IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i5p2707-d758841.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Factors to COVID-19 Vaccine Adoption in Gujarat, India

Author

Listed:
  • Viral Tolia

    (Post Graduate Department of Business Management, Sardar Patel University, Anand 388120, Gujarat, India)

  • Rajkumar Renin Singh

    (Shanti Business School, Ahmedabad 380058, Gujarat, India)

  • Sameer Deshpande

    (Social Marketing @ Griffith, Griffith Business School, Nathan Campus, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD 4111, Australia)

  • Anupama Dave

    (School of Business and Law, Navrachana University, Vadodara 391410, Gujarat, India)

  • Raju M. Rathod

    (Post Graduate Department of Business Management, Sardar Patel University, Anand 388120, Gujarat, India)

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed threats to human life across the globe, including India. Vaccinating is an effective means of addressing the pandemic threat. The government of India has implemented a massive vaccination drive to save its citizens from the deadly virus. However, the effort has faced multiple challenges, including vaccine hesitancy. This research understands respondents’ perspectives on factors contributing to the lower vaccination uptake in Gujarat, India. Forty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted through convenience sampling representing different demographic backgrounds. Factors influencing vaccine adoption included religious leadership, political leadership and the government, and fear of side effects, especially among children and those with co-morbidities, resulting primarily from fake news and misinformation circulated through social media. Compared with nine countries from across the world, the study found similarities to vaccine hesitancy from misinformation and the fear of side effects among children. In contrast, the role of government and the influence of religious and political leaders was considered positive. The study recommends strategies to overcome people’s apprehensions about the adoption of vaccination. These include offering incentives, providing positive peer-to-peer communication, recruiting influencers such as religious and community leaders and early adopters such as the elderly population to endorse vaccination, targeting youth through social media, and reaching rural sections by involving NGOs and social service groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Viral Tolia & Rajkumar Renin Singh & Sameer Deshpande & Anupama Dave & Raju M. Rathod, 2022. "Understanding Factors to COVID-19 Vaccine Adoption in Gujarat, India," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:5:p:2707-:d:758841
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/5/2707/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/5/2707/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ashwag Alasmari & Aseel Addawood & Mariam Nouh & Wajanat Rayes & Areej Al-Wabil, 2021. "A Retrospective Analysis of the COVID-19 Infodemic in Saudi Arabia," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Jeff French & Sameer Deshpande & William Evans & Rafael Obregon, 2020. "Key Guidelines in Developing a Pre-Emptive COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake Promotion Strategy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Hennie Boeije, 2002. "A Purposeful Approach to the Constant Comparative Method in the Analysis of Qualitative Interviews," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 391-409, November.
    4. Rudolf R. Sinkovics & Elfriede Penz & Pervez N. Ghauri, 2008. "Enhancing the Trustworthiness of Qualitative Research in International Business," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 689-714, December.
    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. Maider Belintxon & Nisha Dogra & Paula McGee & Maria Jesus Pumar‐Mendez & Olga Lopez‐Dicastillo, 2020. "Encounters between children's nurses and culturally diverse parents in primary health care," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 273-282, June.
    2. Julia Veidt & Steven Lam & Hung Nguyen-Viet & Tran Thi Tuyet-Hanh & Huong Nguyen-Mai & Sherilee L. Harper, 2018. "Is Agricultural Intensification a Growing Health Concern? Perceptions from Waste Management Stakeholders in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Tzeng, Cheng-Hua, 2018. "How foreign knowledge spillovers by returnee managers occur at domestic firms: An institutional theory perspective," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 625-641.
    4. Iversen, Sara V. & Naomi, van der Velden & Convery, Ian & Mansfield, Lois & Holt, Claire D.S., 2022. "Why understanding stakeholder perspectives and emotions is important in upland woodland creation – A case study from Cumbria, UK," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    5. Valtteri Kaartemo & Helena Känsäkoski, 2018. "Information and Knowledge Processes in Health Care Value Co-Creation and Co-Destruction," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(4), pages 21582440188, December.
    6. Komppula, Raija, 2014. "The role of individual entrepreneurs in the development of competitiveness for a rural tourism destination – A case study," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 361-371.
    7. Anna Romiti & Mario Vecchio & Chiara Milani & Gino Sartor, 2023. "Italian healthcare organizations facing new dimensions: changes in governance structure," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(3), pages 893-921, September.
    8. Eriksson, Taina & Nummela, Niina & Saarenketo, Sami, 2014. "Dynamic capability in a small global factory," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 169-180.
    9. Saint Ville, Arlette S. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Phillip, Leroy E., 2017. "How do stakeholder interactions influence national food security policy in the Caribbean? The case of Saint Lucia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 53-64.
    10. Khakhar, Priyan & Rammal, Hussain Gulzar, 2013. "Culture and business networks: International business negotiations with Arab managers," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 578-590.
    11. Martha A Abshire & Marie T Nolan & Sydney M Dy & Joseph J Gallo, 2020. "What matters when doctors die: A qualitative study of family perspectives," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-12, June.
    12. Kranke, Derrick & Floersch, Jerry & Townsend, Lisa & Munson, Michelle, 2010. "Stigma experience among adolescents taking psychiatric medication," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-505, April.
    13. Zhongzhong Fu & Han Yan & Zhongnan Fu, 2024. "Negotiation within legitimate political boundaries: revealing the bottom-up news filtering of Chinese Party newspapers," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-8, December.
    14. Ai, Qi & Tan, Hui, 2020. "Uncovering neglected success factors in post-acquisition reverse capability transfer: Evidence from Chinese multinational corporations in Europe," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(3).
    15. Ejiogu, Amanze & Ambituuni, Ambisisi & Ejiogu, Chibuzo, 2021. "Accounting for accounting’s role in the neoliberalization processes of social housing in England: A Bourdieusian perspective," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    16. Antony S. Cheng & Lisa Dale, 2020. "Achieving Adaptive Governance of Forest Wildfire Risk Using Competitive Grants: Insights From the Colorado Wildfire Risk Reduction Grant Program," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(5), pages 657-686, September.
    17. Tineke Schoot & Ireen Proot & Marja Legius & Ruud ter Meulen & Luc de Witte, 2006. "Client-Centered Home Care," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 15(4), pages 231-254, November.
    18. Rudolf R. Sinkovics & Eva A. Alfoldi, 2012. "Progressive Focusing and Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 52(6), pages 817-845, December.
    19. María Gloria Villarejo-Rodríguez & Beatriz Rodríguez-Martín, 2019. "A Qualitative Study of Parents’ Conceptualizations on Fever in Children Aged 0 to 12 Years," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-11, August.
    20. Singh, Pratibha & Sharma, Mahak & Daim, Tugrul, 2024. "Envisaging AR travel revolution for visiting heritage sites: A mixed-method approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:5:p:2707-:d:758841. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.