This study estimates the monetary value of voluntary coaching in German non-profit sports clubs applying an output-based approach as opposed to previous studies relying on input-based approaches. Using the contingent valuation method, the willingness-to-pay of the beneficiaries (i.e., the club members consuming training sessions) is estimated. Club members across eight different sports were surveyed (n = 1,583). Results show that—depending on the question format—club members place a monetary value of €67.26 (open question), €17.51 (dichotomous choice), and €18.46 (payment ladder) on one hour of voluntary work. Determinants of reporting a positive willingness-to-pay and on the amount of willingness-to-pay are analyzed applying Cragg's double hurdle model. The results show that the attitude towards the coach, income, and the size of the training group are significantly associated with stated willingness-to-pay. This study contributes to the literature on contingent valuation in sport by providing empirical evidence from the non-profit sector.
AtkinsonG., MouratoS., SzymanskiS., & OzdemirogluE. (2008). Are we willing to pay enough to ‘back the bid'? Valuing the intangible impacts of London's bid to host the 2012 Summer Olympic Games. Urban Studies, 45, 419–444.
2.
BowmanW. (2009). The economic value of volunteers to nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 19, 491–506.
3.
BreuerC., & FeilerS. (2013). Trainer, Übungsleiter und Qualifizierung. In C. Breuer (Ed.), Sportentwicklungsbericht 2011/2012. Analyse zur Situation der Sportvereine in Deutschland (pp. 239–283). Cologne, Germany: Sportverlag Strauß.
4.
BreuerC., & FeilerS. (2015). Sport development report 2013/2014. Analysis of the situation of sports clubs in Germany. Abbreviated version. Cologne, Germany: Sportverlag Strauß.
5.
BurkeW. J. (2009). Fitting and interpreting Cragg's tobit alternative using Stata. Stata Journal, 9, 584–592.
6.
CarlssonF., & MartinssonP. (2001). Do hypothetical and actual marginal willingness to pay differ in choice experiments?Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 41, 179–192.
7.
CarsonR. T. (2000). Contingent valuation: A user's guide. Environmental Science & Technology, 34, 1413–1418.
8.
CarsonR. T., FloresN. E., & MeadeN. F. (2001). Contingent valuation: Controversies and evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics, 19, 173–210.
9.
CastellanosP., GarcíaJ., & SánchezJ. (2011). The willingness to pay to keep a football club in a city: How important are the methodological issues?Journal of Sports Economics, 12, 464–486.
10.
ColonnaC. M. (1995). The economic contribution of volunteerism toward the value of our cultural inventory. Journal of Cultural Economics, 19, 341–350.
11.
CnaanR. A., HandyF., & WadsworthM. (1996). Defining who is a volunteer: Conceptual and empirical considerations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25, 364–383.
12.
CraggJ. (1971). Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with application to the demand for durable goods. Econometrica, 39, 829–844.
DownwardP., & RalstonR. (2006). The sports development potential of sports event volunteering: Insights from the XVII Manchester Commonwealth Games. European Sport Management Quarterly, 6, 333–351.
15.
EmrichE., PierdziochC., & OestmannM. (2014). The intensity of internet use by volunteers: Empirical results for the internet portal of the German Football Association. European Sport Management Quarterly, 14, 238–258.
FosterV., MouratoS., PearceD. & OzdemirogluE. (2001). The benefits of volunteering. In FosterV., MouratoS., PearceD., & OzdemirogluE. (Eds.), The price of virtue: The economic value of the charitable sector (pp. 101–113). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
18.
FreemanR. B. (1997). Working for nothing: The supply of volunteer labor. Journal of Labor Economics, 15, 140–166.
19.
Goldschmidt-ClermontL. (1993). Monetary valuation of non-market productive time. Methodological considerations. Review of Income and Wealth, 39, 419–433.
20.
HandyF., & SrinivasanN. (2004). Valuing volunteers: An economic evaluation of the net benefits of hospital volunteers. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33, 28–54.
