IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v19y2021i3d10.1007_s40258-021-00644-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to Pay for a COVID-19 Vaccine

Author

Listed:
  • Arcadio A. Cerda

    (University of Talca)

  • Leidy Y. García

    (University of Talca)

Abstract

Background The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has considerably affected the lives of people worldwide, impacting their health and economic welfare, and changing the behavior of our society significantly. This situation may lead to a strong incentive for people to buy a vaccine. Therefore, a relevant study to assess individuals’ choices and the value of change in welfare from a COVID-19 vaccine is essential. Objective This study aimed to estimate the willingness-to-pay (WTP) value for a vaccine for COVID-19. We also identify the variables that influence individual vaccination decisions, which could be used in the design of vaccination promotion strategies. Methods We use the contingent valuation method in its double-bounded dichotomous choice format. The estimation coefficients are calculated according to the maximum likelihood method under the assumption of a probit distribution. The sample consisted of 531 individuals, mainly from middle- and high-income socioeconomic groups from Chile between enrolled between 10 July and 10 August 2020. Results The results show a high WTP for the COVID-19 vaccine, with a value up to US$232. Income and education levels and having family members with COVID-19 increased the likelihood of persons paying for a vaccine. There is also a greater fear as the pandemic progresses that people will get sick from COVID-19. Conclusions The high WTP value creates an opportunity for formulating public health policy. The results of this study suggest that governments can provide the vaccine free to low-income groups and allow those with higher incomes to acquire the vaccine through the private sector by paying. This will be useful especially for countries with economic difficulties.

Suggested Citation

  • Arcadio A. Cerda & Leidy Y. García, 2021. "Willingness to Pay for a COVID-19 Vaccine," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 343-351, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:19:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s40258-021-00644-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-021-00644-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-021-00644-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-021-00644-6?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy Park & John B. Loomis & Michael Creel, 1991. "Confidence Intervals for Evaluating Benefits Estimates from Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Studies," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(1), pages 64-73.
    2. Lopez-Feldman, Alejandro, 2012. "Introduction to contingent valuation using Stata," MPRA Paper 41018, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427.
    4. Barbara J. Kanninen, 1993. "Optimal Experimental Design for Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(2), pages 138-146.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Shin KINOSHITA & Masayuki SATO & Takanori IDA, 2022. "Bayesian Probability Revision and Infection Prevention Behavior in Japan : A Quantitative Analysis of the First Wave of COVID-19," Discussion papers e-22-004, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    2. Sasaki, Shusaku & Saito, Tomoya & Ohtake, Fumio, 2022. "Nudges for COVID-19 voluntary vaccination: How to explain peer information?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    3. Shusaku Sasaki & Tomoya Saito & Fumio Ohtake, 2021. "The Resilience of FDI to Natural Disasters through Industrial Linkages," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 21-07, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    4. Leidy Y. García & Arcadio A. Cerda, 2021. "Authors’ Reply to Sprengholz and Betsch: “Willingness to Pay for a COVID-19 Vaccine”," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 623-624, July.
    5. Yoshiro Tsutsui & Shosh Shahrabani & Eiji Yamamura & Ryohei Hayashi & Youki Kohsaka & Fumio Ohtake, 2021. "The Willingness to Pay for a Hypothetical Vaccine for the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-16, November.
    6. Joan Costa‐Font & Caroline Rudisill & Sayward Harrison & Luca Salmasi, 2023. "The social value of a SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine: Willingness to pay estimates from four western countries," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(8), pages 1818-1835, August.
    7. Sun, Sizhong, 2022. "The demand for a COVID-19 vaccine," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    8. Chiang, Chun-Fang & Kuo, Jason & Liu, Jin-Tan, 2022. "Cueing quality: Unpacking country-of-origin effects on intentions to vaccinate against COVID-19 in Taiwan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    9. Philipp Sprengholz & Cornelia Betsch, 2021. "Comment on: “Willingness to Pay for a COVID-19 Vaccine”," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 619-621, July.
    10. Caroline Steigenberger & Magdalena Flatscher-Thoeni & Uwe Siebert & Andrea M. Leiter, 2022. "Determinants of willingness to pay for health services: a systematic review of contingent valuation studies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(9), pages 1455-1482, December.

