Sports footwear manufacturers are being urged to ditch the “shrink it and pink it” approach when it comes to women’s running shoes.
Over the past five decades, brands have invested billions of dollars into the development trainers that prevent injury, maximise comfort and boost performance.
But this research has overwhelmingly been designed for – and tested on – men, experts have said.
Running shoes are typically designed using a three-dimensional foot-shaped mould called a last, which is usually based on male foot anatomy.
Most sports footwear retailers use the same last for their entire range, and beyond making shoes smaller and changing the colour – a process known as ‘shrink it and pink it’ – only minimal modifications are made to create women’s shoes, the experts said.
Brands are therefore failing to differentiate women’s distinct anatomical and biomechanical needs across the course of their lives, a small study published in the open access journal has concluded.
Female- rather than male-based designs would probably boost women’s comfort, enhance injury prevention and improve their performance, the experts said.
For the study, researchers led by Simon Fraser University in Canada interviewed women in Vancouver to find out whether they faced any issues with footwear for their runs.
They recruited 21 study participants with the aim of including a broad range of ages, running experience and weekly running volume and frequency.
Eleven were recreational runners who clocked up a weekly average of 19 miles (30km); 10 were competitive runners who averaged 28 miles. Nine of the women ran while pregnant or soon after giving birth.
The women were aged between 20 and 70; their running experience ranged from six to 58 years.
All of them were asked to rank in order of importance the factors informing their choice of running shoes. The responses showed that their primary considerations were the comfort and feel of the shoe, injury prevention and performance.
In terms of comfort, most said they wanted a wider toe box, a narrower heel and more cushioning; competitive runners also wanted shoes incorporating performance-enhancing features, such as a carbon plate, as long as they did not compromise comfort.
The women said they actively sought running shoes that they believed would help prevent running injuries. With this in mind, both groups emphasised the high value they placed on buying shoes from trusted sources.
They also highlighted the need for different shoe designs or components to align with different running contexts – for racing, training, speed work or running with an injury, for example.
And those who were mothers reported needing larger shoe sizes and a wider fit, as well as more support and cushioning during pregnancy and after giving birth. Competitive runners also said they needed added cushioning and support features in their footwear as they grew older.
“Overall, our findings highlight a critical gap in the design of running footwear, which has been traditionally based on male anatomy and biomechanics,” the researchers wrote.
“While participants did not always report an inability to find footwear, their narratives reflected a process of trial-and-error adaptation, often without guidance or purpose-built solutions. This suggests that their needs are not proactively addressed through current footwear design or communication.”
They concluded: “We strongly recommend that the footwear industry should move beyond simply scaling down men’s shoes to fit women’s feet. Instead, there is a need for sex- and gender-specific designs that accommodate the distinct foot morphology of women and their social constructs and preferences, all of which evolve across the lifespan.”