21.
HorchH.-D. (1992). Geld, Macht und Engagement in freiwilligen Vereinigungen.Berlin, Germany: Duncker & Humblot.
22.
HumphreysB. R., JohnsonB. K., MasonD. S., & WhiteheadJ. C. (in press). Estimating the value of medal success in the Olympic Games. Journal of Sports Economics. doi: 10.1177/1527002515626221.
23.
HumphreysB. R., LeeY. S., & SoebbingB. P. (2010). Consumer behaviour in lottery: The double hurdle approach and zeros in gambling survey data. International Gambling Studies, 10, 165–176.
24.
HumphreysB. R., & RuseskiJ. E. (2009). The economics of participation and time spent in physical activity. Working paper No. 2009–09. University of Alberta: Department of Economics.
25.
HumphreysB. R., & RuseskiJ. E. (2015). The economic choice of participation and time spent in physical activity and sport in Canada. International Journal of Sport Finance, 10, 138–159.
26.
JohnsonB. K., WhiteheadJ. C., MasonD. S., & WalkerG. J. (2007). Willingness to pay for amateur sport and recreation programs. Contemporary Economic Policy, 25, 553–564.
27.
JonesA. M. (1989). A double hurdle model of cigarette consumption. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 4, 23–39.
28.
JonesA. M. (2000). Health econometrics. In A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (Eds.), Handbook of health economics (pp. 265–344). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
29.
LarsonD. M., ShaikhS. L., & LaytonD. (2004). Revealing preferences for leisure time from stated preference data. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 8, 307–320.
30.
LoomisJ., BrownT., LuceroB., & PetersonG. (1996). Improving validity experiments of contingent valuation methods: Results of efforts to reduce the disparity of hypothetical and actual willingness to pay. Land Economics, 72, 450–461.
31.
MeyerhoffJ., & LiebeU. (2006). Protest beliefs in contingent valuation: Explaining their motivation. Ecological Economics, 57, 583–594.
32.
NoonanD. S. (2003). Contingent valuation and cultural resources: A meta-analytic review of the literature. Journal of Cultural Economics, 27, 159–176.
33.
OrlowskiJ., & WickerP. (2015). The monetary value of voluntary work: Conceptual and empirical comparisons. Voluntas, 26, 2671–2693.
34.
SalamonL. M., SokolowskiS. W., & HaddockM. A. (2011). Measuring the economic value of volunteer work globally: Concepts, estimates, and a roadmap to the future. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 82, 217–252.
35.
SeipK., & StrandJ. (1992). Willingness to pay for environmental goods in Norway: A contingent valuation study with real payment. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2, 91–106.
36.
SolbergH. A. (2003). Major sporting events: Assessing the value of volunteers’ work. Managing Leisure, 8, 17–27.
37.
Van DeursenA. J., Van DijkJ. A., & Ten KloosterP. M. (2015). Increasing inequalities in what we do online: A longitudinal cross sectional analysis of Internet activities among the Dutch population (2010 to 2013) over gender, age, education, and income. Telematics and Informatics, 32, 259–272.
38.
VosS., BreeschD., KésenneS., LagaeW., HoeckeJ. V., VanreuselB., & ScheerderJ. (2012). The value of human resources in non-public sports providers: The importance of volunteers in non-profit sports clubs versus professionals in for-profit fitness and health clubs. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 11, 3–25.
39.
WalkerM., & MondelloM. J. (2007). Moving beyond economic impact: A closer look at the contingent valuation method. International Journal of Sport Finance, 2, 149–160.
40.
WhiteH. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817–838.
41.
WickerP. (2011). Willingness-to-pay in non-profit sports clubs. International Journal of Sport Finance, 6, 155–169.
42.
WickerP., WhiteheadJ. C., JohnsonB. K. & MasonD. S. (2016). Willingness-to-pay for sporting success of Football Bundesliga teams. Contemporary Economic Policy, 34, 446–462.
