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,

1

The Power of a Single Prototype: Sustainable Fashion Textile Design and the prevention of Carcinogenic Melanoma.

Dr. J. Farrer RCAAuckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.

A. FinnAuckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.

2009). Added value in terms of functionality, performance, desirability and wellbeing as a unique selling point had been overlooked.

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.

3 THE SMART HAT PROJECT

3.1 Project Background

SunSmart policies (CS & HCS, 2008) are widely implemented in New Zealand in early learning centres (3-12 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 multi-disciplinary approach, understanding the influential

2

dynamics behind fashion design, which could perfectly integrate the constraining forces of science with creativity to investigate and reach a prototype solution.

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.

Figure 2: Protection Factors for Various Hat Types

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 4: CS & AUT University Design Brief

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

3

Figure 3: CS & AUT University Competition Brochure

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 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.

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/SkinCancerControl/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/Cancer/

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_TheCostsofSkinCancertoNewZealandDec07.pdf

The hat guidelines that have been developed as the minimum criteria for appropriate protection is:

http://www.cancernz.org.nz/Uploads/IS_HatsDec07v2.pdf

5