Adverse selection and moral hazard are two core problems that arise from asymmetric information, a situation where one party in a transaction knows more than the other. These concepts explain why some markets fail, why insurance premiums rise, and why companies design contracts and policies to align incentives and manage risk.

more resources to help you study

practice questions

Adverse Selection in Markets

Types of Markets Affected by Adverse Selection

Adverse selection occurs before a transaction takes place. One party has better information than the other, and this imbalance leads to suboptimal outcomes because the wrong people end up participating in the market.

Insurance markets are the classic example. Individuals with higher health risks are more likely to purchase comprehensive health insurance, because they know they'll use it. Insurers can't perfectly distinguish high-risk from low-risk applicants, so they're stuck covering a disproportionately risky pool.
Used car markets experience adverse selection because sellers know far more about a vehicle's true condition than buyers do. Buyers, aware of this gap, assume the worst and offer lower prices.
Credit markets face adverse selection when lenders can't fully assess borrowers' creditworthiness. To compensate, they raise interest rates for everyone, which pushes safe borrowers out and leaves a riskier pool behind.
Labor markets are affected when job applicants know more about their own skills and productivity than employers can observe during hiring.
Financial markets encounter adverse selection when companies issuing securities know more about their true financial health than investors do. A company might choose to issue bonds precisely when its financial situation is deteriorating. Investors, sensing this possibility, may avoid certain stocks altogether, even when some of those companies are perfectly healthy.

Consequences of Adverse Selection

The most famous consequence is the "market for lemons" problem, identified by economist George Akerlof. When buyers can't distinguish quality, they treat all goods as average or below-average quality. Sellers of genuinely good products can't get a fair price, so they leave the market. This drives average quality down further, and the cycle continues.

Markets shrink or collapse entirely. If too many high-risk individuals enroll in health insurance, insurers respond with high-premium plans only, pushing low-risk people out. The market unravels.
Transaction costs rise as parties try to protect themselves through screening, monitoring, and complex contracts. Employers, for instance, may implement extensive background checks and multiple interview rounds just to assess candidates.
Underinvestment in socially beneficial activities results because risk can't be priced accurately. Lenders may refuse loans to small businesses in industries they perceive as risky, even when individual firms are creditworthy.

Moral Hazard in Principal-Agent Relationships

Types of Markets Affected by Adverse Selection, Labor and Financial Markets | Macroeconomics

Common Scenarios of Moral Hazard

Moral hazard occurs after a transaction or agreement is in place. One party (the agent) takes on more risk because another party (the principal) bears the cost. The key distinction from adverse selection: moral hazard is about changed behavior once protections are in place, not about hidden characteristics before the deal.

Insurance markets: A person with comprehensive car insurance may drive more recklessly, since they won't pay the full cost of an accident. Patients with generous health coverage may request unnecessary tests or brand-name drugs when generics would work just as well.
Corporate governance: Executives (agents) may make decisions that benefit themselves at the expense of shareholders (principals). A CEO might pursue risky acquisitions to boost short-term stock prices and trigger bonus payouts, even if the long-term outlook is poor.
Banking: Deposit insurance and the expectation of government bailouts can encourage banks to invest in high-risk, high-yield assets. If the bets pay off, the bank profits. If they fail, taxpayers absorb the losses.

Additional Manifestations of Moral Hazard

Government bailouts of failing companies create moral hazard across an entire sector. Automotive companies, for example, may take on unsustainable debt if they expect government assistance in a crisis.
Team settings produce a version of moral hazard called free-riding, where individuals exert less effort because costs and consequences are shared across the group. Group projects are the familiar example: some members contribute less, knowing others will pick up the slack.
Tenants with property insurance may be less careful about maintaining the property, leading to increased wear and tear that the landlord or insurer absorbs.
Employees with generous sick leave policies may take unnecessary days off, reducing overall productivity.

Impacts of Information Asymmetry

Economic Inefficiencies

Adverse selection drives out high-quality participants and products, creating the "lemons" dynamic described above. In health insurance, low-risk individuals opt out, leaving only high-risk individuals and pushing premiums higher for everyone who remains.
Moral hazard leads to overconsumption of resources. When patients face low copayments, they use more medical services than they otherwise would, increasing healthcare costs system-wide. This creates allocative inefficiency and deadweight loss, meaning resources aren't going to their highest-value uses.
Both problems raise transaction costs. Parties spend significant time and money on screening, monitoring, and drafting contracts to protect themselves.

Types of Markets Affected by Adverse Selection, The Theory of Labor Markets | OS Microeconomics 2e

Long-term Market Effects

Adverse selection and moral hazard can reinforce each other in a negative feedback loop. In credit markets, as interest rates rise due to adverse selection, more low-risk borrowers exit, which worsens the risk pool, which pushes rates higher still.

Market collapse becomes a real possibility. The market for annuities, for instance, tends to be small because mostly people with above-average life expectancy purchase them, making the product expensive for everyone else.
Social welfare declines as resources are misallocated and inequality can worsen. Talented individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds may lack the means to signal their abilities effectively, reducing social mobility.
Underinvestment persists in novel or hard-to-evaluate ventures. Potentially profitable business ideas may struggle to secure funding simply because investors can't verify the founders' claims.

Solutions for Adverse Selection vs Moral Hazard

Strategies to Combat Adverse Selection

Since adverse selection stems from hidden information, the solutions focus on revealing or signaling that information before the transaction.

Screening: The less-informed party gathers information to sort participants. Insurance companies require medical exams before issuing life insurance. Lenders run credit checks before approving loans.
Signaling: The more-informed party voluntarily discloses information to stand out. Job applicants earn certifications or degrees to demonstrate their skills. This is the logic behind Spence's signaling model: education may serve partly as a signal of ability, not just a source of knowledge.
Risk-based pricing: Charging higher prices to higher-risk individuals reflects their true cost. Car insurance companies charge higher premiums to drivers with accident histories, which keeps premiums lower for safe drivers.
Market design and information platforms: Standardized products and shared information reduce the knowledge gap. Services like Carfax vehicle history reports help used car buyers assess quality, partially solving the lemons problem.

Approaches to Mitigate Moral Hazard

Since moral hazard stems from changed behavior after an agreement, the solutions focus on aligning incentives so that agents bear some of the consequences of their actions.

Deductibles and copayments ensure policyholders share in the cost. Health insurance plans with copayments for doctor visits discourage unnecessary medical care because patients still feel the price.
Performance-based compensation ties rewards to outcomes. Linking executive bonuses to long-term company performance (rather than short-term stock prices) better aligns managers' interests with shareholders'.
Monitoring and regulation: Government-mandated disclosure requirements (like public companies reporting financial statements) reduce information gaps. Regulatory capital requirements for banks limit how much risk they can take on.
Risk-sharing mechanisms in contracts give both parties skin in the game. Franchise agreements where franchisees pay a percentage of profits to the franchisor align both parties' interest in the business's success.

2,589 studying →