The Power of a Single Prototype: Sustainable Fashion Textile Design
and the prevention of Carcinogenic Melanoma.
Dr. J. Farrer RCA
Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
A. Finn
Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
ABSTRACT:
Is there a role for prototyping (sketching, patternmaking and sampling) in addressing real world problems of
sustainability (People, Profit, and Planet), in this case social/healthcare issues, through fashion and textiles
research? Skin cancer and related illnesses are a major cause of disfigurement and death in New Zealand and
Australia where the rates of melanoma are four times higher than in the Northern Hemisphere regions of
USA, UK and Canada (IARC, 1992). In 2007, AUT University (Auckland University of Technology) Fashion
Department and CS (The Skin Cancer Society of New Zealand - Health Prevention) developed a prototype hat
aimed at exploring a barrier type solution to prevent facial and neck skin damage. This is a paradigm shift
from the usual medical research model. This paper provides an overview of the project and examines how a
fashion prototype has been used to communicate emergent social, environmental, personal, physiological and
technological concerns to the trans-disciplinary research team. The authors consider how the design of a
product can enhance and support sustainable design practice while contributing a potential solution to an
ongoing health issue. Analysis of this case study provides an insight into prototyping in fashion and textiles
design, user engagement and the importance of requirements analysis in relation to sustainable development.
The analysis and a successful outcome of the final prototype have provided a gateway to future collaborative
research and product development.
KEYWORDS: Fashion Design, Sustainability, Prototype, Melanoma Cancer Prevention, Wellbeing
1 INTRODUCTION
It is estimated that in New Zealand, between 45,000 and
70,000 skin cancers are diagnosed every year (O’Dea,
2000). Accordingly, we have a critical window of
opportunity” (Carter, 2008) to impact on this statistic.
There is a realisation that more must be done to support
prevention of skin cancer which attracts significant
funding from the medical sector and has growing
commercial interests in the sun screen industry (with
mixed results). Barrier and ‘smart’ design to support
wellbeing is a new field for investigation. The first stage
of the research project reports upon head gear
prototyping through the unusual application of fashion
design research methods such as; problem analysis,
design engineering, aesthetics, materiality, user
connexion and performance, to prevent melanoma and in
some cases death. The ‘westernised’ clothing fashion
market is segmenting into two distinct areas; low cost/
high volume (TESCO/WALMART) and high-end
specification goods (up market branded goods such as
NIKE for example). While the science of testing potential
solutions is ‘smart’ the design of these solutions remains
‘dumb’.
As a result of the scientific testing of existing products in
the marketplace, conducted by the CS prior to the
commencement of this research, the ‘bucket hat’ (Fig. 1.)
was recommended as the ‘best case’ for providing a
protective shield against the sun damage which remains a
main factor in causing incidents of Carcinogenic
Melanoma. The scientific testing did not consider that the
target group most at risk (18 – 24 year age group) did not
want to wear (nor were they required by legislation to
wear) the bucket hat and therefore these benefits were
negated. The changing paradigms of the fashion market,
namely the emergence of a new intelligent and emotional
consumer (Farrer & Fraser, 2008), had not been
considered. The products that were existing in the
marketplace, and that were recommended by CS, were
designed for the pile it high/sell it cheap market. Best
practice in sustainable design for production and disposal
addresses the challenges of future lifestyle needs and
consumer requirements in a ‘close to market’ approach
aimed at the more informed consumer (Farrer & Finn,
2009). Added value in terms of functionality,
performance, desirability and wellbeing as a unique
selling point had been overlooked.
1
3 THE SMART HAT PROJECT
3.1 Project Background
Figure 1: The Bucket Hat
2 PROTOTYPING IN FASHION TEXTILES
This project provided an opportunity for traditional
industry methods of prototyping in the development
of Fashion Textile products to demonstrate value in
the area of Research. For the non-specialist reader
this section provides a brief overview of the methods
used in fashion prototyping. The process of
developing a prototype is cyclic and includes the
following phases; Research, Requirements Analysis,
Concept Development, Sample Development and
Critique. The research phase involves data gathering
on the problem, in this specific case head wear, in
relation to the desired target market demographic.
The project is put into context and a design brief is
developed. From this brief the designer or design
team conduct requirements analysis through which
specifics relating to a potential design outcome are
identified and considered. In the case of this project,
the technical requirements of the product to meet
scientific criteria (e.g. brim widths and depths) were
identified and in accord with considerations for
functionality, performance and wellbeing. These
requirements were essential for use in the next phase
of concept development. This is the key role for
design in the product development as opposed to
relying on science alone to address the problem. The
concept development phase involved sketching of a
wide range of possibilities for the final design and
provided a selection for evaluation. The role of
concept development allowed this wide range of
possibilities to be tested in terms of human factors
such as ‘cool’ or ‘un-cool’ without the cost of
developing full prototype samples. Concept ideas
that ‘ticked multiple boxes’ of scientific and human
factors could be taken further to the development of
a ‘sample’ (fashion speak for prototype). The sample
provides a physical manifestation of an idea that can
be assessed and tested by potential users and, in this
case, by the scientists at ARPANSA.
