Place and sense of place in local manufacturing: How local fashion and textile companies in Norway work with and through place-based tensions

Abstract

The study examines: (1) how place-based organizational tensions arise in the context of local textile and fashion manufacturing, and (2) the strategies employed to address these tensions. Based on interviews with owners and/or managers from Norwegian textile and fashion companies, the study identifies three main categories of place-based tensions: (1) Mission: Belonging vs Performing; (2) Spatial: Belonging vs Organizing; and (3) Competence: Belonging versus Learning. Moreover, the study identifies four interrelated coping strategies used by actors to tackle place-based tensions and strengthen the position of local manufacturing in the global fashion industry. The findings contribute to the existing literature by identifying the key place-based tensions linked to local manufacturing business models and the steps taken by actors to address these oppositional demands in everyday organizational practices. Additionally, the study adds nuance to our understanding of how attachment to place can support organizational change toward practicing sustainability.

Keywords

business models local fashion place-based sustainability tensions textiles

Introduction

Recent years have shown an increase in companies exploring opportunities for local manufacturing, either by investigating new product and/or business opportunities rooted in a specific place or by moving production (closer) to home (Hedrich et al., 2021). Local manufacturing can in general be understood as businesses that establish: ‘… a supply chain in geographical proximity while consciously taking into account local conditions in the business decision’ (Dybdahl, 2019: 194). Local manufacturing reflects a global trend to ascribe social, environmental, and economic values to products manufactured in a particular place (Guthey et al., 2014). Here, the local manufacturing literature differs from discussions of, for example, reshoring, where decisions to bring offshored production back to the home country are often rooted in risk management concerns, including the risk of losing supplier knowledge, stricter environmental legislation, lack of raw materials, and shortage of qualified staff (Ashby et al., 2016; Robinson and Hsieh, 2016; Weismann et al., 2017).

The emphasis on the local origins is, for instance, found in the food sector with the emergence of the slow food movement and the Nordic cuisine (Byrkjeflot et al., 2013; Hendrikx and Lagendijk, 2022). Local manufacturing can be seen as a place-based business model, which describes organizations using: ‘location-specific resources to create and capture value, thereby profiting from and contributing to a “sense of place”’ (Di Gregorio, 2017: 115). However, the boundaries of the term ‘local’ are blurry and do not only refer to a geographical location or physical setting. Local manufacturing is also a socially constructed phenomenon that can be subject to multiple interpretations and meanings (Agnew, 1987; Cresswell, 2015; Gieryn, 2000; Relph, 1976). As noted by Croft et al. (2019: 268): ‘it is important to remain aware of the socially constructed nature of “local” and thus be sensitive to its many diversities’. Drawing on the broader literature on ‘place’ and ‘sense of place’, local can both refer to a specific geographical location and the personal connection to a given place (Shrivastava and Kennelly, 2013). Thus, understanding local manufacturing requires attention to physical locations and landscapes as well as the multiple interpretations, meanings and feelings associated with them (Guthey et al., 2014).

The multiple meanings of local manufacturing as a place and ‘sense of place’ can give rise to a variety of tensions, which can be defined broadly as: ‘… the simultaneous existence of apparently oppositional demands’ (Pedersen and Rosati, 2019: 39). For instance, actors can form diverging views of ‘local manufacturing’ and the associated benefits from this type of business activity. Moreover, there is not automatically correspondence between the meanings ascribed to local manufacturing and the actual business realities of a given location. As an example, companies may find that the skills, knowledge, competences, and material resources necessary for rediscovering local manufacturing are either in short supply or long gone (Fisher and Botticello, 2016; Plieth et al., 2012). Tensions can also emerge if actors develop conflicting understandings of local manufacturing. The meaning and making of local manufacturing as a place are ongoing processes that evolve over time and can be subject to negotiation (Guthey et al., 2014; Massey, 1994). In the words of Staeheli (2003), place is ‘continually in the process of being made’ (2003: 163).

As of today, there is little systematic knowledge about the multiple place-based tensions experienced by organizations running local manufacturing business models. In this study, we therefore explore place-based tensions in the small but growing environment for local textile and fashion manufacturing (Krager, 2018; Pal et al., 2018). Recently, local textile and fashion manufacturing has re-emerged as an antidote to the global fashion industry and stressing the importance of more coherent and sustainable value chains (Burgess and White, 2019; Clarke-Sather and Cobb, 2019; Klepp and Laitala, 2018; Mohajer va Pesaran, 2018; Sutherland et al., 2016). For instance, it is argued that local manufacturing can potentially bring more transparency to the textile and clothing sector, which is infamous of long, anonymous supply chains (Mukendi et al., 2020; Pedersen and Gwozdz, 2014). As such, the literature on local textile and fashion manufacturing has ties to the concept of slow fashion, which is concerned with slowing down production and consumption processes as well as protecting the well-being of the workers, communities, and the environment (Fletcher and Vittersø, 2018; Sarokin and Bocken, 2024; Trejo and Lewis, 2020). However, slow fashion is less explicit about the specific location of manufacturing and its distinct ecosystems, resources, and communities (Curtis, 2003; Guthey et al., 2014).

The aim of this study is to examine how owner-managers perceive and respond to the multiple place-based tensions arising in local manufacturing and the coping strategies used to tackle these oppositional demands. Drawing on the literature on organizational tensions and paradoxes, the study analyses how owner-managers from 14 fashion and textile businesses in Norway navigate within multiple oppositional demands linked to place in daily organizational practices, and by this also contribute to the making of places. The study contributes to the literature providing a more nuanced understanding of the place-based tensions experienced by local textile and fashion organizations. Even though it is recognized that local manufacturing is not without challenges, there has to the knowledge of the authors been no systematic effort to document the place-based tensions facing owner-mangers operating local manufacturing business models. The study also provides practical insights to managers by demonstrating how organizations investing in manufacturing cope with tensions at the intersection of organization, sustainability, and place.

On organizational tensions and local manufacturing

In the last decades, there has been a booming literature on organizational tensions and related terms such as paradox, duality, dialectics, and pluralism (Fairhurst and Putnam, 2014; Farjoun, 2010; Graetz and Smith, 2008; Jarzabkowski and Fenton, 2006; Putnam et al., 2016; Schad et al., 2016; Smith and Lewis, 2011; Wannags and Gold, 2020). Examples of tensions identified in the literature include oppositional demands between exploitation and exploration, profits and purpose, efficiency and flexibility, stability and change, and social, environmental, and economic priorities (Ashforth and Reingen, 2014; Gaim and Wåhlin, 2016; Joseph et al., 2020; Slawinski and Bansal, 2015). Certain topics, issues, and ideas also come with built-in tensions. It is generally agreed that tensions are common features of organizational life and can emerge within and across levels (individual, group, department, etc.), hierarchies (employees, middle managers, top executives, etc.), functions (operations, marketing, finance, etc.), and professions. For instance, scholars have argued that tensions are embedded in the very idea of corporate sustainability, which tries to balance economic, social, and environmental goals (Haffar and Searcy, 2019; Van der Byl and Slawinski, 2015). However, tensions do not always result in overt conflicts; they can sometimes remain latent until they surface and become salient in situations of plurality, scarcity, and change (Smith and Lewis, 2011). As an example, a fundamental tension may exist between the short-term versus long-term, but only manifest themselves in specific situations (e.g. when making investment decisions) (Pedersen et al., 2017).

