A Review of Well-Being Valuation for Sports, Culture and Leisure Activities

Abstract

It is widely acknowledged that engagement in sports, as well as in cultural and leisure activities benefits people’s well-being. However, what remains unclear is the monetary value of this contribution. For creating sustainable policies that withstand austerity measures, it is crucial to have a better understanding of the value of these activities. This scoping review provides the first overview of studies that estimate the value of leisure activities by using the compensating variation approach exclusively. The purpose of the review is to identify methodological issues to detect knowledge gaps and to investigate the conduct of research. Records were retrieved from several scientific databases and Google Scholar. To analyze the results, all studies were summarized for country, scope, source, database, sample, measures, control variables, design, common bias and outcomes. The search resulted in eleven original studies of which five were commissioned reports delivered by academics. Important methodological issues were the diverse use of control and well-being variables and the endogeneity and selection biases that contributed to a wide range of monetary values. Because of the variability in their conduct, methodological standardization is required to reach a consensus on the contribution of sports and cultural and leisure activities to society.

Valuing the contribution of sport volunteering to subjective wellbeing: evidence from eight European countries

“…These studies have used data from large-scale surveys and advanced statistical methods to explore the relationship between volunteering and SWB and assign a monetary value to this activity. The review of Schoemaker (26) identified two potential biases that can arise when using the wellbeing valuation approach. One important bias is the endogeneity of income, which refers to the possibility that unobserved factors may influence both income and wellbeing, leading to biased estimates of the effect of income on wellbeing.…”