SunSmart policies (CS & HCS, 2008) are widely
implemented in New Zealand in early learning centres (312 years) because they are much more legislated
environments. The findings of baseline study entitled:
“Are NZ Primary Schools SunSmart?” (Jopson &
Reeder, 2006) justified CS setting up the SunSmart
Schools Programme in primary and intermediate schools.
A key part of this initiative involved establishing a
minimum recommendation for head gear in terms of sun
protection effectiveness and therefore establishing testing
guidelines for sun exposure barrier prevention. Most
significantly however there is little evidence that
secondary school students wear appropriate sun
protection as they can not be forced to do so. Cancer
Society established the dimensions contained in the
'magic' formula, presented in the hat guidelines from the
testing organisation ARPANSA, and viewed these as
being absolute without the opportunity to alter the
accredited design. At the time Cancer Society viewed the
dimensions (and design) of the Bucket Hat as the ultimate
sun protection. Schools were often declined accreditation
because it was assumed that any variations to the existing
hat designs would negate the benefits. The hat science
seemed good, but was cancelled by bad design in terms
of desirability. CS was successful with young children
but realised they had a fundamental problem to engage
secondary school students and young adults to protect
themselves from sun damage by wearing the
recommended design.
3.2 The Project
In response to the design problem, AUT Fashion
Department Undergraduate Team (under Finn in
conjunction with CS) posed the following questions: Is it
possible to develop a prototype hat design which 18-25
year olds wanted to wear, which would also provide
adequate protection from the sun? And could the
scientific specifications be satisfied and incorporated into
such a fashion accessory? The emphasis for the design
team was product relevance and aesthetic desirability i.e.
young people would wear it primarily because it was’
cool’, not because it protected them. In 2007 CS
approached the AUT Fashion Department to discuss if
there was a role for prototyping (through pattern, sample
testing and user trials) in solving this social/healthcare
issue. The fashion department viewed the research
collaboration positively due to the innovative multidisciplinary approach, understanding the influential
dynamics behind fashion design, which could perfectly
integrate the constraining forces of science with creativity
to investigate and reach a prototype solution.
2
The styles offering the most protection were less popular
in this age demographic than baseball style caps and
visors which were perceived as being more fashionable,
yet provided inadequate protection from the sun. It
should be noted that the styles that were tested are
popular with primary school children; a fact that may
contribute to their lack of popularity in the marginally
older target market. The hat styles identified in the test
data table below (Fig. 2) met the Sun Protective
Clothing– Evaluation and Classification Standards
(AS/NZS 4399) when tested by scientists at the
Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety
Agency (ARPNSA). The existing designs were functional
in nature, a literal translation of the minimum
accreditation standards in the spirit of the ‘pile it high/sell
it cheap’ market model. A brochure was developed for a
fashion student competition to easily communicate all the
different criteria (Fig. 3). The project was designed to test
the theory that any changes to the existing design
specifications, in order to make the designed product
more desirable to the target market demographic, would
not necessarily compromise that effectiveness of the head
gear to provide adequate sun protection and to meet the
minimal requirements for SunSmart accreditation.
AUT University & CS extended a design challenge
to develop a hat that would replace the standard
baseball ‘cap’ as the preferred choice with the 18–24
year market segment, and would provide adequate
protection from the sun in relation to prevention of
an increasing rate of melanoma in New Zealand.
Data provided by the Cancer Society was used to
develop the design challenge brief called “Scrap the
Cap” (Fig. 4). Staff in the AUT Fashion department
worked with approx 120 fashion students from the
target market age group to develop a selection of
design concepts from which 25 were chosen to be
presented for further development. These 25
concepts were presented as design layouts (Fig. 8)
and judged by a panel of five judges selected from
CS and AUT University and a representative from
NZ Street wear fashion brand “Huffer”
(http://www.huffer.co.nz ). The judges selected a
total of five finalists from which the ultimate design
would be chosen through a public vote.
