Re-thinking do-it-yourself: An ontological approach to sustainability in fashion design praxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research explored DIY (do-it-yourself) as a sustainable approach within the design praxis of a South African clothing label. DIY is characterized by “ creating,” “ doing,” and “ making” to formulate temporary expressions about who we are, rather than passive engagement and consumption. DIY, as a degrowth anti-capitalist practice, echoes the slow fashion movement by addressing questions of individual accomplishment, creativity, self-confidence, independence, self-reliance, and developing new skill sets. The findings from the study of fashion design praxis suggest that the motivation for DIY activities and behavior within the studied design praxis is holistic and ontological. The design praxis no longer focuses on producing for self-use (DIY), but rather that DIY is a meaningful tool for engaging with a living object that is informed by users’ meaningful association with the product and the making process. The study revealed significant similarities between DIY and emotional durability, suggesting an ontological framework, “ doing-it-for-yourself-and-others” (DI4Y 2 ).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".