Without urgent repairs, the iconic Sydney Opera House will collapse. Sydneysiders were asked two questions in a survey.

Question 1: What is the maximum amount you would be willing to pay to prevent the collapse of the Sydney Opera House? The survey result was $500 per person (on average).

Question 2: If the Sydney Opera House were to collapse, what is the minimum compensation you would accept for the loss of this building? The survey result was $200 per person (on average).

Are the people answering this survey thinking rationally (from a neoclassical economist's perspective)? Why? How might a behavioural economist explain the differences in their responses?