    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. Tanvir Pavel & Pallab Mozumder, 2019. "Household Preferences for Managing Coastal Vulnerability: State vs. Federal Adaptation Fund," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 281-304, October.
    2. Gordillo, Fernando & Elsasser, Peter & Günter, Sven, 2019. "Willingness to pay for forest conservation in Ecuador: Results from a nationwide contingent valuation survey in a combined “referendum” – “Consequential open-ended” design," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 28-39.
    3. Michael Ahlheim & Oliver Frör & Antonia Heinke & Alwin Keil & Nguyen Minh Duc & Pham Van Dinh & Camille Saint-Macary & Manfred Zeller, 2008. "Landslides in mountainous regions of Northern Vietnam: Causes, protection strategies and the assessment of economic losses," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 298/2008, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
    4. Ben Gilbert & Alexander James & Jason F. Shogren, 2018. "Corporate apology for environmental damage," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 51-81, February.
    5. Kim, GwanSeon & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Interis, Matthew G., 2012. "A Method for Improving Welfare Estimates from Multiple-Referendum Surveys," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 1-12, August.
    6. González-Cabán, Armando & Loomis, John B. & Rodriguez, Andrea & Hesseln, Hayley, 2007. "A comparison of CVM survey response rates, protests and willingness-to-pay of Native Americans and general population for fuels reduction policies," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 49-71, May.
    7. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    8. Paul Mwebaze & Jeff Bennett & Nigel W. Beebe & Gregor J. Devine & Paul Barro, 2018. "Economic Valuation of the Threat Posed by the Establishment of the Asian Tiger Mosquito in Australia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 357-379, October.
    9. Musiliu O. Oseni, 2017. "Self-Generation and Households' Willingness to Pay for Reliable Electricity Service in Nigeria," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    10. Changsok Yoo & Yelim Kim & Jee Hoon Sohn, 2021. "Evaluating the Social Cost of Conflict between New Media and Society: The Case of Gaming Disorder in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-13, July.
    11. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. W. George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa & Susan M. Chilton & T. McCallion, 2001. "Parametric and Non‐Parametric Estimates of Willingness to Pay for Forest Recreation in Northern Ireland: A Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Study with Follow‐Ups," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 104-122, January.
    13. Kofi Britwum & Amalia Yiannaka, 2019. "Labeling food safety attributes: to inform or not to inform?," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 7(1), pages 1-21, December.
    14. Pappalardo, Gioacchino & West, Grant Howard & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Toscano, Sabrina & Pecorino, Biagio, 2022. "The effect of a UNESCO world heritage site designation on willingness to pay to preserve an agri-environmental good: The case of the dry stone walls in Mt. Etna," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    15. Hermann Donfouet & P. Jeanty & P.-A. Mahieu, 2014. "Dealing with internal inconsistency in double-bounded dichotomous choice: an application to community-based health insurance," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 317-328, February.
    16. Ahlheim, Michael & Frör, Oliver & Heinke, Antonia & Duc, Nguyen Minh & Dinh, Pham Van, 2010. "Labour as a utility measure in contingent valuation studies: how good is it really?," FZID Discussion Papers 13-2010, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    17. Mirzobobo Yormirzoev & Ramona Teuber & Daniil Baranov, 2018. "Is Tajikistan a Potential Market for Genetically Modified Potatoes?," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 216-226.
    18. Mekonnen, Tigist, 2017. "Willingness to pay for agricultural risk insurance as a strategy to adapt climate change," MERIT Working Papers 2017-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    19. Samnaliev, Mihail & Stevens, Thomas H. & More, Thomas, 2003. "A Comparison Of Cheap Talk And Alternative Certainty Calibration Techniques In Contingent Valuation," Working Paper Series 14517, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    20. Loomis, John B., 2010. "Testing Construct Validity of River Recreation Use Values: A Comparison of Direct Elicitation of Use Values to Use Values Inferred Indirectly from WTP for Total Economic Value," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 60410, 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:spr:aphecp:v:19:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s40258-021-00644-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.