IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v43y1996i6p985-998.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to pay for child survival: Results of a national survey in Central African Republic

Author

Listed:
  • Weaver, Marcia
  • Ndamobissi, Robert
  • Kornfield, Ruth
  • Blewane, Cesaire
  • Sathe, Antoine
  • Chapko, Michael
  • Bendje, Nicholas
  • Nguembi, Emmanuel
  • Senwara-Defiobonna, Jacques

Abstract

Many policy-makers and health economists are interested in designing and implementing user fee/quality improvement programs in public facilities in Sub-Saharan Africa on a national scale. This research addresses two design issues for a national program: (1) to what extent would user fees finance the costs of quality improvements, and (2) whether a uniform program could be implemented throughout the country or the user fees should differ between urban and rural areas or across health regions. A national survey was conducted to determine the population's willingness and ability to pay for seven quality improvements: (1) facility maintenance, (2) supervision of personnel, and drugs to treat (3) diarrheal diseases, (4) acute respiratory infections (ARI), (5) malaria, (6) intestinal parasites, and (7) sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Willingness to pay for quality improvements was measured by contingent valuation techniques in which subjects were asked about expenditures for care at government facilities under a hypothetical user fee/quality improvement program. Ability to pay was measured by monthly expenditures for health care as a percentage of monthly household consumption. The majority of the population was willing to pay the cost of the quality improvements, which ranged from U.S. $0.40 to U.S. $4.00. Estimates of the percentage of the population that was willing to pay the cost of the quality improvements ranged from 81% for facility maintenance (an improvement with the lowest cost) to 64% for drugs to treat ARI (the improvement with the highest cost). The median willingness to pay ranged from U.S. $7.98 for drugs to treat malaria to U.S. $16.61 for drugs to treat diarrheal diseases. Willingness to pay was greater in rural areas than in urban areas. It was also greater in Health Region I than in Health Regions IV and V. The population was able to pay the estimated cost of all seven quality improvements. Median monthly health care expenditures per episode of illness was 2.6% of median monthly household consumption. In comparison, the estimated cost of the quality improvements ranged from 0.2 to 2.4% median monthly household consumption. The national user fee/quality improvement program has good prospects for financing the quality improvements because the majority of the population is willing to pay the estimated costs of the quality improvements and more than half of the population is willing to pay substantially more than the costs. It also appears that the user fees should differ between urban and rural areas and across some health regions.

Suggested Citation

  • Weaver, Marcia & Ndamobissi, Robert & Kornfield, Ruth & Blewane, Cesaire & Sathe, Antoine & Chapko, Michael & Bendje, Nicholas & Nguembi, Emmanuel & Senwara-Defiobonna, Jacques, 1996. "Willingness to pay for child survival: Results of a national survey in Central African Republic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 985-998, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:43:y:1996:i:6:p:985-998
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(96)00015-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Foreit, James R. & Foreit, Karen G. Fleischman, 2003. "The reliability and validity of willingness to pay surveys for reproductive health pricing decisions in developing countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 37-47, January.
    2. Samuel Shillcutt & Damian Walker & Catherine Goodman & Anne Mills, 2009. "Cost Effectiveness in Low- and Middle-Income Countries," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(11), pages 903-917, November.
    3. Marcello Basili & Filippo Belloc, 2012. "How to Measure the Economic Impact of Vector-Borne Diseases at a Country Level: An Assessment," Department of Economics University of Siena 648, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    4. Jennifer Whitty & Emily Lancsar & Kylie Rixon & Xanthe Golenko & Julie Ratcliffe, 2014. "A Systematic Review of Stated Preference Studies Reporting Public Preferences for Healthcare Priority Setting," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(4), pages 365-386, December.
    5. Klose, Thomas, 1999. "The contingent valuation method in health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 97-123, May.
    6. Shono, Aiko & Kondo, Masahide & Ohmae, Hiroshi & Okubo, Ichiro, 2014. "Willingness to pay for public health services in rural Central Java, Indonesia: Methodological considerations when using the contingent valuation method," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 31-40.
    7. Marcello Basili & Filippo Belloc, 2015. "How To Measure The Economic Impact Of Vector-Borne Diseases At Country Level," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 896-916, December.
    8. M. Trapero‐Bertran & H. Mistry & J. Shen & J. Fox‐Rushby, 2013. "A Systematic Review And Meta‐Analysis Of Willingness‐To‐Pay Values: The Case Of Malaria Control Interventions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 428-450, April.

    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:eee:socmed:v:43:y:1996:i:6:p:985-998. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.