IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/113405.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Economic Approach to Public Funding for the Arts

Author

Listed:
  • Rushton, Michael

Abstract

This paper examines the rationales for public funding for the arts that arise out of economic models of markets, and market failure, specifically public goods and positive externalities. At the heart of the economic method is a reliance on consumer sovereignty: that individuals are the best judges of their own preferences and well-being, and that there is no disputing cultural preferences and tastes regarding consumption, and perceived benefits from public goods and externalities. Clarity is provided on what precisely would constitute externalities in the arts, and the challenges of trying to measure them. Consideration is also given to people seeking to change their own tastes, whether behavioral economics has implications for arts policy, and the concept of merit goods. The paper concludes by considering the rather stringent implications of the economic method for the practical allocation of arts funding.

Suggested Citation

  • Rushton, Michael, 2022. "The Economic Approach to Public Funding for the Arts," MPRA Paper 113405, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:113405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/113405/1/MPRA_paper_113405.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Trine Hansen, 1997. "The Willingness-to-Pay for the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen as a Public Good," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 21(1), pages 1-28, March.
    2. Towse,Ruth, 2010. "A Textbook of Cultural Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521888721, June.
    3. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    4. Atkinson, A. B. & Stiglitz, J. E., 1976. "The design of tax structure: Direct versus indirect taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1-2), pages 55-75.
    5. Daniel Fujiwara & Ricky N. Lawton & Susana Mourato, 2019. "More than a good book: contingent valuation of public library services in England," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(4), pages 639-666, December.
    6. Stigler, George J & Becker, Gary S, 1977. "De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 76-90, March.
    7. Cheung, Steven N S, 1973. "The Fable of the Bees: An Economic Investigation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 11-33, April.
    8. Throsby,David, 2010. "The Economics of Cultural Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521868259.
    9. Michael Rushton, 2000. "Public Funding of Controversial Art," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 24(4), pages 267-282, November.
    10. Richard T. Carson, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: A Practical Alternative When Prices Aren't Available," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 27-42, Fall.
    11. David Throsby, 2003. "Determining the Value of Cultural Goods: How Much (or How Little) Does Contingent Valuation Tell Us?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 27(3), pages 275-285, November.
    12. Sugden, Robert & Williams, Alan, 1978. "The Principles of Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198770411.
    13. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(4), pages 309-309.
    14. Peacock, Alan T, 1969. "Welfare Economics and Public Subsidies to the Arts," The Manchester School of Economic & Social Studies, University of Manchester, vol. 37(4), pages 323-335, December.
    15. Harberger, Arnold C, 1971. "Three Basic Postulates for Applied Welfare Economics: An Interpretive Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 785-797, September.
    16. Towse,Ruth, 2010. "A Textbook of Cultural Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521717021, June.
    17. Bronwyn Coate & Robert Hoffmann, 2022. "The behavioural economics of culture," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 46(1), pages 3-26, March.
    18. Nicholas Stern, 2022. "A Time for Action on Climate Change and a Time for Change in Economics," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(644), pages 1259-1289.
    19. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    20. Jerry Hausman, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: From Dubious to Hopeless," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 43-56, Fall.
    21. Becker, Gary S & Murphy, Kevin M, 1988. "A Theory of Rational Addiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 675-700, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rushton, Michael, 2019. "Expensive Tastes and Public Funding for the Arts," MPRA Paper 113404, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Aleksandra Wiśniewska & Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2020. "An economic valuation of access to cultural institutions: museums, theatres, and cinemas," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 44(4), pages 563-587, December.
    3. Aleksandra Wiśniewska & Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2018. "Publicly funded cultural institutions – a comparative economic valuation study," Working Papers 2018-22, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    4. Victor Fernandez-Blanco & Juan Prieto-Rodriguez & Javier Suarez-Pandiello, 2015. "A quantitative analysis of reading habits," ACEI Working Paper Series AWP-05-2015, Association for Cultural Economics International, revised May 2015.
    5. KOZLOVA Maria, 2017. "Regional differentiation in Russian cultural industries: the statistical measurement and the results for the state government," Applied Econometrics and International Development, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 17(2), pages 47-60.
    6. Erwin Dekker, 2015. "Two approaches to study the value of art and culture, and the emergence of a third," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 39(4), pages 309-326, November.
    7. Moisés Carrasco Garcés & Felipe Vasquez-Lavin & Roberto D. Ponce Oliva & José Luis Bustamante Oporto & Manuel Barrientos & Arcadio A. Cerda, 2021. "Embedding effect and the consequences of advanced disclosure: evidence from the valuation of cultural goods," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 1039-1062, August.
    8. Victor Ginsburgh, 2013. "Mark Blaug and the economics of the arts," Chapters, in: Marcel Boumans & Matthias Klaes (ed.), Mark Blaug: Rebel with Many Causes, chapter 15, pages 208-224, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Haucap, Justus, 2021. "Glücksspielregulierung aus ordnungsökonomischer Perspektive," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 110, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    10. Anthony Boardman & Shaun Hargreaves-Heap, 1999. "Network Externalities and Government Restrictions on Satellite Broadcasting of Key Sporting Events," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 23(3), pages 165-179, August.
    11. Ahlheim, Michael & Schneider, Friedrich, 2013. "Considering Household Size in Contingent Valuation Studies," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79974, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Levan Elbakidze & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2018. "The Adding-Up Test in an Incentivized Value Elicitation Mechanism: The Role of the Income Effect," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(3), pages 625-644, November.
    13. John C. Whitehead, 2024. "They doth protest too much, methinks: Reply to “Reply to Whitehead”," Working Papers 24-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    14. Weber, Cameron & Zhen, Ying & Arias, JJ, 2022. "Practice, Entrepreneurship and Subjectivity in Artist Identification with Applications to the Covid-Era," MPRA Paper 115712, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Amoah, Anthony & Ferrini, Silvia & Schaafsma, Marije, 2019. "Electricity outages in Ghana: Are contingent valuation estimates valid?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    16. Hammitt, James K. & Herrera-Araujo, Daniel, 2018. "Peeling back the onion: Using latent class analysis to uncover heterogeneous responses to stated preference surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 165-189.
    17. Nicole Maestas & Kathleen J. Mullen & David Powell & Till von Wachter & Jeffrey B. Wenger, 2023. "The Value of Working Conditions in the United States and the Implications for the Structure of Wages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(7), pages 2007-2047, July.
    18. Neuteleers, Stijn & Engelen, Bart, 2015. "Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 253-260.
    19. Bruno S. Frey, "undated". "What Values Should Count in the Arts? The Tension between Economic Effects and Cultural Value," IEW - Working Papers 253, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    20. Julia Martin‐Ortega & M. Azahara Mesa‐Jurado & Julio Berbel, 2015. "Revisiting the Impact of Order Effects on Sensitivity to Scope: A Contingent Valuation of a Common‐Pool Resource," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 705-726, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cultural economics; public funding of the arts; merit goods;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • Z11 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economics of the Arts and Literature

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:113405. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.