IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Value of Information in Impersonal and Personal Markets


  • Jeffrey F. Jaffe
  • Mark Rubinstein


The conclusions of Hirshleifer (1971) concerning the private and social value of information in a pure exchange economy are examined. We agree that in the impersonal and competitive market of Hirshleifer, the production of new private information has private value and the production of new public information has no social value; however, the dissemination of existing private information has both positive private and social value. For the same reason, the production of private information, even if costless, can be socially harmful. We then examine a personal market, in which each consumer knows something of the economic characteristics of other consumers. In this context, even with arbitrary exchange arrangements, private information can be expected to be less valuable. It is not needed to identify Pareto-efficient allocations and may not even be needed to rank these allocations. Moreover, if either the endowed allocations is itself Pareto-efficient or exchange arrangements are competitive and average beliefs exist, then neither the production nor dissemination of private information has private or social value. In general, there is less incentive than one might expect to trade on private information. In impersonal markets, if the market for information can be efficiently organized, it is better to sell information than trade on it. And in personal markets, there may be no benefit to trading on information.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey F. Jaffe & Mark Rubinstein, "undated". "The Value of Information in Impersonal and Personal Markets," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 16-75, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:fth:pennfi:16-75

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fth:pennfi:16-75. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Thomas Krichel). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.