Information economics

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  Information economics sits at a peculiar crossroads: it studies something that can be given away without being lost, copied without being diminished, and sold over and over at almost no additional cost. The field is formally classified under Journal of Economic Literature code JEL D8, which groups it with the study of Knowledge and Uncertainty. Its central puzzle is deceptively simple. When what you sell is not a physical object but a piece of knowledge, the normal rules of markets break down in striking ways. How do you price something that costs nothing to reproduce? How do you sell something the buyer must already understand to judge its value? And how do you stop the people who know more from exploiting the people who know less? These are the questions that have driven information economists since the field began to mature in the 1970s, and the answers touch everything from car dealerships to university degrees to the 2008 financial crisis.

• 2. The Price of Knowledge

  ›

  Friedrich Hayek's 1945 essay "The Use of Knowledge in Society" set off a chain reaction that neither he nor his critics fully anticipated. Hayek wrote to discredit central planning agencies, arguing that no single authority could gather enough knowledge to allocate resources as efficiently as a free market. His insight was that price signals do the communicating: a rise in the price of a good tells producers it has become scarce, without anyone needing to know why. That argument was read by Abba Lerner, Tjalling Koopmans, Leonid Hurwicz, and George Stigler, among others, and it pushed them to take information itself seriously as an economic variable. What they developed was a field that asks not just what prices communicate but what happens when some people receive that communication and others do not. The price mechanism, it turned out, was only part of the story. Transactions do not always happen in markets; they happen inside organizations too. Whether a deal is struck in a market or coordinated within a firm, the source text notes, the information requirements of the transaction are the prime determinant for which coordination mechanism actually gets used.

• 3. Information Asymmetry

  ›

  George Akerlof's paper "The Market for Lemons" introduced a thought experiment that became one of the classic papers on adverse selection. Akerlof asked listeners to imagine the used car market. A buyer might be choosing between a new or used car, and between a good car or a bad one, a "lemon." The seller knows which type the car is. The buyer does not. Because the buyer cannot reliably tell good from bad, they discount every car accordingly. That discount drives sellers of good used cars out of the market, since they cannot get a fair price. What remains are disproportionately the lemons, which confirms the buyer's suspicion, which drives the price lower still. The logic threatens to unravel the market entirely. This same dynamic, the source explains, appears across many markets wherever sellers have an incentive to conceal poor quality. Moral hazard is a related problem but runs in a different direction. It arises when an agent changes their behaviour after a contract is signed, in ways that harm the principal. Someone who buys car insurance and then drives more recklessly is a textbook case. The 2008 financial crisis offered a large-scale version: mortgage-backed securities were assembled from subprime mortgages and sold to investors without disclosing the risk involved. Insurance contracts often respond to moral hazard by building in a waiting period clause, which reduces the incentive to change behaviour immediately after signing.

• 4. Signals and Screens

  ›

  Michael Spence originally proposed the idea of signaling as a way to resolve information asymmetry between employers and job applicants. An employer wants someone skilled at learning. Every applicant claims to be that person, because only the applicant knows if it is true. Spence's insight was that attending college could serve as a credible signal, even if the coursework itself taught nothing relevant to the job. The logic depends on a cost asymmetry: finishing college is easier for someone who genuinely learns quickly than for someone who does not. So the act of completing a degree filters the types, not because of what was learned but because of what the completion signals. Joseph E. Stiglitz developed the complementary tool of screening, which works from the other direction. Rather than waiting for informed parties to signal their type, the underinformed party can design a menu of choices so that each option is most attractive to a different type. Stiglitz's example involves an amusement park selling priority tickets that allow visitors to skip lines, alongside regular tickets at a lower price. The park cannot reliably ask customers how much they value their time. But by offering both options, it induces customers with a high value of time to self-select into the priority tier, revealing information they would never have disclosed if asked directly. In 2001, the Nobel Prize in economics was awarded jointly to Akerlof, Spence, and Stiglitz for their analyses of markets with asymmetric information.

• 5. Information Goods

  ›

  Computer software like Microsoft Windows, pharmaceutical compounds, and technical books share an unusual cost structure: they are expensive to produce but cheap to reproduce. Once a piece of information exists on paper, in a computer, or on a compact disc, a second copy can be made for essentially nothing. Three properties follow from this, and together they break the assumptions underlying standard market theory. First, information is non-rivalrous: one person consuming it does not stop another from doing the same. Second, information resists natural exclusion. If a piece of knowledge is known, it is hard to stop others from using it. Together, non-rivalry and non-excludability make information behave like a public good, in the technical economic sense. Third, the information market lacks transparency in a specific way. To evaluate whether a piece of software, a film, or a book is worth buying, you have to use it. By then you have already paid the cost of knowing. De Long and Froomkin explored the implications of these properties in their work "The Next Economy." The consequence for production is stark: without basic research, the initial investment in high-information goods may be too costly to recoup, a form of market failure. Government subsidization of basic research has been proposed as one response to this problem.

• 6. Networks and Critical Mass

  ›

  Carl Shapiro and Hal Varian described network effects as products that gain additional value from each additional user who joins. A telephone is worthless with no one to call; it becomes more valuable as the network of callers grows. Each new adopter creates a direct benefit for every existing user. There is also an indirect effect: as the network grows, complementary goods improve and proliferate alongside it. The growth of data has added a complicating dimension to this picture. Data expands at an exponential rate, but the application of that data lags far behind its creation. New data also brings a rising proportion of misleading or inaccurate information, which crowds out sourced and verified material. The ease and low cost of creating online content means unverified information spreads more freely than careful research. When a new network is developing, early adopters shape the social dynamics that the broader population later inherits. A network becomes self-sustaining at what researchers call critical mass, the point where it no longer needs subsidized or discounted entry to attract new users. Getting there typically requires low initial prices and broad marketing to generate the snowball effect that makes self-sustaining growth possible. Once positive cash flows, consistent revenue, customer retention, and brand engagement are in place, product maturity follows.