It’s understandable that political observers, academics and members of the public in greenfield jurisdictions would express caution around the legalization of any new form of gambling in their country. After all, we all acknowledge that gambling can and does cause harm to vulnerable individuals. As a society, it is our duty to do all we reasonably can to protect and support these people.
But there are also some common misconceptions about the gambling industry and the impact of legalization that, when they are allowed to shape the narrative, inevitably do more harm than good to the broader gambling debate.
One such misconception revolves around the idea that the introduction of casino gaming into a new market will inevitably result in an increase in problem gambling rates. The reality is that, in markets where gambling has previously existed only in unregulated forms, the introduction of regulated gaming can actually contribute to a decrease in problem gambling rates. This is because regulated casinos markets typically incorporate mandated responsible gambling measures that simply do not exist in unregulated markets, not to mention organized programs and support groups to assist those displaying signs of addiction.
Academic studies support this notion, including important research by Dr Marc Potenza and Dr Randy Stinchfield which examined data across two decades from 79,000 high-school students in Minnesota. The research, which coincided with the introduction of legalized casinos in the state, found that youth gambling rates declined during and after the casino legalization period.
This, they argued, showed that regulation, when thoughtfully combined with education and prevention, can help reduce problem gambling.
George Tanasijevich, the former President and CEO of Singapore’s Marina Bay Sands and part of the team that bid for one of the two licenses Singapore was offering in 2005, broached this topic during a presentation at IAG’s recent Thailand Entertainment Complex Roundtable, stating, “I recognize it is counterintuitive that you introduce casinos for the first time and the rate of problem gambling goes down, but when you think more closely about it you can understand why. That is, the casino industry is the most highly regulated, highly developed industry in terms of social safeguards and protections for people and for research conducted on this topic.
“Prior to the introduction of land-based casinos, even markets that have other forms of gambling don’t have this highly developed system of regulation that addresses these types of issues, nor do they have budget to focus on it. So, when you bring in casino-style regulation, you instead have a new framework that is replete with social safeguards.”
This theme of counterintuition can also be seen across other forms of gambling. In Australia, for example, a long-standing ban on regulated online sportsbooks offering in-play betting has been blamed for a growing proportion of players moving to illegal offshore sites that offer a greater array of bet types, including in-play. Despite a government-led review into Australia’s online gambling space having found in 2016 that the lifting of such restrictions should be explored – a notion supported by leading integrity bodies – multiple Australian governments have failed to take action, likely wary of the perception – rather than the reality – of introducing any new legal modes of gambling.
All of this ignores the inconvenient truth that people will gamble whether they are legally permitted to or not. If you’re serious about protecting them, prohibition is rarely the way to go.
