Research Shows Adaptive Apparel Market Underserved at Retail
The one in four U.S. residents who experience at least one type of disability don’t have enough adaptive apparel options.
That’s according to a recent study published in the International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education Journal by Hannah Laurits and Dr. Sheng Lu of the Department of Fashion and Apparel Studies at the University of Delaware. They analyzed the hundreds of thousands of adaptive apparel product for sale online in the U.S. from January 2018 to December 2022, and found that retailers tend to adopt specific assortment strategies for these goods compared to non-adaptive products.
More from Sourcing Journal
Namely, retailers typically offer adaptive apparel in a limited number of categories, with a poor selection. Of the collected samples, “statistically adaptive clothing concentrated on tops and bottoms, but were notably fewer in categories such as underwear, dresses, and outerwear,” researchers wrote. Notably lacking were dresses and outerwear, highlighting how people with disabilities have limited options to meet their needs.
What’s more, U.S. retailers often stock adaptive clothing in “boring” patterns, researchers wrote. “For example, of the collected samples, close to 70 percent of adaptive clothing did not incorporate graphics, stripes, spots, checks, floral, or other non-plain designs,” they added. By contrast, core assortments of non-adaptive apparel offered a variety of design choices. The findings showed that retailers focus on the functionality of adaptive apparel, rather than aesthetics.
Sellers also tend to stock more adaptive clothing for kids and teens than adults. Recent studies focus on the benefits of adaptive apparel for children with disabilities, which has likely increased their availability, according to researchers. The duo solicited input from fashion companies, many of which said parents influenced their children’s adaptive clothing designs and product selections. Adults with disabilities tended to offer less feedback or personal information that would guide product development.
Across the board, U.S. retailers priced adaptive clothing higher than non-adaptive apparel. Researchers pointed to higher production costs as a “critical contributing factor” to the price differential, noting the complexities of developing adaptive apparel. It requires more time, labor and testing for technical quality and product reliability, which can add months to the production process. Adaptive designs often require specialized materials and components, like magnetic fasteners, which add to the cost.
Despite limited selection and higher MSRPs, researchers said the study “indicated an emerging commercial adaptive clothing market in the United States” that could expand to serve substantial demand. “For example, improving the product offers of adaptive clothing in dresses and outerwear could play a vital role in supporting [people with disabilities] consumers’ participation in social activities and engagement,” they wrote. In recent years, brands including Tommy Hilfiger, Kohl’s and Brooks Brothers have launched adaptive apparel assortments targeting some of those needs.
“Likewise, as the study’s findings illustrated, U.S. retailers could offer more adaptive underwear, which was regarded as one of the essential apparel categories,” they added. In October, Victoria’s Secret launched its first adaptive intimates line, incorporating input from people with disabilities through wear testing, focus groups and panels.
As the market for adaptive apparel expands, retailers must find ways to make adaptive apparel more accessible to the consumers who need it, researchers wrote. People with disabilities generally have limited purchasing power and are more likely to struggle financially in the U.S. In 2022, full-time American workers with disabilities aged 16 to 64 earned about $8,500 less than their counterparts without disabilities. With those lower incomes in mind, “it is imperative for US retailers to actively seek solutions that make adaptive clothing more financially attainable for this demographic,” they added.
Lu told Sourcing Journal that U.S. trade law could reduce the cost of adaptive apparel for both producers and consumers if leveraged effectively. “Products qualified for the HS code 9817.00.96 (articles specially designed or adapted for the use or benefit of the blind or other physically or mentally handicapped persons) could enjoy the import duty-free treatment,” he said.
The researchers spoke to several U.S. fashion retailers that carry adaptive apparel, finding frustration with the lack of trade policy supporting adaptive clothing imports. In 2018, Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger parent company PVH Corp. petitioned Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to allow it to import several styles of adaptive apparel duty free under HS code 9817.00.96. “However, CBP rejected the petition by citing the reason that such clothing is not unique looking that can be ‘easily distinguishable from articles useful to the general public and any use thereof by the general public,’” Lu said. This is because adaptive apparel is designed to look as similar to non-adaptive clothing as possible.
“As more and more fashion companies start to carry adaptive clothing and there is a legitimate need to make such products more financially affordable, I think more dialogues between the industry and policymakers could be beneficial,” Lu said.
