Determining the Value of Cultural Goods: How Much (or How Little) Does Contingent Valuation Tell Us?

TLDR: The authors argue that CVM provides an incomplete view of the nonmarket value of cultural goods, and that alternative measures need to be developed to provide a fuller account of the cultural goods' value.

Abstract: Contingent valuation methods (CVM) are now well established as a means of measuring the nonmarket demand for cultural goods and services. When combined with valuations provided through market processes (where relevant), an overall assessment of the economic value of cultural commodities can be obtained. Within a neoclassical framework, such assessments are thought to provide a complete picture of the value of cultural goods. But are there aspects of the value of cultural goods which are not fully captured, or not captured at all, within such a model? This paper argues that CVM provides an incomplete view of the nonmarket value of cultural goods, and that alternative measures need to be developed to provide a fuller account. of Sydney which sought to measure the community's willingness to pay (WTP) for the perceived public-good benefits of the arts. Around 825 respondents were questioned about the nature and extent of the nonmarket benefits they enjoyed from the existence of the subsidised arts in Australia - literature, visual arts, music, theatre, dance, etc. - and they were asked to nominate the dollar amounts they would be willing to pay out of their taxes to support the arts, under conditions of both liability and nonliability for actual payment. With appropriate caveats, we concluded from our research that aggregate WTP for the public-good benefits of the arts in Australia at that time exceeded the then-prevailing tax-price of cultural subsidy. What did we think we were measuring in this study and what did we actually measure? As far as the arts were concerned, our work was predicated on two princi- pal motivations, one theoretical and one practical. The theoretical drive came from a desire to test the longstanding proposition that the arts were a case of market failure. This hypothesis, first articulated in the 1960s (Baumol and Bowen, 1966; Peacock, 1969) and elaborated at length in our own book of 1979 (Throsby and