Researchers have also identified a number of responses to organizational tensions. For instance, inspired by the work of Poole and Van de Ven (1989), scholars distinguish between acceptance, separation (spatial and temporal), and synthesis responses (see e.g. van Bommel, 2018; Epstein et al., 2015; Hahn et al., 2015; Joseph et al., 2020). The first strategic response, acceptance, encourages managers to embrace paradox, while the last three seek resolution by finding ways to meet competing demands. The list of responses has also been extended with different types of suppression responses, which cover attempts to downplay, ignore or avoid one pole of the tension in the organization (van Bommel, 2018; Jarzabkowski et al., 2013; Xiao et al., 2019). In summary, managers can cope with tensions using a variety of suppression, acceptance, and resolution strategies, which may also be combined and change over time and in specific contexts.

There is limited cross-fertilization between the literature on organizational tensions and the literature on place. The literature on organizational tensions has paid limited attention to the concepts of place and ‘sense of place’, whereas the place-based literature rarely makes explicit reference to research in organizational tensions and paradoxes. However, studies suggest that organizational tensions can emerge from the differing needs and desires of actors involved in the ‘making of place’ (Cartel et al., 2022; Cresswell, 2015; Goncalves and Lexander, 2024). For instance, Guthey et al. (2014) point to several studies where the intersection of place, organization, and sustainability is marked by tensions. In the context of local manufacturing, companies investing in local manufacturing also experience opposing demands, which can be linked to underlying place-based tensions (Byrkjeflot et al., 2013; Klepp et al., 2019; Leer, 2016; Scott, 2022). As an example, evidence indicates that it can be difficult for local manufacturing companies to compete on cost efficiency with conventional players in a market, where most of the production take place in global supply chains (Pal et al., 2018). Fundamentally, tensions can emerge between actors which hold oppositional views of a given place as a geographical location and the multiple meanings, feelings, and attachments associated with it (Agnew, 1987; Shrivastava and Kennelly, 2013). Moreover, the temporal dimension of place can give rise to diverging perspectives of what a place is today, has been in the past, and should be in the future. For instance, Cartel et al. (2022) stress that place is associated with: (1) a past orientation, where the accumulation of historical meanings tied to the place informs current interactions with it; (2) a present orientation, reflecting contemporary encounters between people and the place; and (3) a future orientation, in which aspirations for the place influence how people engage with it.

In this study, we draw on the rich literature on organizational tensions to explore the multiple, place-based tensions emerging when managing local manufacturing business models. Based on the seminal work of Smith and Lewis (2011), we suggest that place-based tensions can exist within and between four broad organizational categories: (1) belonging, (2) learning, (3) organizing, and (4) performing. Tensions of belonging concern the multiple identities of organizational stakeholders, who occupy competing roles, values and memberships (Smith and Lewis, 2011). Tensions of belonging can manifest themselves, for example, when a local manufacturer simultaneously must balance the dual objectives of having a place-based purpose (e.g. contributing to creating sustainable jobs within a local context and using local resources in the best possible way) while at the same time being a profit-driven enterprise (e.g. high salaries and more expensive materials). Moreover, a recent case study of a Tibetan textile enterprise describes the tensions between the local history and traditions of nomads versus their aspirations for economic growth and material needs (Yu, 2024). Tensions of learning happen when organizations simultaneously build up and destroy knowledge during change and innovation (Smith and Lewis, 2011). We see such tensions arise, for instance, in local textile and fashion manufacturing as owner-managers train new employees in traditional, local skills (spinning, weaving etc.) but try to create new versions of what can be quite monotone and physically straining jobs. Moreover, ambitions to revitalize local manufacturing in a given geographical location may clash with the local skills base available (Plieth et al., 2012). Tensions of organizing concern the design and structure of organizational activities, for example, between organizational differentiation/integration, exploration/exploitation, and control/flexibility. We see such tensions of organizing also in relation to investments in local manufacturing business models, as owner-managers explore and develop local opportunities while also needing to stay financially sustainable on a very price competitive market. Organizing tensions can also manifest themselves, when business needs for governance and control at the manufacturing floor clash with local needs for flexibility and autonomy (Yu, 2024). Finally, tensions of performing concern competing strategies and goals that require individuals to juggle multiple, often conflicting, tasks and roles (Smith and Lewis, 2011). Performing tensions are likely to arise in local manufacturing as organizational members are being asked to work towards multiple and, at times, conflicting goals, for example, create good quality products using local resources. For instance, a recent study examined the tensions between local embeddedness and scalability of grassroot initiatives (Baileche et al., 2024). As highlighted by Smith and Lewis (2011), tensions may arise within and between these four categories of tensions.

The study advances the existing literature by conducting rich, empirical analyses of how multiple, place-based tensions are manifested and acted upon in a local manufacturing context. So far, the literature has primarily focused on individual tensions (e.g. exploration vs exploitation) and responses rather than examining the broader organizational landscape of oppositional demands and their interdependencies (Pedersen and Rosati, 2019). Moreover, there has been calls to move beyond generic response strategies and conduct more empirical studies of how real-life managers work with and through tensions in practice (Joseph et al., 2020; Xiao et al., 2019). The study also contributes to the literature on local manufacturing by highlighting the tensions built into place-based business models. Local manufacturing represents the antonym to globalization by ‘shrinking’ the boundaries of the organization through geographical exclusion and shutting the doors for actors in global supply chains. However, the new geographical demarcation lines are constantly negotiated and may cause instability and tensions which must be addressed by the organization members.

Method and dataset

The multi-case study adopts a qualitative research approach, which includes semi-structured interviews with 18 representatives from 14 textile and/or fashion companies. The interviewees and case companies were chosen by reaching out to the Norwegian Fashion Hub and the KRUS research project. Based on this, an initial list of 12 textile and/fashion companies were contacted out of which 10 agreed to interviews and visits. An additional four companies were found by following leads from the first 10 companies (see Table 1). This data was complemented by observations carried out during the Spinnvill Rokkefestival and the 6th North Atlantic Sheep and Wool Conference. Thus, while we did an interview with one of the companies when also in the area for the conference, observations from the festival and conference primarily serve to add further context to the interviews. For instance, some of the companies that we had already talked to also attended the conference. All interviewees had a particular interest in using and strengthening the use of local resources, primarily wool, but also different types of local resources, for example, leather or wood.

Table 1.

Respondents.

