Generally, the more valuable a resource is, the more discerning (or less promiscuous) will an SP/RP be in choosing IdPs/OPs to accept assertions from in order to grant access to that resource.
For a resource with zero value, nothing discourages the RP from accepting identity assertions from any IdP. For a resource with infinite value, nothing encourages the RP to accept assertions from any Idp. For resources with value in between these extremes, increased value pushes the RP to pick partner IdPs from a smaller pool of candidates.
Trust frameworks like OIX, InCommon, and Kantara's IAF, in which the determination of what IdPs are suitable for a given value of resource is removed from the shoulders of the RP, change the equation by making choosing IdPs more scaleable.
For a given resource value, the RP has a larger pool of candidate IdPs to choose from. (except for resources with zero or infinite value).
From the PoV of a given RP, the 'value' of the trust framework is the difference in area under the two curves for the range of values of particular interest to that RP
I think there is enough here to get some Masters student started on a monetization thesis no?