Free distribution or cost-sharing? Evidence from a randomized malaria prevention experiment
| Abstract | It is widely believed that cost-sharing - charging a subsidized, positive price - for a health product is necessary to avoid wasting resources on those who will not use or do not need the product. We explore this argument in the context of a field experiment in Kenya, in which we randomized the price at which pregnant women could buy long lasting anti-malarial insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) at prenatal clinics. We find no evidence that cost-sharing reduces wastage on those that will not use the product: women who received free ITNs are not less likely to use them than those who paid subsidized positive prices. We also find no evidence that cost-sharing induces selection of women who need the net more: those who pay higher prices appear no sicker than the prenatal clients in the control group in terms of measured anemia (an important indicator of malaria). Cost-sharing does, however, considerably dampen demand. We find that uptake drops by 75 percent when the price of ITNs increases from 0 to $0.75, the price at which ITNs are currently sold to pregnant women in Kenya. We combine our estimates in a cost-effectiveness analysis of ITN prices on infant mortality that incorporates both private and social returns to ITN usage. Overall, given the large positive externality associated with widespread usage of insecticide-treated nets, our results suggest that free distribution to pregnant women is both more effective and more cost-effective than cost-sharing. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesG. Alexander, Mark Hall & John Lantos (2006). Rethinking Professional Ethics in the Cost-Sharing Era. American Journal of Bioethics 6 (4):W17-W22.
Kjell Arne Johansson & Ole Frithjof Norheim (2011). Problems With Prioritization: Exploring Ethical Solutions to Inequalities in HIV Care. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (12):32-40.
Giacomo Bonanno (1998). Intensity of Competition and the Choice Between Product and Process Innovation. International Journal of Industrial Organization 16 (4):495-510.
Carla Saenz (2011). Affordability of Health Care: A Gender-Related Problem and a Gender-Responsive Solution. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 4 (2).
Vivekananda Mukherjee & Shyama V. Ramani (2011). R&D Cooperation in Emerging Industries, Asymmetric Innovative Capabilities and Rationale for Technology Parks. Theory and Decision 71 (3):373-394.
Joan E. Sieber & Bruce E. Trumbo (1995). (Not) Giving Credit Where Credit is Due: Citation of Data Sets. Science and Engineering Ethics 1 (1).
John Ziker (2004). Nonmarket Cooperation in the Indigenous Food Economy of Taimyr, Arctic Russia: Evidence for Control and Benefit. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (4):571-571.
Amotz Zahavi (2004). The Details of Food-Sharing Interactions – Their Cost in Social Prestige. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (4):570-571.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads5 ( #160,518 of 550,840 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