Title	Company	‘Fylke’ (county)	Value chain
Owner-manager	HU	Vestland	Dyeing and spinning
Owner-manager	O	Vestland	Design, knitting, and cut & sew
Owner-manager	H *¹	Akershus (Oslo)	Design and cut & sew
Owner-manager	VW *	Akershus (Oslo)	Design
Owner-manager	MBV	Møre og Romsdal	Weaving
Project manager	A	Vestland	Shoemaking
Owner-manager	K	Møre og Romsdal	Weaving
Production manager	K	Møre og Romsdal	Weaving
Project manager	K	Møre og Romsdal	Weaving
Owner-manager	SS	Trøndelag	Spinning
Owner-manager	MD	Trøndelag	Design
Owner-manager	L	Akershus (Oslo)	Design and cut & sew
Owner-manager	S *	Troms	Design and weaving
Owner-manager	U *	Troms	Carding
Owner-manager	TU **²	Møre og Romsdal	Wool and knitting
Owner-manager	TU **	Møre og Romsdal	Wool and knitting
Manager	FU, Rogaland		Wool classifying
Spinnvill RokkefestivalCraftsmen, hobbyists, folk artists and the Norwegian Folk Art and Craft Association representatives	Festival		Spinning and dyeing
The North Atlantic Native Sheep and Wool conferenceDesigners, professional weavers, professional spinners, sheep farmers, wool collectors, wool sorters, entrepreneurs, and researchers	Conference		An international project to celebrate and promote the short-tailed sheep and their fleeces of the North Atlantic

The data collection was carried out as semi-structured interviews with the owners and/or managers and lasted approximately 60–90 minutes. All case organizations in the study are small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) which compared to large organizations are generally characterized by, for example, dominant owner-managers, flat hierarchies, and informal communication (Jenkins, 2004). Although the relationship between the personal values of entrepreneurs or owner-managers and organizational values may not be straightforward, previous research still highlights a strong connection between the two, especially within the context of SMEs (Adla et al., 2020; Oldham, 2024). Thus, in our analysis of place-based tensions, we do not distinguish between the owner-managers’ ‘sense of place’ and that of the organization. Most interviews took place in person and were supplemented with a tour of the factory and/or design studio. Two interviews were conducted online. The interviews were based on an interview guide, which covered the following themes: background and motivation for local production; current situation (e.g. the value chain of the most-sold product and strategy); network (e.g. supply chain, collaborators, and knowledge partners); and barriers and opportunities in local production (e.g. the greatest benefits to working with local production); and the future (e.g. the company’s prospects).

Following data collection, all interviews were transcribed. Data was analysed using the NVivo qualitative data software (Bazeley and Jackson, 2013) and combining deductive and inductive approaches. In the first phase, analysis focused on coding the qualitative data and identifying first order concepts and their interrelationships primarily taking an inductive approach. This brought to light various tensions and managers’ responses to these tensions, in the respondents’ own terms. In the second phase, the researchers categorized these recurrent themes into second order themes, while moving back and forth between the data and the literature. Our initial research interest originating in the tension literature and the emerging phenomena of ‘local production’ were reflected in our study’s aggregated dimension, namely, tensions between (1) Belonging versus Performing (Mission), (2) Belonging versus Organizing (Spatial), and (3) Belonging versus Learning (Competences). We have developed a coding tree to illustrate the analytical process (see Figure 1). Starting from the Gioia methodology (Gioia et al., 2012), our coding tree includes two levels to encompass tension identification as well as tension management. Second order themes and aggregate dimensions are dotted lines to indicate the relationships between a given tension and the strategies applied to manage it.

Figure 1.

Coding tree.

Organizational tensions in local manufacturing

Context: Local textile and fashion manufacturing in Norway

As of today, the Norwegian textile and clothing sector employs about 42,000 people and has an annual turnover of around 67 billion NOK (Norwegian Fashion Hub, 2024). Most people employed in the industry work with design, sourcing, sales, etc. (Klepp and Laitala, 2018). Norway began industrial textile manufacturing in the mid-1800s, with Oslo as the primary production hub, powered by hydropower from the city’s main river and traditional crafts. Soon, the western regions of Norway, particularly the counties of ‘Hordaland’ and ‘Møre og Romsdal’, became the industry’s core. However, in line with global trends, most of the industry had been outsourced by the mid-1900s (Government.no, 2001; Norwegian Fashion Hub, 2024). Despite outsourcing, sharpened environmental demands, lack of capital, and lack of political support, a small number of spinning mills, weaving, knitting factories, and seam production have survived. Some have even gone into business. While wool is, and always has been, at the centre of local textile and fashion production, other fibres such as cotton and linen historically have been, and continues to be, processed (but not grown) in Norway. For the last decades, sheep in Norway have mainly been bread for their meat, as there has been very little profits to be made, if any, in wool. This means that parts of the processing of wool, for instance, industrial washing and scouring of raw wool, is limited in Norway at the time of research. In recent years, imported merino and alpaca have also become important raw materials (Klepp and Laitala, 2018). The traditional textile manufacturing regions of Norway are well represented in our interview data, but also regions with less tradition for industrial textile manufacturing such as ‘Troms’ in the Northern part of Norway (see Table 1).

Mission: Belonging versus performing

The first organizational tension observed in the data relate to the fundamental mission conflict of the companies regarding values and identity (belonging) versus efficiency (performing). The benefits of building an organizational identity as a local manufacturer can be at odds with the actual costs of running such business. Our data show that investment in local manufacturing is driven by ambitions of creating high quality and more sustainable products as well as contributing to local job creation and community resilience. As such, a strong ‘sense of place’, a feeling of identity with and attachment to a particular place permeates the purpose of the respondents’ businesses. For instance, explaining the motivation behind setting up a production of sweaters made from locally sourced wool, one of the owner-managers of TU says: ‘Having talked about sustainability for years, I got sick and tired of talking. I wanted to walk the talk’. The goal to produce locally is generally perceived to be at odds with the raison d’etre of the established industry, which in the view of our respondents is mainly about the bottom line. As noted by owner-manager of HU: ‘For us, it’s not so much a question of the bottom line. For us, it’s about keeping the factory in business. And carrying it over to the next generations’. Nonetheless, while taking distance from a singular focus on bottom line, the question of money is also paramount in the everyday work of the respondents. Due to comparably high minimum salaries in Norway and small manufacturing runs, the cost of each item produced is considerably higher than that of brands relying on global supply chains. Owner-managers of TU, who are about to start producing sweaters using a 3D knitting machine, contemplates if to sell their sweaters for less or more than NOK 3000, knowing that it makes a big difference to the customer, but also knowing that it will be hard to make ends meet if the price is below NOK 3000. The tension between identity and the costs of local versus global production is accentuated by lack of institutional backing for local manufacturing, for example, the difficulty of securing bank loans and grants to establish or expand production in Norway.

