Towse (2010) proceeds: “Arts are also said to yield economic externalities. Old castles, well-known opera houses or orchestras, and art festivals attract visitors and tourists”. This is a national issue and governments must protect heritage in all forms, not only because it is a public good and a right for future generations, but also because tourism is a business and the contribution of arts and culture can be crucial in attracting tourists. We can call this the “spillover effect” not only for costumers but also for producers, which means that individual consumers may attach an option value to the arts, even though they personally do no attend arts events or view historical artefacts, notably in the form of the prestige on a country or community from their existence. So that individual satisfaction may be derived from the fact that others may enjoy cultural events (Ginsburgh, …show more content…
Education can be an example: we believe that society functions better when everyone has a certain level of education. It is pretty much the same that happens with the access to arts and culture. As is well known, people believe that educated individuals commit less crime and are more likely to help others, for instance. As Ruth Towse (2010, p. 34) says: “Some people regard the arts and heritage as merit goods and believe that cultured society is a better one”. Some individuals, particularly the youngest, tend to under estimate the benefits of such investment because it is only in retrospect that its benefits come