The Nash Equilibrium, a cornerstone concept in game theory

Adapted by Peter Burow and Zane Harris

8 min read

The Nash Equilibrium, a cornerstone concept in game theory, is named after mathematician John Nash. 

It describes a situation in which each participant in a game or economic model, with knowledge of the other participants’ strategies, has no incentive to change their own strategy. This equilibrium occurs when each player’s choice is optimal, given the choices of others. While originally applied to games and economics, the Nash Equilibrium offers profound insights into the complexities of the health system.

Application to the health system

In the context of healthcare, the players can be patients, healthcare providers, insurance companies, and regulatory bodies, each with their own strategies and goals. A Nash Equilibrium arises when each entity, acting in its own interest, reaches a state where no one benefits from changing their strategy unilaterally. For instance, insurance companies might opt for higher premiums and selective coverage to maximise profits, while healthcare providers may prioritise treatments that ensure maximum reimbursement. Patients, on the other hand, navigate through these dynamics to access the best possible care within their financial means.

This equilibrium, however, often leads to a suboptimal outcome for overall health system efficiency and patient care quality. The interplay of different incentives and strategies can create a status quo where systemic issues, such as high costs, access disparities, and variable quality of care become entrenched.

Challenges in changing the health system

The complexity of the health system and the diversity of stakeholders make systemic change daunting. Each player in the health system is part of a delicate balance, influenced by regulations, market forces, and the actions of others. Proposing a change – such as policy reforms aimed at reducing healthcare costs – can disrupt this equilibrium. Stakeholders may resist or slow down changes that threaten their interests or require significant adjustments to their strategies, even if such changes could potentially lead to overall improvements in healthcare.

The Nash Equilibrium illuminates why well-intentioned reforms often face challenges. Change implies moving to a new equilibrium, a process that can be met with uncertainty, resistance and unintended consequences. As such, efforts to transform the health system must navigate the intricate web of vested interests, entrenched practices and the inherent inertia of the status quo.

Navigating change in healthcare

Understanding the dynamics of the Nash Equilibrium in the health system provides valuable insights for those looking to foster change. Here are some strategies for stakeholders.

Collaboration over competition

Encourage collaboration between healthcare providers, insurance companies, and regulatory bodies to align incentives towards shared goals, such as improving patient outcomes and reducing costs.

Incremental changes

Implement small-scale changes that can gradually shift the equilibrium towards more desirable outcomes without causing significant disruption or resistance.

Stakeholder engagement

Engage all stakeholders in the change process, ensuring that their concerns are addressed and their roles in the new equilibrium are clearly defined and understood.

Evidence-based policy making

Utilise data and research to demonstrate the benefits of proposed changes, thereby reducing uncertainty and opposition based on speculative outcomes.

“A shared aspirational vision is vital for creating alignment within a complex system. Establishing the systems’ identity can motivate different players to put the group’s long-term objectives before individual short-term gains, potentially shifting the Nash Equilibrium towards more optimal strategies for all.”

The role of IRI in system change

While the Nash Equilibrium framework provides insights into the dynamics that maintain the status quo in the health system, an integrated approach that includes Identity, Relationships and Information (IRI) may facilitate a more cooperative and adaptive environment. A shared identity with an aspirational state (sometimes known as a vision or superordinate goal) for the health system can create a unifying goal that trumps individual agendas. The agreement of the attractiveness to the goal needs to be able to overcome the pain of putting the group before self. Moreover, cultivating relationships that encourage transparent information exchange can lead to an iterative process of strategy refinement among all stakeholders.

Through this collective identity and open communication, incremental shifts toward a more favourable equilibrium could become more attainable, aligning individual behaviours with the overarching goal of a more effective and equitable healthcare system.

Understanding and applying the concept of the Nash Equilibrium to healthcare challenges can pave the way for more effective and sustainable reforms. By acknowledging the complexity of stakeholder interactions and the difficulty of changing entrenched systems, we can navigate towards a healthier equilibrium that better serves the needs of all participants in the health system.

Adapted by Peter Burow and Zane Harris, powered by Neuro Cortex AI

© Jin, X., & Das, S. K. (2012). Game theory for infrastructure security. In Handbook on Securing Cyber-Physical Critical Infrastructure

Contact Us


25 King Street, Bowen Hills 4006


Weteringschans 165, Amsterdam 1017 XD

United Kingdom

30 Churchill Pl, London E14 5RE