The "cost per wear," calculated by dividing the price of a garment by the number of times it is expected to be worn, could encourage more sustainable clothing choices. This approach highlights that a high-quality piece of clothing may be more cost-effective over time than it initially seems. It encourages people to consider buying durable items rather than fast fashion, which is often cheaper but wears out quickly. However, this method doesn't account for the ethical and environmental impacts of how the garment was made. Imagine a man looking to buy a new shirt for work. He plans to wear it once a week for at least the next five years. When comparing options, he considers an entry-level brand shirt priced at 25 euros and a higher-quality shirt from another brand priced at 60 euros. Based on his experience with both brands, he estimates that the cheaper shirt will last about one year, while the higher-quality one will remain in good condition for at least four years. The higher-priced shirt, though more expensive, would cost only 30 cents per wear, compared to 50 cents for the cheaper one. This is the principle behind the "cost per wear." Some blogs focused on fashion and small brands use this concept to promote buying higher-quality clothing. The idea is that while a durable garment may cost more upfront, the investment is justified if it lasts longer. The cost per wear is calculated by dividing the price of the garment by the number of times it will be worn. This concept is similar to the unit price labels found in supermarkets, which help consumers compare prices per unit weight or volume. However, this logic is not yet applied to clothing in stores. The fashion industry is one of the largest contributors to environmental damage. It is responsible for up to 8% of global carbon emissions, causes significant water pollution due to textile treatments like dyeing, and generates millions of tons of textile waste each year. By displaying the cost per wear in stores or on online shopping sites, consumers could be encouraged to choose garments that last longer, thereby reducing the environmental impact of fashion. The longer a garment is worn, the more efficiently the resources used in its production are utilized, and the less frequently it needs to be replaced. The challenge is that most consumers do not know how long a garment will last. Without clear information in stores or on online shopping sites, many people do not consider a garment's longevity when making a purchase. However, there are already standardized methods for evaluating fabric durability, such as measuring how many times a fabric can be rubbed against an abrasive surface before showing signs of wear. These tests could be used to determine the cost per wear for garments, allowing retailers to display this information alongside the selling price. In a study with Lucia Reisch from the Cambridge Judge Business School, researchers tested the idea of displaying cost per wear. Participants were shown two versions of the same garment, such as a sweater: one cheaper and lower quality, the other more expensive and higher quality. When the cost per wear was indicated for both options—or even just for the higher-quality one—participants were more likely to choose the more expensive, higher-quality item. This effect was stronger when the garment was intended for daily use, when participants could compare multiple options, and when the information was certified by an independent organization. Participants trusted this information more than a brand's simple sustainability claims. Studies show that displaying the cost per wear can make fast fashion seem less advantageous than it appears. Conversely, higher-quality garments are seen as more prudent financial choices. By choosing these options, participants also made more environmentally friendly decisions. The cost per wear can thus make more expensive but higher-quality garments appear more affordable to consumers. However, not everyone may be able to afford the higher purchase price, even if it is more advantageous in the long term. The cost per wear reflects only one aspect of a garment's sustainability: its durability over time. It does not consider ethical issues, such as working conditions in the production chain, or other environmental factors, such as the use of natural or synthetic fibers. Nevertheless, brands and retailers can choose to display this information in the absence of regulatory requirements. Brands that focus on quality would likely benefit more than fast fashion retailers. The concept of cost per wear encourages consumers to think about the lifespan of a garment and how often they will wear it. In the long term, it could help people move away from fast fashion and choose more durable options—not only for environmental reasons but also to save money over time.