Abstract
M.Tech.
In 2004, the Health Products Association (HPA) reported that the complementary
health care industry in South Africa is growing at a rate of approximately 18% per
annum (Health Products Association, 2004). This surge in awareness and interest
in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is largely consumer-driven.
Although the total market size for complementary health products in 2003 was
R1 928 661 375, homoeopathy constitutes only 4% of this total. The identification
of potential problems and opportunities through situational analysis is necessary if
effective marketing of homoeopathy is to be achieved.
One of the most common and effective methods of obtaining market related data is
the survey method. Market segmentation refers to the division of the total sample
group into homogeneous groups of consumers. The South African Advertising
Research Foundation’s (SAARF) Living Standards Measure (LSM) has become
the most widely used market segmentation research tool in South Africa. The LSM
groups people according to their living standards using criteria such as degree of
urbanisation and ownership of cars and major appliances. This system, divides the
South African population into ten LSM groups, 10 being the highest or “top end” of
the market and 1 being the “low end” of the market.
This study formed part of a 3 part study to establish the perceptions of the South
African public towards homoeopathy with regard to awareness, usage, treatment
and cost expectations using a survey in the form of a questionnaire. The sample
group consisted of a total of 352 respondents completing interviews conducted in
Johannesburg, Pretoria, Cape Town, Durban, Bloemfontein, East London and Port
Elizabeth. Trained field workers, under the supervision of the researcher presented
the survey to the sample group in the form of door to door interviews. Field
workers employed by Research Surveys (Pty) Limited, a professional market
research company, conducted the interviews. This study focuses on LSM groups 9
and 10.
iii
Cromarty (2007), completed the first part of the 3 part study. The results from that
study indicated that 22% and 34% of respondents in LSM groups 7 and 8 respectively
had heard of homoeopathy before. In general the respondents view homoeopathy as
fairly effective for certain conditions but they would rather see a medical practitioner
for certain conditions and are unlikely to see a homoeopath in the future. All of this did
not seem to be related to the perceived cost of homoeopathic treatment. It was also
noted that consumers in LSM groups 7 and 8 were generally uncertain about
homoeopathy in regard to general awareness, usage and as a product in general.
After analysis of the results of this study, it can be concluded that consumers in LSM
groups 9 (49%) and 10 (66%) have a higher awareness of homoeopathy when
compared to LSM groups 7 and 8. In general, LSM groups 9 and 10, feel that
although they perceive homoeopaths to be well trained, they still would only go and
see a homoeopath for certain illnesses and would rather consult with a medical
doctor. These consumers are also more likely to visit a homoeopath in the future. In
contrast to the researcher’s expectations, the decision to possibly visit a homoeopath
in the future does not seem to be directly associated with perceived cost or medical
aid re-imbursement. It also appears that, in general, there is still much uncertainty as
to what “homoeopathy” is and what homoeopaths as professionals do.