[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uto/dipeco/201437.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Determining the Value of Modern and Contemporary Furniture Design: an Exploratory Investigation

Author

Listed:
Abstract
The paper analyses the formation of pricess in the market of collectable furniture design. Given their aesthetic quality and symbolic significance modern and contemporary furniture design objects are increasingly exchanged in art auctions. However, reproducibility and other potential differences from traditional artworks set interesting challenges in studying auction price formation for this kind of goods. The paper documents the development of markets in modern and contemporary furniture design analysing how cultural and economic values interact in this emerging context and what are the distinctive features with respect to other traditional art markets. Moreover, using auction data for furniture design works by the most prominent designers of the XXth century, the determinants of price formation are analysed and discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Bertacchini, Enrico & Friel, Martha, 2014. "Determining the Value of Modern and Contemporary Furniture Design: an Exploratory Investigation," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201437, University of Turin.
    • Handle: RePEc:uto:dipeco:201437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.est.unito.it/do/home.pl/Download?doc=/allegati/wp2014dip/wp_37_2014.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Wyburn & Paul Roach, 2012. "An hedonic analysis of American collectable comic-book prices," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 36(4), pages 309-326, November.
    2. Guido Candela & Massimiliano Castellani & Pierpaolo Pattitoni, 2012. "Tribal art market: signs and signals," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 36(4), pages 289-308, November.
    3. Victor Ginsburgh & David Throsby, 2006. "Handbook of the economics of art and culture," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/1673, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Elisabetta Lazzaro, 2006. "Assessing Quality in Cultural Goods: The Hedonic Value of Originality in Rembrandt's Prints," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 30(1), pages 15-40, March.
    5. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    6. Benhamou, Francoise & Ginsburgh, Victor, 2006. "Copies of Artworks: The Case of Paintings and Prints," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 253-283, Elsevier.
    7. Marilena Locatelli-Biey & Roberto Zanola, 2002. "The Sculpture Market: An Adjacent Year Regression Index," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 26(1), pages 65-78, February.
    8. Federico Etro & Laura Pagani, 2013. "The market for paintings in the Venetian Republic from Renaissance to Rococò," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 37(4), pages 391-415, November.
    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. Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Noel, Laurent & Galariotis, Emilios & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2021. "An ordinal regression approach for analyzing consumer preferences in the art market," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(2), pages 718-733.
    2. Kim Oosterlinck & Anne-Sophie Radermecker & Yuqing Song, 2023. "The Valuation of Copies for Chinese Artworks," Working Papers CEB 23-008, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Samuel Cameron, 2019. "Cultural economics, books and reading," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(4), pages 517-526, December.
    4. Alessia Crotta & Filip Vermeylen, 2020. "Does nudity sell? An econometric analysis of the value of female nudity in Modigliani portraits," ACEI Working Paper Series AWP-02-2020, Association for Cultural Economics International, revised Dec 2020.
    5. Dominik Filipiak & Agata Filipowska, 2016. "Towards data oriented analysis of the art market: survey and outlook," "e-Finanse", University of Information Technology and Management, Institute of Financial Research and Analysis, vol. 12(1), pages 21-31, June.
    6. Kompa Krzysztof & Witkowska Dorota, 2014. "Construction Of Hedonic Price Index For The “Most Liquid” Polish Painters," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 14(2), pages 76-100, December.
    7. Federica Codignola & Paolo Mariani, 2022. "Investigating preferences in art collecting: the case of the François Pinault Collection," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2022(1), pages 107-133, March.
    8. Luc Renneboog & Christophe Spaenjers, 2013. "Buying Beauty: On Prices and Returns in the Art Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 36-53, February.
    9. Kim Oosterlinck, 2009. "The Price of Degenerate Art," Working Papers CEB 09-031.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    10. Francesco Angelini & Massimiliano Castellani & Lorenzo Zirulia, 2022. "Overconfidence in the art market: a bargaining pricing model with asymmetric disinformation," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 961-988, October.
    11. Erdős, Péter & Ormos, Mihály, 2012. "Pricing of collectibles: Baedeker guidebooks," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 1968-1978.
    12. Cellini, Roberto & Cuccia, Tiziana, 2014. "The artist–art dealer relationship as a marketing channel," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 57-69.
    13. David Giles, 2007. "Increasing returns to information in the US popular music industry," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 327-331.
    14. Abderazak Bakhouche & Ludovic P.J. Thebault, 2011. "What Determines Cézanne’S Art Pricing? A Hedonic Regression Method," Analele Stiintifice ale Universitatii "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" din Iasi - Stiinte Economice (1954-2015), Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 58, pages 515-532, november.
    15. Federico Etro & Elena Stepanova, 2016. "Entry of painters in the Amsterdam market of the Golden Age," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 317-348, May.
    16. Anne-Sophie V. E. Radermecker, 2019. "Artworks without names: an insight into the market for anonymous paintings," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(3), pages 443-483, September.
    17. Patrick Georges & Aylin Seçkin, 2013. "Black notes and white noise: a hedonic approach to auction prices of classical music manuscripts," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 37(1), pages 33-60, February.
    18. Patrick Georges & Aylin Seçkin, 2012. "Auction Prices of Classical Music Manuscripts – A Hedonic Approach," Working Papers 1202E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    19. Massimiliano Castellani & Pierpaolo Pattitoni & Antonello Eugenio Scorcu, 2012. "Visual artist price heterogeneity," Economics and Business Letters, Oviedo University Press, vol. 1(3), pages 16-22.
    20. Filipiak Dominik & Filipowska Agata, 2016. "Towards Data Oriented Analysis of the Art Market: Survey and Outlook," Financial Internet Quarterly (formerly e-Finanse), Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 21-31.

    More about this item

    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:uto:dipeco:201437. 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: Piero Cavaleri or Marina Grazioli (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/detorit.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.