, nylon, sugar, gasoline and meats among a number of other items.

• Clunky and new material in shoes became fashionable (Tortora, 1997)Comprehension 1942: ‘Consulting customers

for modifications in serviceofferings’ and ‘keeping fashionconstant to conserve/avoidobsolescence’

• Retailers, town hall and community meetings were used to discuss conservation issues.Comprehension of the issues enabled individuals to participate and commit to helping outwith the war effort.

• US core value of frugality though thriftiness and recycling appeared in poster campaigns(Witkowski, 2003).

• Stanley Marcus suggested to design, as a patriotic duty, a fashion that would be stylishfor several seasons (Nolan, 1999).

Attitude 1942: ‘Fashion for victory’ and‘victory-minded woman’

• The first attitude was patriotism in which volunteerism surged with the need formanpower and financial support.

• The second attitude was that of accomplishment. Individuals were encouraged to plant‘Victory Gardens’ and can their own vegetables. The Office of War Informationsuppressed visual material that it feared would threaten domestic unity.

• Hats smaller, skirt shorter (Williams, 1972)• Vest sales restricted, suits slimmer (Goldstein, 1999).• Nylon conserved for the war effort, and women painted legs (Tortora, 1973).• Unpicking, repacking, re-knitting and darning (Office of War Information, 1943)

1943: ‘Conserve time, money,materials for National DefenseProgram’, ‘fashion for victory’,‘victory-minded woman’,‘you’re in the war too’,‘anti-Hitler’ and ‘differences b/nAmerican and other countries’efforts’

Legitimation 1941: ‘America’s new role asfashion arbiters’ and ‘conservetime, money, materials forNational Defense Program’

• US consumers took a stand and supported their troops by conserving and taking on theirworkforce roles in society while they were abroad.

• Women in workforce increased, required practical clothing (Schmidt, 2005).• Women covered their head with turbans or snoods to keep from getting their hair caught

in machines (Tortora and Eubank, 2005).1943: ‘Beauty in peace andwar’ ‘fabric conservation’ and‘teaching consumers how toconserve’

Trial 1943: ‘Wearing clothes more’and ‘changing materials for war[nylon]’

• US consumers acted upon a number of issues• Bundles for America, Inc.’s nationwide campaign collected unused textile material and

clothing to turning them into garments for the families of men at war (Staff Writer, 1942).Adoption 1944: ‘America’s new role as

fashion arbiters’• The wartime years were a time in American history that citizens sacrificed and pulled

together for the common purpose of winning the war. (Leff, 1991). In 1944, there wasonly one theme found in the New York Times, which suggests US consumers adopted anew perspective on US fashion.

• The compelling reason in the US to conserve textiles and other materials used inmanufacturing apparel diminished as World War II neared its end and then disappeared.Perhaps this foreshadowed victory for the Allied forces.




8

designers had a patriotic duty to design fashions that would bestylish for several seasons (Nolan, 1999).

The 1942 and 1943 poster campaign message, ‘WPB GeneralLimitations Order L-85 – Fabric Conservation on SilhouetteDimensions, informed consumers about restrictions on the amountof cloth that could be used to construct a garment (Tortora andEubank, 2005). L-85 – Fabric Conservation on Silhouette Dimen-sions required US designers to comply with AWP Board regula-tions pertaining to the construction of garments (Givhan, 2005).Women’s hats became smaller, and women’s skirts became shorterto economize on fabric (Williams, 1972). Before WWII, mostpants were pleated, but during the war cuffless, un-pleated uniformand civilian trousers were worn (Brady, 1995). The sale of vestswas restricted because of fabric limitations (Goldstein, 1999). Thesilhouette for suits was slimmer, trousers were narrower, andjackets were shorter. Frills were eliminated from women’s cloth-ing (Kim et al., 2007).

The 1943 message, ‘Fabric Conservation’, is put into action bythe practice of using wool the war effort and producing blendedtextile products for civilian consumption (Kim et al., 2007).Another fashion change was related to the 1943 poster campaignmessages, ‘Changing Materials for War [Nylon]’, which influ-enced consumer behaviour and fashion. The use of silk and nylonin hosiery was substituted by rayon until it almost became non-existent because of the war efforts (Williams, 1972). The scarcityof nylon stockings resulted in women painting their legs to imitatestocking seems (Tortora, 1997). The article in Fig. 2 explained that15 pairs of stockings could produce one gunpowder bag, andconservation was beneficial to the war efforts (Staff Writer, 1942).‘Teaching Consumers How to Conserve’ is another 1943 postercampaign message that educated consumers about recycling cloth-ing by unpicking and re-knitting garments, darning clothes, andeven how to make a corset last longer (Office of War Information,1943).

