Cross-sectional survey assesses parental willingness to co-pay for school meals, indicating affordability influences participation.
Background: School meals are an established population-level intervention to improve dietary intake and reduce health inequalities, yet expanding access is constrained by affordability barriers. This study aims to assess parental willingness to contribute to a subsidised co-payment model for primary school meals and to identify the socioeconomic, behavioural, and food insecurity-related factors influencing participation. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 1,009 UK parents was conducted using a contingent valuation approach. Parents were asked about their willingness to contribute towards both a standard and nutritionally enhanced school meal. Multivariable regression analyses were used to examine associations between willingness to pay (WTP) and socioeconomic, behavioural, and food insecurity-related factors. Results: Eighty-eight percent of parents indicated a willingness to contribute to a subsidised school meal scheme. Among those willing to contribute, the mean willingness to pay was £2.45 per meal, with higher contributions observed for nutritionally enhanced meal options. Participation decreased as costs increased, indicating affordability as a key determinant of uptake. Socioeconomic factors, food insecurity, and prior engagement with school-based food provision were significantly associated with both willingness to pay and contribution levels. There was also evidence that parents were willing to contribute more towards nutritionally enhanced meal options. Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of affordability and equity in the design of co-payment models for school meals. The results provide policy-relevant evidence to inform the development of financially sustainable and inclusive school meal programmes, including consideration of how nutritional quality influences parental engagement and perceived value.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Osifowora et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: