Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Willingness to Pay for Domestic Television Programming

  • Published:
Journal of Cultural Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The article describes the application of contingent valuation to estimate the value of the benefits that the Australian community derives from the mandatory transmission of Australian programs by television stations. This application of contingent valuation to estimate cultural benefits offers an insight on the potential for a wider application of the methodology to evaluate cultural policy instruments. The study found that a majority of Australians support regulation of the domestic content of television programs and considers the value of the related benefits to be commensurate with the cost of supplying domestic programming.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Australia Council for the Arts (1993) Public Attitudes to the Arts: 1992. Australia Council for the Arts, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrom, T., Rubinfeld, D., and Shapiro, P. (1982) “Microbased Estimates of Demand Function for Local School Expenditures”. Ecometrica 50: 1183–1205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bille Hansen, T. (1997) “The Willingness-to-Pay for the Royal Theatre in Copenhagen as a Public Good”. Journal of Cultural Economics 21: 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, P. (1972) “Estimating Demand for Public Goods: An Experiment”. European Economic Review 3: 142–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, P. (1979) “Estimating Willingness to Pay: Why and How”. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 81: 111–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, P. (1984) “Revealing Demand for an Actual Public Good”. Journal of Public Economics 24: 135–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R.T., Wright, J., Carson, N., Alberini A., and Flores, N. (1995) “A Bibliography of Contingent Valuation Studies and Papers”. Natural Resource Damage Assessment, Inc., La Jolla, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenberg, A. and Mills, P. (1990) “Viewers' Willingness to Pay”. Research Report, London Business School, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B.S. (1997) “The Evaluation of Cultural Heritage: Some Critical Issues”, in M. Hutter and I. Rizzo (eds), Economic Perspectives on Cultural Heritage. Mcmillan Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, J.A. (ed.) (1993) Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoehn, J.P. (1983) “Contingent Valuation in Fisheries Management: The Design of Satisfactory Contingent Valuation Formats”. Land Economics 59. Reprinted in Markandya, A. and Richardson, J. (1992).

  • Hoehn, J.P. and Randall, A. (1987) “A Satisfactory Benefit Cost Indicator from Contingent Valuation”. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 14: 226–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maital (1979) “Measurement of Net Benefits from Public Goods: A New Approach Using Survey Data”. Public Finance 34(1): 85–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, F. (1994) “Determining the Size of Museum Subsidies”. Journal of Cultural Economics 18: 255–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R.C. and Carson, R.T. (1989) Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, W.G. and West, E.G. (1986) “Subsidies for the Performing Arts: Evidence on Voter Preference”. Journal of Behavioural Economics 15(Fall): 55–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • NOAA (1993) “Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation”. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papandrea, F. (1996) Measuring Community Benefits of Australian TV Programs. BTCE Occasional Paper no. 113, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P.A. (1954) “The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure”. Review of Economics and Statistics 36 (November), 387–389.

  • Thompson, B.J., Throsby, C.D., and Withers, G.A. (1983) “Measuring Community Benefits from the Arts”. Research Paper no. 261, Macquarie University, School of Economics and Financial Studies, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Throsby, C.D. and Withers, G. (1986) “Strategic Bias and Demand for Public Goods: Theory and an Application to the Arts”. Journal of Public Economics 31: 307–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Throsby, C.D. and Withers, G. (1994) “Measuring Demand for Public Expenditure: Theory, Methods and Preliminary Results”. Research Paper No. 383, Macquarie University, School of Economic and Financial Studies, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeckhauser, R. (1973) “Voting Systems, Honest Preferences and Pareto Optimality”. American Political Science Review 67: 934–946.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communications and the Arts, Communications Research Unit, GPO Box 2154, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia

    Franco Papandrea

Authors
  1. Franco Papandrea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Papandrea, F. Willingness to Pay for Domestic Television Programming. Journal of Cultural Economics 23, 147–164 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007571812251

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007571812251

Search

Navigation