It is difficult to discern which US government conservationcampaigns or the scarcity of goods and services had more of animpact on US consumer behaviour during WWII. This is a limi-tation to the study and a suggestion for future research. However,this paper documents how US government conservation and regu-lations were communicated to consumers in poster campaigns.The scarcity of goods and services did influence US fashion.

The practices described above illustrate how the message usedfor poster campaign communications were translated into fashion.The effectiveness of these campaigns is reflected description of thegeneration that lived through WWII as ‘known for their frugalityand patriotism’ (Kim et al., 2007, p. 22).

DiscussionThis paper examined the conservation themes and practices com-municated to consumers through War Production Board and retailposter campaign communications that appeared in the New YorkTimes during WWII. The themes poster campaign practices iden-tified were ‘America’s New Role as Fashion Arbiters’; ‘ConserveTime, Money, Materials for National Defense Program’; ‘WPBGeneral Limitations Order L-85 – Fabric Conservation on Silhou-ette Dimensions’; ‘Fashion for Victory’ and ‘Victory-MindedWoman’; ‘Beauty in Peace and War’; ‘Anti-Hitler’; ‘Fabric Con-servation’; ‘Teaching Consumers How to Conserve’; ‘You’re In

the War Too’; ‘Wearing Clothes More’; ‘Changing Materials forWar [Nylon]’; ‘Differences b/n American and other Countries’Efforts’; ‘Price Ceilings’; and ‘Keeping Fashion Constant toConserve/Avoid Obsolescence’. Robertson’s (1971) adoptionprocess model provided a framework applicable to historicalresearch about fashion and innovation in this exploration of WarProduction Board and retail communications during WWII, aswell as the actions taken by consumers after receiving the mes-sages. The components of Robertson’s model can guide commu-nications about conservation, recycling and product disposal fortoday’s consumers.

This paper furthers an understanding of how retail poster cam-paign communications and the relevant themes communicated toconsumers during WWII impacted consumer behaviour andfashion innovation. It illustrates how similar messages can informpeople today about the need for resources conservation and sus-tainability. WWII was a time when fashion influenced how textileand apparel products were recycled, and conservation mandatedchanged styles.

Task-oriented retail poster campaign communications success-fully communicated change and innovation. The War ProductionBoard and retail poster communications during WWII clearlyillustrate how conservation or environmental information can becommunicated. However, it is important to note that WWII task-oriented conservation messages had short-term measurable out-comes, such as supporting the war efforts, such as saving nylon forthe war effort and fabric conservation.

During WWII, US consumers developed a fashion sense con-trolled by mandated conservation in response to the German occu-pation of Paris (Givhan, 2005). Currently, American consumersface environmental concerns and a weak economy with escalatingpetroleum prices and increasing competition from foreign imports.These conditions may influence consumers’ interest in sustainablefashion consumption, which can include what Zaccaï (2008)described as use/reuse/maintenance, recycling and disposing thefinal product.

There was interest in conservation of resources in support of theWWII effort. Examination of past themes used in retail postercommunications about the conservation of natural resources inapparel, as mandated by the US government, provides someinsights into the types of themes used and built upon to commu-nicate conservation to consumers. First, the theme ‘America’sNew Role as Fashion Arbiters’ was communicated to readers ofthe New York Times throughout the period 1941–1944. This isquite revealing as conservation was a need, and fashion was avehicle for making it desirable.

Designers’ perspectives and understanding of sustainableapparel consumption is an effective promotion of fashion inproduct communications to consumers. In the second year, 1942,War Production Board and retail communications themes becamebroader, included the idea of fashion and described the need toconserve. Conservation became fashionable to US consumers.

It is important to tell the consumers how to conserve. DuringWWII, the OWI retail poster campaign communications aboutconservation provided consumers with actionable information andsupport for a societal value of patriotism. The impacts of retailposter campaign communications were measurable within a shortperiod of time. These included fashion silhouettes changes, sub-stitutable materials used in shoes and a nationwide campaign




9

collection of unused clothing to recycle for families. WWII con-sumers were educated about how to conserve resources andrecycle. This is in contrast to the current situation in which only asegment of the consumer market supports current recyclingefforts. Almost 8% of the total municipal solid waste is frommaterials used in apparel products such as rubber, leather, andtextiles account for, and about 15.3% of these materials can berecovered and reused (Environmental Protection Agency, 2010).Birtwistle and Moore (2007) proposed making consumers moreaware of the environmental impact of clothing manufacturing anddisposal in order for apparel retailers to modify their collectionsand sales strategies in response.