Coping strategies

To remain financially sustainable while being loyal to the local mission, the respondents often adopted separation as a management strategy. In the short-term, investment in local manufacturing often took place as an add-on to business as usual. However, this short-term investment in local manufacturing was an integral part of the long-term strategy to move local manufacturing from the margins to the mainstream. As an example, Owner-manager of HU explains that they continuously experiment with the use of local wool to create higher quality yarn and putting more and more yarn made from Norwegian wool on the market. HU and K collaborate with recognized Norwegian designers to explore new products and processes. Owner-manager of HU stresses that such projects are not something HU makes money on short-term. Rather, it is a long-term investment in product development and increasing the perceived value of local manufacturing.

Another approach to manage the mission tension between belonging and performing is the creation of a compensation, that is, supplementing core business with additional offers such as consulting, serving food, running courses, and offering factory visits and conference space. Companies HU, A, and O have also made investments in becoming recognized Economusée®.³ Adopting compensation strategies allow companies to supplement potential economic losses from their investments in local production, through profits in another part of their business. Such activities also have the added advantage of more long-term awareness and value creation. Managing tensions between belonging and performing through such ‘patchwork’ may create more resilient businesses and communities (Hahn et al., 2015). The manifestations of mission tensions within and between questions of belonging and performing are further illustrated in Table 2. Obviously, mission tensions are not unique to local manufacturing businesses. However, in this case, it has direct consequences for the ability to produce locally, as the respondents continuously must compare the cost and benefits of local versus global value chains.

Table 2.

Belonging versus performing.

Respondent	Representative quotes
Owner-manager, Company L	It is always a question whether to focus on bottom line or on design. But I think there is a happy medium, somewhere in between, that I try to find. A place where you can both make money and be true to your values
Owner-manager, Company K	Today we buy raw materials from Western Europe because the quality is much better. We can’t compete on price, so we must compete on quality. I also think that more and more people value that it’s produced in Norway
Owner-manager, Company L	The question of money, that’s the paradox. I mean, I must make money, but I don’t do it because of the money. If I did it for the money, I would probably do something else. I think the feasibility of it {local production} is an exciting challenge, trying to make it work. It’s like putting together a puzzle
Owner-manager, Company MD	We started out making a prototype using K’s coat fabric. But using K’s fabric we ended up with a coat costing NOK 15.000. We can’t sell that off the rack. Maybe we can do it on order. So, we made the coat using another fabric that I can’t say we’re particularly proud off. I have no idea where the fabric is made, but I don’t know what to do about it yet
Owner-manager, Company MBV	But, at the same time he {grandfather} said that if we sell ourselves too cheap to begin with, then we think we have a business, while, actually, we don’t. The business would be built on false premises
Owner-manager, Company O	We gave up getting grants to build up Company O. We would have spent more time applying for money than we would ever receive. So, we just did the usual. I mean, we used logic and thrift. A lot of thriftiness

Spatial: Belonging versus organizing

The data from the interviews shows that the local textile and fashion manufacturers experience a spatial tension between having a local value proposition (belonging), which defines itself in opposition to operating in a market with global division of labour (organizing). The multitude of materials and processes that go into the making of most textile and fashion products make it near impossible to run a textile or fashion business outside of the global value chains. The clash is thus also between the organizational identity and the resources available in a local context. The central questions that arise are the question of ‘where is local?’ (in terms of the physical sitting of a place); and what materials and parts of the final product must be made locally for a product to qualify as local?

The respondents question the practice of labelling products ‘Made in Norway’ when a piece of clothing is designed in Norway, but fabrication is outsourced. For example, they point to the discrepancy in using a Norwegian flag on the label of a roll of yarn when the yarn is not made from Norwegian wool. Owner-manager of L speculates how to communicate the value (and higher cost) of styles sewn in her factory in Norway when most of her collection, at the time of the interview, was still sewn in the Baltics. The interview data also shows variation in the boundaries of ‘local’, delineations ranging from ‘knowing the farmer in person’ to supporting local production at a global level (see Table 3). For the respondents, the current reliance on global supply chains in the production of Norwegian icons and heritage is contradictory, especially when it occurs at the expense of developing and using local raw materials and skill sets. Owner-manager of K argues that the Norwegian folk costume ‘bunad’: ‘ought to be made from Norwegian wool’, thus also speaking to aspects of cultural identity in clothing. As such, the data attest to a malleable interpretation of ‘local’ depending on the issue at hand. On one hand, respondents’ sense of place, particularly in relation to social sustainability issues – such as creating local job opportunities and supporting community resilience – is closely tied to their attachment to a specific town or county. In some cases, this attachment is reinforced by the textile manufacturing history of their region or factory, which they draw upon to shape the future. On the other hand, when it comes to sourcing raw materials (fibres, yarns, buttons, etc.), the data reveal a broader understanding of ‘local’, extending beyond the immediate county to include the nation and neighbouring regions. A project manager at company A even mentioned the importance of supporting local production in other parts of the world.

Table 3.

Spatial: Belonging versus organizing.

Respondent	Representative quotes
Owner-manager, Company SS	We take in wool from all of Norway. We have even taken a bit of wool from Sweden. So, we use the term ‘local’ in a somewhat vague manner. I mean, in some ways it’s a bit relative
Owner-manager, Company HU	We get most of our Norwegian wool from Førde, which delivers very high quality. This is kind of local, but not to the extent that we know exactly what farm the wool is from
Owner-manager, Company MD	I started producing in Riga. When the clothing industry was closed in Norway, we soon started working with Eastern Europe. This means that we have long traditions of working with the Baltic countries. … I think we ought to be proud of this tradition
Project manager, Company A	If you have a leather made with long traditions, it is also valuable to support local production elsewhere. So, you ought to count this in. How does the moral calculation look when you’re done?
Owner-manager, Company K	There’s no production of linen fibres in Norway and there are no spinning mills working with linen. There are no spinning mills working with silk either. But we specialize in weaving these materials
Production manager, Company K	We work with a Swedish dye house. They do the dyeing for us. We’ve taken the decision to focus on weaving and make that our expertise. Then others take care of the dye and bleaching
Owner-manager, SS	Starting out, we named it Nordenfjeldske Fibershed. We were looking for collaborators north of Nordrefjell. Now we’re working towards a Norwegian Fibershed. Arguably, Norway is a bit too big for one Fibershed. At the same time, people and possible collaborators live so far apart. I think now, to begin with at least, we have to collaborate across the country to make it happen

Coping strategies

When a rigid interpretation of local manufacturing give rise to a variety of organizational, technical, and financial challenges, the companies in effect blur the definitional boundaries of the term to gain flexibility. We might speak of a strategy of relativization. As an example, Owner-manager of O avoids specifying which processes need to take place locally to qualify as local, concluding that if most of the manufacturing is done in Norway, then it is not a problem to source buttons from Italy. Meanwhile, company O has also been looking into sourcing buttons produced in Norway from Norwegian resources such as wood. The respondents generally avoided a strict geographical delineation of local, leaving the boundaries somewhat open to interpretation (see Table 3). Nonetheless, they still use the local origin of materials and processes to distinguish themselves from the global industry incumbents, which do not prioritize where materials come from and/or where products are spun, weaved and/or sewn. In this way the study shows the double role of the spatial tension between belonging and organizing as a constraint as well as a source of identity. Smith and Lewis note that ‘Organizations emerge as leaders respond to foundational questions, constructing boundaries that foster distinctions and dichotomies’ (2011: 388). Our data suggests that the relativization strategy adopted by our respondents allow them to simultaneously work with both short-term and long-term perspectives, exploring what might, in the long run, be viable in the ‘local’ region. As part of this virtuous cycle, owner-managers talk salient tensions into existence, to strengthen their own position within the field. It is the interplay between the local and global that brings value to local manufacturing (Massey, 1991; Mohajer va Pesaran, 2018: xx). In this way, local manufacturers are also deeply involved in the social construction of place.