Figure 2: Protection Factors for Various Hat Types
Figure 4: CS & AUT University Design Brief
Figure 3: CS & AUT University Competition Brochure
It was crucial to the project that the winning design
be chosen by the market demographic that it had
been designed for. The simplest method was to
feature the prototype designs in the AUT student
magazine “Debate” (which has a potential readership
of 35 thousand) along with a voting form to select
the winning ‘cool’ design from the 18-24 year old
intended market segment. The winner of the
competition was 22 year old fashion student
Priyanka Prierra from AUT University. She was
awarded $750.00 prize money - a token amount
which gave Cancer Society ownership of the design
(Fig 5). The winner had an opportunity to work with
local NZ headwear manufacturers “Legends
Headwear” to develop a prototype product (Fig. 10)
The prototype, which was a specific development in
fabrication, cut, shape and measurements with
3
numerous incremental changes and design
improvements, resulted in a new version of a classic
legionnaire’s hat; selected by the student body. This
prototype hat was also sent to the Australian
Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency
(ARPNSA) and tested against the Sun Protective
Clothing – Evaluation and Classification Standards
(AS/NZS 4399). The testing of the prototype was
added to the original test results to allow for
comparison between the existing hat styles and the
‘new legionnaires hat’ prototype. The prototype was
given the highest rating of any product that has been
tested to date by ARPNSA in terms of sun protection
for the Forehead, Ear and Neck. Most importantly,
the product has been accepted by the target age
group who would wear the piece as a fashion/style
item. The final test results are shown in the table
opposite (Fig. 11).
Figure 5: Design Layout by Priyanka Pierra
Figure 6: Final Prototype Testing at ARPANSA
Figure 7: Final Prototype Test Result Comparison
4 CONCLUSION
Our aim was to demonstrate how issues of cancer
prevention can be improved by engineering design
fashion prototyping, integrating form, function and
desire. The research informed a science based healthcare
institution of a research paradigm combining barrier
technology and garment design (incorporating
functionality, performance, desirability and wellbeing)
which could build upon the traditional concepts of
clothing which connects the body with our social and
physical world. Using clothing as a vehicle, which we all
relate to in various degrees, the project aimed to engage
as many young people as possible with wearing sun
protection using science and design for an easy everyday
solution. The benefits of the development of this fashion
prototype can be thus summarised;
1. The fashion prototype is a working
example that will lead to commercial
products that prevent skin cancer
2. The final prototype has illustrated another
method for health prevention indicating
design has been missing from the scientific
approach to health solutions development
3 The development of the prototype has led
to fashion wellbeing concepts and prototypes
using focused, holistic and interdisciplinary
action research. Advisory groups, workshops
and collaborative design/technology/science
processes being the way forward.
4 This research has shown us how to engage
with
other
partners
in
developing
methodology via fashion prototyping which
is its own visual, emotional language and is
widely understood
5 The prototype has demonstrated that even a
rudimentary 3D model will outclass any 2D
sketch or CAD 3D simulation in terms of
trans-disciplinary
communication
e.g.
Connectivity, Sensory, Haptic, and Aesthetic
Appreciation.
The prototype has highlighted the fact that there are
human and financial implications for NZ in the increase
of melanoma through CS and government investment in
‘wrong’ substandard advertising, medical research and
4
poor product development. Opportunity lies in design for
personalisation, in demographic and site specific
applications; co–creation and appropriation by consumers
of protective fashion design. As a result of this project a
gateway has been opened to developing new models of
research funding. A current project explores the
possibilities of AUT Fashion Department, Bio Medical
Research Teams and AUT University Commercialization
Division in investigating the potential of licensed
clothing design to develop a self funding research model.
Significantly, the prototype development had enabled
post-disciplinary collaboration leading to cluster
activities between institutions, charities, science, nuclear
physics, smart textiles and smart fashion design. This is
the power of a single prototype.
http://www.cancernz.org.nz/Uploads/IS_HatsDec07v2.pdf
5 REFERENCES
Jopson JA, Reeder AI. Are NZ Primary Schools
SunSmart? A Baseline study prior to the implementation
of the National SunSmart Schools Accreditation
Programme. A report to the Cancer Society of New
Zealand, August 2006. (36p + appendices).
International Agency for Research on Cancer.
IARC Monographs on the evaluation of
carcinogenic risks to humans. Solar ultraviolet
radiation. Lyon: International Agency for
Research on Cancer, 1992. As cited on the
Cancer Society of New Zealand official website
last retrieved February 12, 2009 from
http://www.cancernz.org.nz/HealthPromotion/Sk
inCancerControl/Cancer/
O'Dea D. The costs of skin cancer to New Zealand. Wellington: Wellington
School of Medicine, University of Otago, 2000
The office of senior citizens briefing minister john carter dec2008
Here is a link to an article written by esteemed NZ epidemiologists Brian
Cox and Mary-Jane Sneyd. This article is about melanoma only, which
is the most serious form of skin cancer:
http://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/119-1242/2169/
Here is the link to a generic skin cancer page on our national website:
http://www.cancernz.org.nz/HealthPromotion/SkinCancerControl/Cance
r/
Des O'Dea, lecturer in health economics at Otago University has written
a paper in 2000 about the financial costs of skin cancer. Last I heard,
this was being updated to more recent statistics, so I will follow that up
with our national skin cancer advisor. Information from that old paper
is on our national website:
http://www.cancernz.org.nz/Uploads/IS_TheCostsofSkinCancertoNewZe
alandDec07.pdf
The hat guidelines that have been developed as the minimum criteria
for appropriate protection is:
5