Reuse and recycle contributions to sustainability will help shapethe next 100 years (AAFCS, 2010). Most often, sustainability isdescribed as fulfilling the needs of individuals without compro-mising resources needed for future generations (United Nations,1987). Consumers can aspire to conserve resources for futuregenerations; however, good intentions for the future are oftenchallenged in the consumer decision-making process. If today’sconsumers are to ensure the sustainability of natural resources,they will need to know, why, how, what and when to conserve.Consumers also will have to be motivated to conserve. This typeof communication provides insight for understanding how toenhance apparel consumers’ propensity to reuse and recycle(Birtwistle and Moore, 2007). War Production Board and retailposter campaign communications provide an example of effectivemessages about fashion and conservation.

Educators and practitioners can promote understanding andknowledge of sustainable conservation practices. There should beshort-term, measurable outcomes for adoption of sustainable con-servation practices. The example given in Fig. 2 clearly commu-nicates the efficiency of conserving nylons. Today, one couldcommunicate how consumers shopping in their own closets ratherthan buying new, mending their garments and extending apparelproduct-use life for the past 6 months can save energy and con-serve oil or energy.

In addition, societal values should be communicated to encour-age sustainable consumer behaviour. WWII retail poster campaignpatriotic communications about fashion for victory led to innova-tive styles and materials being used in apparel, shoes and acces-sories. Today, sustainability and conservation can be positioned asglobal social responsibility. For example, the fair trade movementeffectively articulates global social responsibility to consumers.

Themes and practices communicated to consumers through WarProduction Board and retail poster campaign communicationsduring WWII indicated messages about conservation of naturalresources ended with the war. Examination of the diffusion curvefor New York Times advertisements in Fig. 4 shows a timelinefrom the start to the end of WWII. The type of themes changed inthe poster advertisements between 1941 and 1943, as did thesituation.

However, the adoption curve for sustainability seemingly willcover decades. Supporters of sustainability and conservation ofresources might be better served it they set achievable short-termgoals, ones that could be measurable within the same amount oftime as used by WWII War Production Board and retail postercampaign communications. Given the time frame for a sustain-ability adoption diffusion curve, Robertson’s (1971) adoptionprocess model is useful as it suggests that success is achievable

when two or more stages occur and would be useful in addressingincremental change.

Lastly, efforts made to conserve textiles and other materialsused in apparel construction for WWII were successful becausethey were supported by a majority of consumers. During WWII,conservation of textiles and other materials for the war effort wasconsidered a patriotic duty. Government programmes informedconsumers about how to conserve goods and natural resourceswhile laws and rationing regulated consumption. Seemingly,current interest in sustainable apparel consumption receivessupport from a majority of consumers who believe in the need toconserve our natural resources and environment. Birtwistle andMoore (2007) found that consumers throw damaged clothingaway. Review of War Production Board and retail poster campaigncommunications during WWII illustrates how consumer informa-tion campaigns helped understand how to reuse textiles andapparel products rather than discard them. Arguably, dissemina-tion of conservation knowledge to consumers will play an increas-ing important role in promoting sustainability in countries wherepublic policy does not mandate conservation of resources insupport of sustainability.

As sustainable consumption policy evolves, it is important toidentify WWII retail poster campaign patriotic communicationsthemes previously used to entice consumers to reuse and recycleapparel products. Identification of these motivating appeals canaid in the development of new campaigns to entice current globaland socially responsible consumers to conserve natural resourcessuch as energy and textiles.

AcknowledgementsWe thank Brunette Tercier, TcKoy Jones and Mary Fran Rowe fortheir contributions to a class project that led to the development ofthis paper.

ReferencesAAFCS (Council of Accreditation) (2010) The FCS body of knowledge:

shaping the next 100 years. Journal of Family and Consumer Sci-ences, 102, 7–12.

Azuma, N. & Fernie, J. (2003) Fashion in the globalized world and therole of virtual networks in intrinsic fashion design. Journal ofFashion Marketing and Management, 7, 413–427.

Bayley, J. (2007) French, American and British wartime fashions.[WWW document]. URL http://www.1940.co.uk/history/article/fashion/fashion.htm (accessed on 7 October 2007).

Birtwistle, G. & Moore, C.M. (2007) Fashion clothing – where does itall end up? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Manage-ment, 35, 210–216.

Blum, J.M. (1976) V was for Victory: Politics and American Cultureduring World War II. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.

Brady, J. (1995) War and fashion. Advertising Age, July 31, p. 16.Covert, T.A. (2003) Consumption and citizenship during the Second

World War: product advertising in women’s magazines. Journal ofConsumer Culture, 3, 315–342.