Competences: Belonging versus Learning

Although locally manufactured textiles and fashion play only a marginal role in the market, the respondents’ report that both interest and business have been growing over the last few years. This means that they need to hire more people to deliver on orders. However, respondents generally report difficulties in finding skilled workers and technical expertise. While local manufacturing often celebrates local craft and tradition, the current skills base often fails to meet the needs for local manufacturing, leading to tensions with regards to competences. We see a clash between the organizational identity (belonging) and the competences available (learning). The lack of skilled workers is partly a reflection of the institutional environment and the global division of labour. In the market, brands’ main goal has been to find the cheapest and most efficient solution. Thus, most textile and fashion production have been outsourced to low-cost countries with little concern of the consequence for local craftmanship and manufacturing technologies or social and environmental sustainability at a global scale. While design and marketing have been celebrated as valuable and prestigious jobs, manufacturing has become hidden in anonymous supply chains. The low, perceived value of manufacturing is also reflected in the political priorities. Owner-manager of SS explains: ‘In the Norwegian textile and fashion industry, it’s still design that matters at a political level. They’re not interested in production. This means that we no longer have the skill sets to produce in Norway’. However, the respondents also note that the perceived value of working in the industry has increased over the last few years (see Table 4). As a result, although the owner-managers struggle to find skilled workers, there is no lack of people who want to work in the industry.

Table 4.

Competences: Belonging versus learning.

Respondent	Representative quotes
Owner-manager, Company O	It varies a lot how long it takes for an individual to learn the trade and work at the speed needed. … But we try to invest a lot in those who stay. We go on a study trip once a year. It can be many places. To create a community and show we value people
Owner-manager, Company HU	In this part of the country, lots of people have been laid off from the oil rigs. So, there are many people looking for new jobs, but they do not have the skills needed. This means that we need to carry the cost of educating people
Production manager, Company K	Right now, we’re looking for new people. We used to not have many applicants. Now we have more when we have a position open. But we need to train people. And then we worry that they won’t stay. For example, if we hire a relatively young woman, there’s a good chance that she has ambitions to do something else in the long run
Owner-manager, Company S	It is really hard to find a skilled apprentice. I had one a while ago, but it was such a bad experience that I’m afraid to do it again
Owner-manager, Company MBV	But one day she called us because she wanted to make a Norwegian-produced band. She designed the band, we manufacture it and we share the profits. It’s been a great collaboration
Owner-manager, SS	What I find interesting about them is their qualification. One of them previously worked for a window factory and the other used to work for an oil refinery in South Africa. So both of them come from production-focused jobs. And it turns out that this actually works really well for us. Although no textile background, they know what it means to work in production

Coping strategies

The dominant strategy to manage tensions related to competences is compensation (also used to tackle tensions related to mission). To bridge the gap between manufacturing locally and the fact that there are close to no textile manufacturing skills left in the country, respondents invest in training future employees. The challenge and opportunity here lie in the fact that the owner-managers need to take on the responsibility and cost of developing the local manufacturing skills of new employees to grow the business. While most of our respondents mention the risk of investing in training people, they also see it as an opportunity to ingrain local values, skills, and practices in the organization (Hahn et al., 2015). Respondents also mention looking globally to produce locally. Owner-manager of O reports that they needed to persuade a British technician and his wife to move to Norway as the skill sets needed to operate newly acquired knitting machines were unavailable in Norway. Others, to some extent, rely on immigrants as workforce. As training will only pay off if the employees stay in the company, the owner-managers incentivize employees by investing in an attractive work environment that supports individual needs and make employees feel proud and motivated.

The different actors in the local textile and fashion manufacturing sector also collaborate with each other to address the general lack of textile and clothing manufacturing skills in the country (see Table 4). This coping strategy can best be described as diffusion. The respondents mention several local players whom they see to play a key role in the making of materials and products, for example, spinning and weaving mills, but also sheep farmers, the wool grading station, and consumers. The data show that respondents actively seek collaboration across the value chain to explore product and business opportunities within the context of Norway. According to owner-manager of HU:

‘This wool from crossbreds has been sorted by hand in two colours. It is the highest quality wool in Norway. The wool was sorted by Company SS, following which they sent it to us for spinning a one-thread yarn. We then sent the yarn to Company K, who weaves the fabric that was then sent to the customer, Varp & Veft. Varp & Veft sells the fabric by meter to larger customers such as hotels. For interior and curtains, for example. In this way, we work with others across the supply chain, our role being the spinning. And the quality of the spinning will be as good as the customer asks for’.

Discussion

The ‘constructedness’ of local manufacturing as a place can give rise to a variety of tensions (Entrikin, 1997; Massey, 2012). In this study, we looked more closely at how 14 fashion and textile companies experience and address place-based tensions when running local manufacturing business models, an area that so far have received only piecemeal attention in the literature (Dybdahl, 2019; Pal et al., 2018; Plieth et al., 2012). Fundamentally, local manufacturing seems to rest on a conflict between aiming to be an alternative to, while at the same time being an integral part of, the existing textile and fashion industry. Local manufacturing is defined in opposition to globalization, yet globalization still create dependencies which local manufacturers cannot ignore. Specifically interested in tensions related to questions of place and sense of place, our analysis reveals three main categories of place-based tensions: (1) Mission: Belonging vs Performing; (2) Spatial: Belonging vs Organizing; and (3) Competences: Belonging versus Learning. It is noteworthy that the three types of tensions are all rooted in ‘who you are’ as an individual and/or organization (belonging) and the respondents’ sense of place. Thus, the place-based approach to business can be difficult to combine with the need to minimize governance costs, ensure resource control, and gain access to relevant competences.

