IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0268009.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“I would have to sell things in order to get the money”: A qualitative exploration of willingness to pay for the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in the Volta region, Ghana

Author

Listed:
  • Sharon Darkwa
  • Gilles de Wildt
  • Maxwell Dalaba
  • Edem Vidzro
  • Evelyn Korkor Ansah

Abstract

Background: Malaria morbidity and mortality remain a challenge in Ghana. A promising childhood vaccine is being piloted in Ghana, however with the loss of its low-income status, Ghana is losing associated donor co-funding. User fees have been considered an alternative financing method, so this study utilised qualitative methods and explored caregivers’ willingness to pay for the malaria vaccine (RTS,S/AS01) to inform future service provision. Methods: The study design was cross-sectional. Twenty in-depth interviews were conducted between February 2020 and March 2020 amongst a purposive sample of caregivers of RTS,S/AS01 eligible children, in the Volta region, Ghana. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed into English Language. Thematic analysis followed, using NVIVO12 to organise this data. Results: Caregivers could distinguish between RTS,S/AS01 and routine vaccines and were willing to pay median GH₵5 (US$0.94), interquartile range GH₵3.75–5 (US$0.71–0.94) per dose of RTS,S/AS01. The maximum amount participants were willing to pay per dose was GH₵10 (US$1.88), interquartile range GH₵6–10 (US$1.13–1.88). Caregivers mentioned that they would work more to cover this cost because they were happy with services rendered to them during the RTS,S/AS01 pilot phase, and preferred vaccines over vector control measures. The results suggest that a willingness to pay was based on beliefs that the vaccine is fully effective. Although no participant declared that they would be unwilling to pay hypothetical user fees, there were still widespread concerns about affordability, with the majority feeling that the government should be responsible to pay for RTS,S/AS01. Conclusions: Participants expressed a willingness to pay due to an appreciation of vaccines, shaped by personal experiences with immunisations and disease. Participants’ average income was lower than the national average, potentially affecting the perceived affordability of RTS,S/AS01. Because of the belief that RTS,S/AS01 is fully effective, caregivers may pay less attention to other preventative measures, thus unintentionally undermining malaria vector control.

Suggested Citation

  • Sharon Darkwa & Gilles de Wildt & Maxwell Dalaba & Edem Vidzro & Evelyn Korkor Ansah, 2022. "“I would have to sell things in order to get the money”: A qualitative exploration of willingness to pay for the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in the Volta region, Ghana," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(6), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0268009
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268009
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268009&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0268009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johnston, Robert J. & Weaver, Thomas F. & Smith, Lynn A. & Swallow, Stephen K., 1995. "Contingent Valuation Focus Groups: Insights from Ethnographic Interview Techniques," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 56-69, April.
    2. Geneau, Robert & Massae, Patrick & Courtright, Paul & Lewallen, Susan, 2008. "Using qualitative methods to understand the determinants of patients' willingness to pay for cataract surgery: A study in Tanzania," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 558-568, February.
    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. Johnston, Robert J. & Bauer, Dana Marie & Swallow, Stephen K., 2000. "The Influence Of Spatial Land Use Patterns On Rural Amenity Values And Willingness To Pay For Growth Management: Evidence From A Contingent Choice Survey," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21766, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Johnston, Robert J., 2003. "Forecasting Support For Rural Land Use Policies: The Role Of Preference Asymmetries," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22156, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Hoehn, John P. & Randall, Alan, 2002. "The effect of resource quality information on resource injury perceptions and contingent values," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 13-31, February.
    4. Ndebele, Tom & Johnston, Robert J. & Newburn, David, 2020. "Transaction Costs and Household Adoption of Stormwater Best Management Practices," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304338, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Newell, Laurienne Whinstanley & Swallow, Stephen K., 2002. "Are Stated Preferences Invariant To The Prospect Of Real-Money Choice?," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19623, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Johnston, Robert J. & Swallow, Stephen K. & Weaver, Thomas F., 1999. "Estimating Willingness to Pay and Resource Tradeoffs with Different Payment Mechanisms: An Evaluation of a Funding Guarantee for Watershed Management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 97-120, July.
    7. Pham, Thai Thuy Pham & Dao, The Anh & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2017. "Determinants of Specialty Rice Adoption by Smallholder Farmers in the Red River Delta of Vietnam," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 262581, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    8. Anderson, Christopher M. & Das, Chhandita & Tyrrell, Timothy J., 2006. "Parking preferences among tourists in Newport, Rhode Island," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 334-353, May.
    9. Jason Kinnell & Jeffrey K. Lazo & Donald J. Epp & JaAnn Fisher & James S. Shortle, 2002. "Perceptions and Values for Preventing Ecosystem Change: Pennsylvania Duck Hunters and the Prairie Pothole Region," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(2), pages 228-244.
    10. Johnston, Robert J., 2006. "Is hypothetical bias universal? Validating contingent valuation responses using a binding public referendum," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 469-481, July.
    11. Swallow, Stephen K. & Opaluch, James J. & Weaver, Thomas F., 2001. "Strength-of-Preference Indicators and an Ordered-Response Model for Ordinarily Dichotomous, Discrete Choice Data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 70-93, January.
    12. Probst, Lorenz & Houedjofonon, Elysée & Ayerakwa, Hayford Mensah & Haas, Rainer, 2012. "Will they buy it? The potential for marketing organic vegetables in the food vending sector to strengthen vegetable safety: A choice experiment study in three West African cities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 296-308.
    13. Makriyannis, Christos & Johnston, Robert, 2016. "Welfare Analysis for Climate Risk Reductions: Are Current Treatments of Outcome Uncertainty Sufficient?," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235532, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Johnston, Robert J., 2006. "Context Similarity and the Validity of Benefits Transfer: Is the Common Wisdom Correct?," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21221, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Kaplowitz, Michael D. & Hoehn, John P., 2001. "Do focus groups and individual interviews reveal the same information for natural resource valuation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 237-247, February.
    16. Minjuan Zhao & Robert Johnston & Eric Schultz, 2013. "What to Value and How? Ecological Indicator Choices in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 3-25, September.
    17. Christos Makriyannis & Robert J. Johnston & Ewa Zawojska, 2022. "Do numerical probabilities promote informed stated preference responses under inherent uncertainty? Insight from a coastal adaptation choice experiment," Working Papers 2022-05, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    18. S. M. Chilton & W. G. Hutchinson, 1999. "Exploring Divergence Between Respondent and Researcher Definitions of the Good in Contingent Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 1-16, January.
    19. Michael P. McGonagle & Stephen K. Swallow, 2005. "Open Space and Public Access: A Contingent Choice Application to Coastal Preservation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(4).
    20. Johnston, Robert J. & Swallow, Stephen K. & Bauer, Dana Marie, 2002. "Stated Preferences And Length Of Residency In Rural Communities: Are Development And Conservation Values Heterogeneous?," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19683, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0268009. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.