Generally, adverse selection is when either the buyer or the seller misuses asymmetric information. It is a situation where one party has more information about a product/service than the other.
Let’s discuss what adverse selection is in economics and how it works.
What is Adverse Selection in Economics?
Adverse selection in economics refers to a situation that arises due to asymmetric information or information failure.
In this situation, either the buyer or the seller in a transaction possesses more information about the product/service being sold than the other.
This scenario is commonly observed in the insurance sector, capital markets, and other economic markets where asymmetric information inevitably exists.
Adverse selection can arise when two parties try to negotiate a transaction.
For instance, a contractor will have the upper hand due to information asymmetry by utilizing the knowledge and experience of the construction industry to negotiate a contract with the buyer.
How Does it Work?
Adverse selection arises when one party in a transaction has more information than the other. This greater access to information can be due to better resources for one party or the lack of resources for the other.
The concept denies the efficient market hypothesis, which claims that all publicly available information reflects on stocks (products) in a market.
This scenario leads to inefficiency in a marketplace. The seller may charge irregular prices for the same product/service in the absence of adverse selection.
Generally, adverse selection or asymmetric information affects buyers in a marketplace. They cannot negotiate prices if they don’t have the same information about the features and costs of products/services.
In some scenarios, sellers are also at a disadvantage. For instance, insurance companies don’t have the right information about the insured person/business and rely on the insured party.
Adverse Selection in Economics
Adverse selection is a common situation in many economic scenarios. Sellers usually possess more information about the product/service being sold than buyers.
For instance, sellers of second-hand vehicles do not disclose all faults in a vehicle. If they do, the buyer may not purchase the vehicle or pay significantly less than in the absence of that information.
We can observe the same phenomenon in the real estate industry, where homebuyers typically don’t have the exact information as sellers.
Conversely, adverse selection may exist due to one party’s specialized knowledge and skills. For instance, an attorney will possess greater law knowledge with a degree and experience.
The same rule applies to other professionals as well. In this situation, the adverse selection is compensated by charging for premium services by the sellers.
Adverse Selection in the Insurance Industry
Adverse selection is common in the insurance industry.
For example, an insurer will only know about an applicant’s medical history and health conditions as much as the insured person informs.
Thus, the insurance company will be disadvantaged by insuring a person due to asymmetric information. So, the insurance company will lose if it charges an average insurance premium to such risky clients.
Similarly, auto insurance companies would charge higher premiums in high-risk areas. The insurer will be disadvantaged if the client does not provide complete information about car usage areas.
We can see that the insurance companies are at the receiving end due to adverse selection, although buyers generally face disadvantages.
Adverse Selection in the Capital Markets
Adverse selection also affects capital markets in different ways. Retail investors and the general public do not have access to information as some corporate investors may have.
Similarly, as stock prices are directly affected by a company’s performance or financial results, insiders may have an early advantage. This is the reason insider trading is illegal, but it still exists.
Contrary to the EMH theory, all publicly available information is not symmetric. It is also not fully reflected in the share prices as the market does not fully know the investors’ reaction.
We commonly observe that stocks are either overvalued or undervalued. Both situations may affect investors adversely because these scenarios happen due to asymmetric information in the market about those particular stocks.
Adverse Selection Vs. Moral Hazard
Moral hazard is a closely linked concept to adverse selection. It exists when one party conceals facts or does not enter into an agreement in good faith.
It means moral hazard exists when there is information asymmetry, but it is due to one party’s non-cooperation or ill faith rather than unavailability.
For example, if a bank manager knows the banking industry will soon decrease interest rates on loans but doesn’t inform an applicant to increase the loan applications and achieve short-term results, it’s a moral hazard scenario.
Similarly, if a health insurance applicant is already diagnosed with a fatal disease but conceals facts from the insurance company, it isn’t an adverse selection but a moral hazard.
In short, a moral hazard exists when one party in a transaction does not act in good faith of the other party and deliberately misuses the available information.
Solutions to Adverse Selection
There are different ways to control adverse selection for sellers and buyers.
Access to information is the foremost and important aspect. If buyers have full access to information, they can make informed decisions.
Similarly, sellers offering trial periods, guarantees, and warranty periods also act to reduce the impact of adverse selection.
Sellers can charge premium rates if buyers do not provide complete information. It is particularly useful in the insurance industry.
Also, amending certain regulations, like allowing insurance companies to examine applicants’ medical histories, can reduce adverse selection effects.
Crowdsourced information tools like websites, blogs, tutorials, and review magazines can also play an important role in dealing with information asymmetry.
Is Adverse Selection Always Bad?
Adverse selection is not always bad. In practice, if all information is symmetric and perfectly available to everyone, it will have no value.
For instance, brokers provide professional advice to investors and charge premium prices for their services. If the information were readily available to all investors, a broker wouldn’t have been able to charge premium prices for sharing that information.
Asymmetric information helps professionals strive for career advancement as well. They work hard to achieve higher ranks by obtaining more knowledge and information along with their careers.
Similarly, the adverse selection also means more bargaining and trading opportunities in the general market.
What are the Negative Impacts of Adverse Selection?
Generally, buyers are disadvantaged due to adverse selection because they lack information. Sellers would charge higher prices for products/services than if the buyers had the same information.
For example, investors may buy overvalued stocks and lose money quickly. As a result, investors pay premium charges to obtain this valuable information that should be readily available to them.
As mentioned above, sometimes sellers may be disadvantaged due to adverse selections like an insurance company paying insurance coverage to a high-risk insured person.
Similarly, adverse selection can affect the general public in the service industry when they receive wrong advice from professionals due to the lack of access to information.
For example, a patient receiving the wrong medication or a homebuyer paying overpricing of a house due to wrong advice from a real estate broker.
Example of Adverse Selection In Economic
Adverse selection is an economic concept that occurs when one party to a transaction has better information than the other.
An example of adverse selection in economics is when someone with an impaired driving record tries to purchase car insurance.
The insurer may not be aware of the driver’s record, but they can infer the risk based on other factors such as age or driving history.
As a result, they may offer higher premiums than they otherwise would have, and the applicant may choose not to purchase coverage at those prices.
This leads to what economists call “adverse selection”—a situation where people with greater risks are more likely to purchase coverage because it is priced accordingly for them.
Different Between Adverse Selection and Anti Selection
The difference between adverse selection and anti-selection lies in the party taking on the risk in a transaction.
Adverse selection occurs when one party has more information than another and can make a better decision. In comparison, anti-selection happens when one party takes on all the transaction risks.
With adverse selection, the purchaser may have better knowledge of their own risk level than the seller’s, allowing them to obtain terms that are advantageous for them but disadvantageous for the seller.
With anti-selection, it’s the opposite—the purchaser seeks out terms that are disadvantageous for them because it will benefit them financially in some way.