The analysis shows several interrelated coping strategies, which are not without precedents in the literature. For instance, the mission tension between belonging and performing have similarities with the purpose versus profit tension found in other organizations (Birkinshaw et al., 2014). In the case of local manufacturing, the literature indicates that local manufacturing often departs from a more holistic perspective of business, where choice of manufacturing location is motivated by values beyond profit-maximization (Dybdahl, 2019; Klepp et al., 2019; Leer, 2016; Plieth et al., 2012). Other values highlighted in the literature is resourcefulness, transparency, sustainability, and local job creation (Dybdahl, 2019; Fletcher and Vittersø, 2018; Galatti and Baruque-Ramos, 2019; Klepp and Laitala, 2018; Kourula et al., 2024). The spatial tension between local (belonging) and global (organizing) is tied more closely to the sector in question, as the globalization of the industry makes it notoriously difficult to produce completely local alternatives. Findings from the data analysis demonstrate that being local has multiple meanings. While most interviewees show strong attachment to their local community, they are also deeply invested in (re)building socially and environmentally sustainable textile and garment infrastructures within both national and regional contexts. Some even demonstrate attachment to places beyond their nation and region, fostered through long-term partnerships and respect for local craftsmanship. Organizations can work within as well as across environments in the work with local manufacturing (Kourula et al., 2024). When it comes to the competence tension linked to the available skills base, prior research has identified limited knowledge and experience as a barrier for local textile and fashion manufactures to sustain and grow their business (Fisher and Botticello, 2016; Plieth et al., 2012).

The results show that the mission tension was mainly addressed with separation and compensation strategies. Moreover, the spatial tension was met with relativization, whereas the competence tension was met with compensation and diffusion in the form of training, incentives, and collaboration. The study supports the view that tensions co-exist and that managers/owners respond to them differently depending on the issue in question (Pedersen and Rosati, 2019). The approaches used by the managers/owners do not automatically fit into the generic typologies from the literature on organizational tensions. However, one might say that the managers/owners studied subscribe to an acceptance strategy, where tensions are seen as a precondition for doing business. However, the managers/owners did not merely respond to tensions; they also used them purposefully as a tool of inspiration, innovation, and distinction. Our analysis demonstrates that the owner-managers’ with whom we met (strategically) talked latent tensions into existence, thereby making them salient (Smith and Lewis, 2011). They use place-based tensions as a source of inspiration to enhance local capabilities and strengthen the economic resilience of their community but also as a unique selling point and opportunity to create value (Di Gregorio, 2017).

The local manufacturing organizations covered in this study are grounded in a particular notion of place and the act of assigning special value to this place. It is an understanding of place that operates at multiple levels, ranging from town and county (creating local, sustainable job opportunities) to nation and Northern Europe (e.g. in relation to sourcing). At the heart of the place-based, local enterprise is the emphasis on the perceived value of ‘local’, which is defined in opposition to, but being dependent upon, the idea of the ‘global’ (Di Gregorio, 2017; Massey, 1991). Common across our data is the choice to believe that locally manufactured textiles are of a better quality and more sustainable than textiles produced in global supply chains. Curiously, the resources that respondents explain to be drawing on in their everyday work might be seen as somewhat old-fashioned. In contrast to the current reliance on new technologies as sources of business and societal innovation, our study shows that looking back to old, place-based ideas and practices may also be a source of innovation and change, at product as well as system level (Cartel et al., 2022; Hermelingmeier et al., 2022).

From a policy perspective, interviewees noted that the Norwegian government had primarily invested in fashion design rather than fashion manufacturing in the past few decades. The lack of national support was perceived as a barrier and some interviewees even stated that they have managed to stay in business ‘against all odds’. Local manufacturing was seen as being neglected in regional development and the wider ambitions to ‘live, work, and enjoy a good life throughout Norway’ (Norwegian Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development, 2023: 5). The perspective of the interviewees taps into the broader discussions about place-neutral versus place-based policies in the literature on regional development (Barca et al., 2012; Syssner and Erlingsson, 2023). A place-based approach suggests that policies and planning should take into consideration the local differences in resources and capabilities. For instance, Barca et al. (2012) suggest that a place-based policy approach to development can potentially foster innovation and growth at both local and national level. In relation to this study, policies could, for instance, address the skills and knowledge gaps experienced by the local manufacturing companies. However, it should be noted that place-based policies become more complicated when expanded to include ‘sense of place’, that is, subjective meanings, values, and feelings linked to a given location (Guthey et al., 2014; Shrivastava and Kennelly, 2013). Local manufacturing business models do not only mirror the specific conditions of a given location but are also tied to the subjective value ascribed to locally produced products by stakeholders.

The findings show that respondents also connect the work of increasing the value of ‘location’ and local resources with questions linked to social and environmental sustainability. The textile and fashion industry is one of the most polluting industries in the world and often associated with a lack of social and environmental responsibility (European Parliament, 2023; Karaosman and Marshall, 2023). The sustainability approach of the organizations in this study differs significantly from the global players in the market. For instance, rather than adopting certifications as a road to sustainability, the local textile and fashion manufacturers operate with a more fluid and place-based understanding of sustainability, which is situated in the local, geographical, and cultural context (Lever et al., 2022). Here, the findings resonate with recent scholarly efforts to establish a closer link between place and sustainability (Kourula et al., 2024). Guthey et al. (2014: 255) argue that a place-based approach to corporate sustainability can: ‘(…) highlight human-environment relationships and uncover new dimensions of sustainability that extend beyond conventional views of organizational environment’. Moreover, Böhm and Alexander (2024) call for a place-based approach to circular innovation that is closer linked to the specific local context. This work will also require consideration of the local ecosystems, resources, cultural norms, economic conditions, and political environments that can either support or hinder local manufacturing business models (Barca et al., 2012; Böhm and Alexander, 2024; Croft et al., 2019; Guthey et al., 2014; Petit-Boix and Leipold, 2018; Shrivastava and Kennelly, 2013).

Conclusion

In this study, we draw attention to the place-based tensions and coping strategies linked to local textile and fashion manufacturing businesses. Overall, the results from the study show how local manufacturing position themselves in opposition to a global fashion sector, which they nonetheless remain dependent on to survive in the marketplace. The data analysis identified three interrelated tensions in local manufacturing: (1) belonging versus performing (mission), (2) belonging versus organizing (spatial), and (3) belonging versus learning (competence). Moreover, the evidence from the case companies shows how owners/managers address these place-based tensions through four interrelated coping strategies dependent on the issue in question. The four strategies are: separation, compensation, relativization, and diffusion. Overall, the study brings new insights about the barriers and potentials for furthering place-based local manufacturing businesses as well as an understanding of how place-based business ground sustainability into the local context. Thereby, we also contribute to the literature on ‘localism’ within textile and fashion, which is still in its infancy (Fletcher and Vittersø, 2018).

This research has limitations that also set the ground for future research. Thus, it is limited by its research context, namely, Norway and a primary focus on the value chain of wool. Moreover, the research relies on semi-structured interviews and could have been further strengthened by conducting, for example, participatory observation and longitudinal interviews to allow for explorations into the personal resources of owner-managers in managing tensions in local manufacturing. Thus, we lack an understanding of what are the specific resources that respondents draw upon to take this specific approach to organizational tensions. We suggest that one way to further explore this would be through the application of practice theory, for example, using Bourdieu’s concept of capital.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Kirsti Reitan Andersen

Notes

References

Adla

Eyquem-Renault

Gallego-Roquelaure

(2020) From the leader’s values to organizational values: toward a dynamic and experimental view on value work in SMEs. M@n@gement 1(23): 81–101.

