Consider a variant of the benchmark model of adverse selection. The types of workers (θ) are uniformly drawn from the unit interval [0,1]. A θ-type worker can produce θ units of some product if he is hired by firms. (Workers are the only input in the production.) The price of the product is normalised as 1. Before entering the labor market, workers decide whether to secure some certificate at a cost c ∈ (0, 1) or not. The certificate can fully reveal a worker’s type and he then decides whether to show it to firms or not. If a θ-type worker decides to quit the labor market, he can earn θ/4 from self-employment. Find the competitive equilibrium. (Hint, if a θ-type worker obtains the certificate and shows it to firms, he will receive a wage of θ from the market. For sure, he can also decide to join the labor market without obtaining or showing the certificate.)

Consider a variant of the benchmark model of adverse selection. The types of workers (θ) are uniformly drawn from the unit interval [0,1]. A θ-type worker can produce θ units of some product if he is hired by firms. (Workers are the only input in the production.) The price of the product is normalised as 1. Before entering the labor market, workers decide whether to secure some certificate at a cost c ∈ (0, 1) or not. The certificate can fully reveal a worker’s type and he then decides whether to show it to firms or not. If a θ-type worker decides to quit the labor market, he can earn θ/4 from self-employment. Find the competitive equilibrium. (Hint, if a θ-type worker obtains the certificate and shows it to firms, he will receive a wage of θ from the market. For sure, he can also decide to join the labor market without obtaining or showing the certificate.)

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach

5th Edition

ISBN:9781337106665

Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Publisher:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor

Chapter19: The Problem Of Adverse Selection

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 10MC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Indicate whether the statement is true or false, and justify your answer.Risk-averse individuals have a concave value function for prospective gains and a convex value function for prospective losses.
Which of the following statements is FALSE regarding the concept of "adverse selection"? Multiple Choice Adverse selection describes a situation where an individual's demand for insurance is positively correlated with the individual's risk of loss. Adverse selection occurs when someone increases their exposure to risk when insured. This can happen, for example, when a person takes more risks because someone else bears the cost of those risks. The relationship between smoking status and mortality provides a good illustration for adverse selection, especially in the case in which a life insurance company did not vary its premiums according to smoking status of its customers. To counter the effects of adverse selection, insurers may offer premiums that are proportional to a customer's risk.
Multiple Choice Adverse selection describes a situation where an individual's demand for insurance is positively correlated with the individual's risk of loss. Adverse selection occurs when someone increases their exposure to risk when insured. This can happen, for example, when a person takes more risks because someone else bears the cost of those risks. The relationship between smoking status and mortality provides a good illustration for adverse selection, especially in the case in which a life insurance company did not vary its premiums according to smoking status of its customers. To counter the effects of adverse selection, insurers may offer premiums that are proportional to a customer's risk.
Indicate whether the statement is true, false, or unclear, and justify your answer.Although a firm prediction of Akerlof’s model, the adverse selection death spiral has never been observed in practice.
Suppose that left-handed people are more prone to injury than right-handed people. Lefties have an 80 percent chance of suffering an injury leading to a $1,000 loss (in terms of medical expenses and the monetary equivalent of pain and suffering) but righties have only a 20 percent chance of suffering such an injury. The population contains equal numbers of lefties and righties. Individuals all have logarithmic utility-of-wealth functions and initial wealth of $10,000. Insurance is provided by a monopoly company. a.Compute the “first best” for the monopoly insurer b.Try to characterize the “second best” contracts as well as you can (start from the profit maximization problem and write down the four relevant constraints, point out which constraints matter, which ones don’t, proceed as much as you can, etc.). In addition: assume perfectly competitive insurance market instead of monopoly, and find (i) the first best and (ii) the second-best contracts.
Suppose that left-handed people are more prone to injury than right-handed people. Lefties have an 80 percent chance of suffering an injury leading to a $1,000 loss (in terms of medical expenses and the monetary equivalent of pain and suffering) but righties have only a 20 percent chance of suffering such an injury. The population contains equal numbers of lefties and righties. Individuals all have logarithmic utility-of-wealth functions and initial wealth of $10,000. Assume perfectly competitive insurance market and find (i) the first best and (ii) the second-best contracts.
Consider the following claim: “If a decision maker prefers one given lottery that yields $x with probability 1 over another given lottery whose expected return is $x, then we can fully characterize the agent's risk attitude. That is, this information comparing two given lotteries is enough to determine if the decision maker is risk averse, risk loving or risk neutral.” If this claim is TRUE, then provide a proof. If it is FALSE, then prove your argument by providing an explanation.
The Beveridge Model in the United Kingdom reduces moral hazard by having a universal, single payer system. True False
Show that expectation damages are efficient with respect to breach, but not efficient with respect to reliance.
Consider the following steps Celia chooses how much care, x ∈ [0,1], to take in programming her robot. This effort costs her x^2/2. Nature chooses whether the robot steps on Peter’s pet salamander, leading to emotional harm to Peter of H > 0 (with probability 1 - x). If the robot does step on the salamander then there is a chance of π that Celia will be identified as the culprit. If there is no accident (the salamander is not stepped on), then Celia’s payoff is V - x^2/2. Peter and Luke both get zero. If there is an accident, but Celia is identified as the culprit, then Celia gets V - x^2/2. Peter gets -H. Luke gets zero. If there is an accident, and Celia is identified as the culprit, then Like (the judge) decides a level of compensation D ∈ R+ for Celia to pay Peter. Celia gets V - x^2/2 - D. Peter gets D - H. Luke gets −(βH - D)^2. f) Now we turn to social otimality rather than equilibrium. Consider the value judgement that the optimal level of care is…
Consider the following steps Celia chooses how much care, x ∈ [0,1], to take in programming her robot. This effort costs her x^2/2. Nature chooses whether the robot steps on Peter’s pet salamander, leading to emotional harm to Peter of H > 0 (with probability 1 - x). If the robot does step on the salamander then there is a chance of π that Celia will be identified as the culprit. If there is no accident (the salamander is not stepped on), then Celia’s payoff is V - x^2/2. Peter and Luke both get zero. If there is an accident, but Celia is identified as the culprit, then Celia gets V - x^2/2. Peter gets -H. Luke gets zero. If there is an accident, and Celia is identified as the culprit, then Like (the judge) decides a level of compensation D ∈ R+ for Celia to pay Peter. Celia gets V - x^2/2 - D. Peter gets D - H. Luke gets −(βH - D)^2. A) Draw a game tree to represent this model.
Consider the following steps Celia chooses how much care, x ∈ [0,1], to take in programming her robot. This effort costs her x^2/2. Nature chooses whether the robot steps on Peter’s pet salamander, leading to emotional harm to Peter of H > 0 (with probability 1 - x). If the robot does step on the salamander then there is a chance of π that Celia will be identified as the culprit. If there is no accident (the salamander is not stepped on), then Celia’s payoff is V - x^2/2. Peter and Luke both get zero. If there is an accident, but Celia is identified as the culprit, then Celia gets V - x^2/2. Peter gets -H. Luke gets zero. If there is an accident, and Celia is identified as the culprit, then Like (the judge) decides a level of compensation D ∈ R+ for Celia to pay Peter. Celia gets V - x^2/2 - D. Peter gets D - H. Luke gets −(βH - D)^2. h) What would β have to equal, in order for Celia to choose the socially optimal level of x in a Subgame Perfect Equilibrium ?…