This article is orphaned as few or no other articles link to it. Please help introduce links to this subject in articles on topics related to it. (December 2007)

Repugnancy costs are costs borne by an individual or entity as a result of a stimulus that goes against that individual or entity's cultural mores^[1][2]. The cost could be emotional, physical, mental or figurative. The stimulus could be anything from food to people to an idea.

These costs are perspective-dependent and individual. These costs may be different for different groups of people; countries, states, ethnicities, etc. The term allows for a clear and understandable way of representing the concept of contextual stigma in a literal and applicable sense.

[edit] Origin

Repugnancy costs were first mentioned in a debate between Alvin Roth and Julio Elias on whether there should be an official market for kidneys^[3]. The act of buying and selling organs may be against one's cultural mores; it may be repugnant. Hence, this is an additional costs one must bear if such a market was deemed repugnant in the context of one's culture.

[edit] References