Agnew

(1987) Place and Politics: The Geographical Mediation of State and Society. Boston, MA: Allen & Unwin.

Ashby

Stentoft

Barbieri

(2016) From global to local: reshoring for sustainability. Operations Management Research 9(3-4): 75–88.

Ashforth

Reingen

(2014) Functions of dysfunction: managing the dynamics of an organizational duality in a natural food cooperative. Administrative Science Quarterly 59(3): 474–516. DOI: 10.1177/0001839214537811.

Baileche

Marais

Palpacuer

(2024) Tensions between local embeddedness and scaling up: insights from grassroots sustainability initiatives in the renewable energy transition. Organization & Environment 37(3): 440–465. DOI: 10.1177/10860266241238730.

Barca

McCann

Rodríguez-Pose

(2012) The case for regional development intervention: place-based versus place-neutral approaches. Journal of Regional Science 52: 134–152. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.2011.00756.x.

Bazeley

Jackson

(2013) Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo. 2nd edition. London: Sage.

Birkinshaw

Foss

Lindenberg

(2014) Combining purpose with profits. MIT Sloan Management Review 55(3): 49–56.

Böhm

Alexander

(2024) Towards a place-based approach to circular innovation. JIM 12(1): XII–XXII.

10.

Burgess

White

(2019) Fibershed: Growing a Movement of Farmers, Fashion Activists, and Makers for a New Textile Economy. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.

11.

Byrkjeflot

Pedersen

Svejenova

(2013) From label to practice: the process of creating New Nordic Cuisine. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology 11: 36–55.

12.

Cartel

Kibler

Dacin

(2022) Unpacking “sense of place” and “place-making” in organization studies: a toolkit for place-sensitive research. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 58(2): 350–363.

13.

Clarke-Sather

Cobb

(2019) Onshoring fashion: worker sustainability impacts of global and local apparel production. Journal of Cleaner Production 208: 1206–1218.

14.

Cresswell

(2015) Place: An Introduction. 2nd edition. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.

15.

Croft

Voyer

Adams

, et al. (2019) Does ‘the local’ provide a pathway to revitalizing primary production in regional communities? A case study of professional fishing on the NSW south coast. Australasian Journal of Regional Studies 25(2): 254–281.

16.

Curtis

(2003) Eco-localism and sustainability. Ecological Economics 46(1): 83–102.

17.

Di Gregorio

(2017) Place-based business models for resilient local economies: cases from Italian slow food, agritourism and the albergo diffuso. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy 11(1): 113–128.

18.

Dybdahl

(2019) Business model innovation for sustainability through localism. In: Bocken

Ritala

Albareda

, et al. (eds) Innovation for Sustainability: Business Transformation towards a Better World. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 193–211.

19.

Entrikin

(1997) Place and region 3. Progress in Human Geography 21(2): 263–268.

20.

Epstein

Buhovac

Yuthas

(2015) Managing social, environmental and financial performance simultaneously. Long Range Planning 48(1): 35–45.

21.

European Parliament (2023) The impact of textile production and waste on the environment (infographics). Society, Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20201208STO93327/the-impact-of-textile-production-and-waste-on-the-environment-infographics (accessed 27 June 2023).

22.

Fairhurst

Putnam

(2014) Organizational discourse analysis. In: Putnam

Mumby

(eds) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Communication: Advances in Theory, Research, and Methods. 3rd edition. Los Angeles: Sage, 271–296.

23.

Farjoun

(2010) Beyond dualism: stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review 35(2): 202–225.

24.

Fisher

Botticello

(2016) Machine-made lace, the spaces of skilled practices and the paradoxes of contemporary craft production. Cultural Geographies, Available at: https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/29320/ (accessed 12 April 2024).

25.

Fletcher

Vittersø

(2018) Local food initiatives and fashion change: comparing food and clothes to better understand fashion localism. Fashion Practice 10(2): 160–170.

26.

Gaim

Wåhlin

(2016) In search of a creative space: a conceptual framework of synthesizing paradoxical tensions. Scandinavian Journal of Management 32: 33–44.

27.

Galatti

Baruque-Ramos

(2019) Brazilian potential for circular fashion through strengthening local production. SN Applied Sciences 1(11): 1439.

28.

Gieryn

(2000) A space for place in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 26: 463–496.

29.

Gioia

Corley

Hamilton

(2012) Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organizational Research Methods 16(1): 15–31.

30.

Goncalves

Lexander

(2024) Tensions of place and opposing emblems of authenticity and marginal gentrification in Grünerløkka, Oslo. Language & Communication 96: 67–80.

31.

Government.no (2001) Business and industry in Norway - The textile and ready-made clothing industry. Available at: https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/Business-and-industry-in-Norway---The-textile-and-ready-made-clothing-industry/id419360/ (accessed 17 October 2024).

32.

Graetz

Smith

ACT

(2008) The role of dualities in arbitrating continuity and change in forms of organizing. International Journal of Management Reviews 10(3): 265–280.

33.

Guthey

Whiteman

Elmes

(2014) Place and sense of place: implications for organizational studies of sustainability. Journal of Management Inquiry 23(3): 254–265. DOI: 10.1177/1056492613517511.

34.

Haffar

Searcy

(2019) How organizational logics shape trade-off decision-making in sustainability. Long Range Planning 52(6): 101912. DOI: 10.1016/j.lrp.2019.101912.

35.

Hahn

Pinkse

Preuss

, et al. (2015) Tensions in corporate sustainability: towards an integrative framework. Journal of Business Ethics 127: 297–316.

36.

Hedrich

Hügl

Ibánez

, et al. (2021) Revamping Fashion Sourcing: Speed and Flexibility to the Fore. McKinsey & Company. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/revamping-fashion-sourcing-speed-and-flexibility-to-the-fore (accessed 12 April 2024).

37.

Hendrikx

Lagendijk

(2022) Slow Food as one in many a semiotic network approach to the geographical development of a social movement. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 5(1): 169–188. DOI: 10.1177/2514848620970923.

38.

Hermelingmeier

Augenstein

Palzkill

(2022) The role of place in shaping responsibility logics: revisiting the relation between place and business sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment 32: 3106–3118. DOI: 10.1002/bse.3289.

39.

Jarzabkowski

Fenton

(2006) Strategizing and organizing in pluralistic contexts. Long Range Planning 39(6): 631–648.

40.

Jarzabkowski

Lê

Van de Ven

(2013) Responding to competing strategic demands: how organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve. Strategic Organization 11(3): 245–280. DOI: 10.1177/1476127013481016.

41.

Jenkins

(2004) A critique of conventional CSR theory: an SME perspective. Journal of General Management 29(4): 37–57.

42.

Joseph

Borland

Orlitzky

, et al. (2020) Seeing versus doing: how businesses manage tensions in pursuit of sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics 164: 349–370. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-018-4065-1.

43.

