Fear of coercion in organ donations leads to repugnance

A country experiencing a critical shortage of kidneys for transplantation is considering a new policy. The policy would create a government-regulated system where individuals could sell one of their kidneys to a national organ bank for a fixed, substantial price. The organ bank would then allocate these kidneys to patients on the waiting list based on medical need. From an economic perspective focused on why such markets are often prohibited, which of the following best evaluates the primary objection this policy would face, despite its potential to increase supply?

Evaluating the Prohibition on Organ Markets

Match each transaction involving the human body or its functions to the description that best represents its typical legal and social standing in most developed nations.

Critique of a 'Philanthropic' Organ Market

Analyzing a For-Profit Organ Procurement Model

The widespread legal prohibition of selling human organs for transplantation is primarily based on the same economic principles that lead to regulations in markets with information asymmetry or negative externalities.

Applying the Concept of Repugnant Markets

Analyzing Forms of Compensation in Organ Procurement

Most countries legally prohibit the buying and selling of human organs. How does the core justification for this type of market prohibition fundamentally differ from the standard economic justification for intervening in a market with a negative externality (e.g., pollution)?

The widespread legal ban on selling human organs is primarily justified by economists as a necessary intervention to correct a market failure, specifically the potential for coercion of low-income individuals.