Dudley, D. (1947) Molding public opinion through advertising. Annalsof the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Communi-cation and Social Action, 250, 105–112.

Environmental Protection Agency (2010) Municipal solid waste genera-tion, recycling, and disposal in the United States: facts and figures.[WWW document]. URL http://www.epa.gov/wastes/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/msw2008rpt.pdf (accessed on 27 August 2010).




10

Fox, F. (1975) Madison Avenue Goes to War: The Strange MilitaryCareer of American Advertising, 1941–1945. Brigham Young Univer-sity Press, Provo, UT.

Gerbner, G. & Marvanyi, G. (1977) The many worlds of the world’spress. The Journal of Communication, 27, 52–66.

Givhan, R. (2005) Looking for Rosie the riveting. The Washington Post.[WWW document]. URL http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64668-2005Mar24.html (accessed on 25 March 2005).

Goldstein, L. (1999) What we wore. Fortune, 140, 156–160.Gregory, P.M. (1947) An economic interpretation of women’s fashions.

Southern Economic Journal, 14, 148–162.Harris, G. & Attour, S. (2000) The international advertising practices of

multinational companies: a content analysis study. The EuropeanJournal of Marketing, 37, 154–169.

Kaiser, S. (1990) The Social Psychology of Clothing. Macmillan, NewYork.

Kassarjian, H.H. (1977) Content analysis in consumer research. Journalof Consumer Research, 4, 8–18.

Kerlinger, F.N. (1986) Foundations of Behavioral Research. Holt, Rine-hart and Winston, Fort Worth, TX.

Kim, Y.-K., Sullivan, P. & Forney, J.C. (2007) Experiential Retailing.Fairchild Publications, New York.

Lauterbach, A. (1944) From rationing to informed consumption. TheJournal of Business of the University of Chicago, 17, 209–219.

Leff, M.H. (1991) The politics of sacrifice on the American home frontin World War II. The Journal of American History, 77, 1296–1318.

McGovern, C. (2006) Sold American: Consumption and Citizenship,1890–1945. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.

NARA (2002) Powers of persuasion: poster art from World War II,National Archives and Records Administration. [WWW document].URL www.archives.gov/exhibit_hall/powers_of_persuasion (accessedon 23 September 2007).

Nolan, C. (1999) Ladies fashion of the 1940s. [WWW document].URL http://www.murrayontravel.com/carolnolan/fashionhistory_1940ladies.html (accessed on 7 October 2007).

Office of War Information (1943) Use It Up – Wear It Out – Make ItDo! US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

Pope, V. (1942) Prize offered to US designers. The New York Times,January 8, p. 25.

Robertson, T.S. (1971) Innovative Behavior and Communication. Holt,Rinehart and Winston, New York.

Rogers, E.M. (1971) Communication of Innovations. Free Press, NewYork.

Schmidt, C. (2005) Made in America [electronic version]. The New YorkSun.

Seitz, V. (1998) Information needs of catalog consumers. Journal ofHome Economics, 17, 39–42.

Staff Writer (1942) Bundles for America expands it salvage programplan. The New York Times, April 28, p. 18.

Tortora, P. (1973) Fashion magazines mirror changing role of women.Journal of Home Economics, 65, 19–23.

Tortora, P.G. (1997) 75 years of change in consumer textiles. TextileChemist and Colorist, 29, 19–24.

Tortora, P.G. & Eubank, K. (2005) Survey of Historic Costume: AHistory of Western Dress. Fairchild Publications, New York.

Turley, L.W. & Kelley, S.W. (1997) A comparison of advertisingcontent: business to business versus consumer services. Journal ofAdvertising, 26, 39–48.

United Nations (1987) Report of the World Commission on Environmentand Development General Assembly. 96th Plenary Meeting, 11December 1987.

Walton, F.L. (1943) There will always be fashion. New York Times,March 21, pSM31.

Williams, F.M. (1972) The standard of living in wartime. In The Ameri-can Family in World War II (1943 reprint) (ed. by R.H. Abrams), pp.117–127. Arno Press and New York Times, New York.

Witkowski, T. (2003) World War II poster campaigns: preaching frugal-ity to American consumers. Journal of Advertising, 32, 68–82.

Zaccaï, E. (2008) Assessing the role of consumers in sustainable productpolicies. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 10, 51–67.




11

Robertson's model: a framework for exploration of World War II conservation consumption policy...

Documents

Transcript of Robertson's model: a framework for exploration of World War II conservation consumption policy...