Karaosman

Marshall

(2023) Supplier Inclusion is Key to Climate Action. Union of Concerned Researchers in Fashion: Open Letter. Available at: https://concernedresearchers.org/blog/supplier-inclusion-is-key-to-climate-action (accessed 12 January 2024).

44.

Klepp

Laitala

(2018) Nisseluelandet – The impact of local clothes for the survival of a textile industry in Norway. Fashion Practice: The Journal of Design, Creative Process and the Fashion Industry 10(2): 171–195.

45.

Klepp

Tobiasson

Haugrønning

, et al. (2019) KRUS final report: enhancing local value chains in Norway. SIFO Report No. 8-19.

46.

Kourula

Georgallis

Henriques

, et al. (2024) Introduction to the special issue on the role of place in sustainability: key trends and agenda for future research. Organization & Environment 37(3): 363–375. DOI: 10.1177/10860266241283157.

47.

Krager

(2018) Personligt har jeg ingenting imot Asia, eller produkter som er produsert der. Melk & Honning, Available at: https://melkoghonning.no/vi-har-snakket-med-klesdesignerene-om-a-produsere-i-norge-vs-a-produsere-i-utlandet/ (accessed 12 April 2024).

48.

Leer

(2016) The rise and fall of the new nordic cuisine. Journal of Aesthetics & Culture 8: 33494, Available at: https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/115390127/The_rise_and_fall_of_the_nordic_cuisine_pdf_2016.pdf (accessed 10 April 2024).

49.

Lever

Blake

Newton

, et al. (2022) Working across boundaries in regional place-based food systems: triggering transformation in a time of crisis. Cities 130: 103842. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2022.103842.

50.

Massey

(1991) A Global Sense of Place. June: Marxism Today.

51.

Massey

(1994) Space, Place, and Gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

52.

Massey

(2012) Preface. In: Convery

Corsane

Davis

(eds) Making Sense of Place: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Woodbridge: The Bodydell Press.

53.

Mohajer va Pesaran

(2018) People and placelessness: paper clothing in Japan. Fashion Practice 10(2): 236–255.

54.

Mukendi

Davies

Glozer

, et al. (2020) Sustainable fashion: current and future research directions. European Journal of Marketing 54(11): 2873–2909.

55.

Norwegian Fashion Hub (2024) Norwegian fashion and textile design: grown up green. Available at: https://www.norwegianfashionhub.com/norwegian-fashion (accessed 10 March 2024).

56.

Norwegian Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (2023) A Good Life throughout Norway – Regional and Rural Policy for the Future. White Paper. Available at: https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/c50898d2683e4edfb008e5f29f2e0666/en-gb/pdfs/stm202220230027000engpdfs.pdf (accessed 22 October 2024).

57.

Oldham

(2024) Embedding owner-manager values in the small and medium sized enterprise context: A Lockean conceptualisation. Journal of Bususiness Ethics. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-024-05620-3.

58.

Pal

Harper

Vellesalu

(2018) Competitive manufacturing for reshoring textile and clothing supply chains to high-cost environment. A Delphi study. International Journal of Logistics Management 29(4): 1147–1170.

59.

Pedersen

ERG

Gwozdz

(2014) From resistance to opportunity-seeking: strategic responses to institutional pressures for corporate social responsibility in the Nordic fashion industry. Journal of Business Ethics 119: 245–264.

60.

Pedersen

ERG

Rosati

(2019) Organisational tensions and the relationship to CSR in the football sector. European Sport Management Quarterly 19(1): 38–57.

61.

Pedersen

ERG

Rosati

Lauesen

, et al. (2017) What is in a business case? Business cases as a tool-in-use for promoting water management practices in the food sector. Journal of Cleaner Production 162(9): 1048–1060.

62.

Petit-Boix

Leipold

(2018) Circular economy in cities: reviewing how environmental research aligns with local practices. Journal of Cleaner Production 195: 1270–1281.

63.

Plieth

Bullinger

Hansen

(2012) Sustainable entrepreneurship in the apparel industry: the case of Manomama. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 45(Spring): 123–136.

64.

Poole

Van de Ven

(1989) Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review 14(4): 562–578.

65.

Putnam

Fairhurst

Banghart

(2016) Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: a constitutive approach. The Academy of Management Annals 10(1): 65–171.

66.

Relph

(1976) Place and Placelessness. London: Pion.

67.

Robinson

Hsieh

(2016) Reshoring: a strategic renewal of luxury clothing supply chains. Operations Management Research 9: 89–101.

68.

Sarokin

Bocken

NMP

(2024) Pursuing profitability in slow fashion: exploring brands’ profit contributors. Journal of Cleaner Production 444: 141237.

69.

Schad

Lewis

Raisch

, et al. (2016) Paradox research in management science: looking back to move forward. The Academy of Management Annals 10(1): 5–64.

70.

Scott

(2022) The changing fortunes and future prospects of a traditional industrial cluster: woollen textile production in the Scottish Borders. Local Economy 37(3): 125–141.

71.

Shrivastava

Kennelly

(2013) Sustainability and place-based enterprise. Organization & Environment 26: 83–101.

72.

Slawinski

Bansal

(2015) Short on time: intertemporal tensions in business sustainability. Organization Science 26(2): 531–549.

73.

Smith

Lewis

(2011) Towards a theory of paradox: a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review 36(2): 381–403.

74.

Staeheli

(2003) Place. In: Agnew

Mitchell

Toal

(eds) A Companion to Political Geography. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 158–170.

75.

Sutherland

Richter

Hutchins

, et al. (2016) The role of manufacturing in affecting the social dimension of sustainability. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 65: 689–712.

76.

Syssner

Erlingsson

GÓ

(2023) Place-based policies for the periphery? Policies for local development in sparsely populated areas in northern Sweden. Local Economy 38(8): 794–803. DOI: 10.1177/02690942241275950.

77.

Trejo

Lewis

(2020) Evaluating New York raw fiber-to-retail. Local Economy 35(8): 787–807. DOI: 10.1177/02690942211007119.

78.

van Bommel

(2018) Managing tensions in sustainable business models: exploring instrumental and integrative strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production 196: 829–841. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.063.

79.

Van der Byl

Slawinski

(2015) Embracing tensions in corporate sustainability: a review of research from win-win and trade-offs to paradoxes and beyond. Organization & Environment 28(1): 54–79.

80.

Wannags

Gold

(2020) Assessing tensions in corporate sustainability transition: from a review of the literature towards an actor-oriented management approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 264: 121662. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121662.

81.

Wiesmann

Snoei

Hilletofth

, et al. (2017) Drivers and barriers to reshoring: a literature review on offshoring in reverse. European Business Review 29(1): 15–42.

82.

Xiao

Wilhelm

Van der Vaart

, et al. (2019) Inside the buying firm: exploring responses to paradoxical tensions in sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Supply Chain Management 55(1): 3–20. DOI: 10.1111/jscm.12170.

83.

(2024) Sense of place and sustainable development: the case of a Tibetan luxury enterprise. Organization & Environment 37(3): 376–407. DOI: 10.1177/10860266231226143.