Keywords
Financing, Healthcare
User fees
Willingness-to-pay
How to Cite
Abstract
This study examines the willingness to pay (WTP) for tertiary public healthcare services in Kerala, a state with a high prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and significant out-of-pocket healthcare expenditures. Data were collected from in-patients at Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, using structured interviews to assess the socio-economic determinants influencing WTP. The findings reveal that socio-economic variables such as age, caste, education, employment status, and economic background significantly impact WTP. Urban patients, those with higher education levels, and regular income earners were willing to pay more for improved healthcare services, while patients from economically weaker backgrounds expressed lower WTP. The study also highlights the inadequacies in the current public healthcare system, such as insufficient laboratory facilities, leading to increased reliance on costly private institutions. The results underscore the potential of WTP-based user fees to enhance service quality and financial sustainability while addressing urban-rural disparities and economic inequities. However, careful policy design, including subsidies and exemptions for low-income groups, is essential to ensure affordability and accessibility. The study provides insights into sustainable healthcare financing models tailored to the socio-economic realities of Kerala.
References
1. Anjana, Ranjit Mohan et al.( 2023). Metabolic non-communicable disease health report of India: the ICMR-INDIAB national cross-sectional study (ICMR-INDIAB-17), The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, Volume 11, Issue 7, 474 - 489
2. Azhar, A. et al.(2018). Willingness to Pay for Health Insurance in Sarawak, Malaysia: A Contingent Valuation Method, Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science, 17(2) 230-237.
3. Gilson, L., & Mcintyre, D. (2005). Removing user fees for primary care in Africa: the need for careful action. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 331, 762 - 765. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.331.7519.762.
4. Godwin, S. (2016). Means testing and user charges in health care: means testing in tertiary level public hospitals in Kerala. BMJ Global Health, 1, A22 - A23. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2016-EPHPabstracts.29.
5. Griffin, C. (1988). User Charges for Health Care in Principle and Practice, EDI Seminar Paper, Number 37, World Bank.
6. Johannesson, M. (1993). The Contingent-valuation Method. Medical Decision Making, 13, 311 - 312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9301300407.
7. Lagarde, M., & Palmer, N. (2008). The impact of user fees on health service utilization in low- and middle-income countries: how strong is the evidence?. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 86 11, 839-848 . https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.07.049197.
8. Ridde, V., & Morestin, F. (2011). A scoping review of the literature on the abolition of user fees in health care services in Africa. Health policy and planning, 26 1, 1-11 . https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czq021.
9. Roy, B., & Gupta, S. (2011). Public-Private Partnership and User Fees in Healthcare: Evidence from West Bengal. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 46, Issue No. 38.
10. Tambor, M., Pavlova, M., Rechel, B., Golinowska, S., Sowada, C., & Groot, W. (2014). Willingness to pay for publicly financed health care services in Central and Eastern Europe: evidence from six countries based on a contingent valuation method. Social science & medicine, 116, 193-201 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.009.
11. Thakur, H., Ghosh, S., Mariappan, M., & Bhatia, M. (2009). User Fees in India’s Health Sector: Can the Poor Hope for any Respite?. Artha Vijnana: Journal of The Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, 51, 139-158. https://doi.org/10.21648/ARTHAVIJ/2009/V51/I2/115399.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 South India Journal of Social Sciences