the economic “impact” of a downtown casino in...

The Economic “Impact” of a Downtown Casino in Toronto

The Martin Prosperity Institute (MPI) is the world’s leading think-tank on the role of sub-national factors—location, place, and city-regions—in global economic prosperity. It takes an integrated view of prosperity, looking beyond traditional economic measures to include the importance of quality of place and the development of people’s creative potential.

Photo credit: Heidi Bakk-Hansen

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8669065@N06/528938817/


Martin Prosperity InstituteMarch 2013

www.martinprosperity.org | iii

CONTENTS

The Economic “Impact” of a Downtown Casino in Toronto 1 Jobs 1 Neighbourhood impacts 3 City Impacts 4 Conclusions 5

Appendix: Literature Review 6 Casinos & cities 6 International examples 6 Atlantic City case study 6 Why a casino? 7 Social concerns 7 Public perception 8

References 9

Acknowledgements 11

EXHIBITS

Exhibit 1 Gambling company stock prices (past year) 2Exhibit 2 Gambling company stock prices (past 10 years) 2Exhibit 3 Toronto population by census tract (2011) 3Exhibit 4 Toronto population growth by census tract (2006–2011) 4

www.martinprosperity.org | 1

This is going to be a very different kind of research report. It is a research report without any directly applicable research. A lot of numbers have been thrown about with regard to the establishment of a casino or mixed-use, multi-purpose, destination, resort, hotel (casino) somewhere in the downtown core of the city of Toronto. All of the players for the downtown location seem to prefer some variation of the highly visible, in the heart of the city, waterfront location. The interesting thing is that so far, all we have are numbers — lots and lots of numbers. The important thing is that all of them are meaningless.

This report will not add to the already overly abundant collection of completely meaningless numbers that are being thrown around and at the citizens of Toronto and Ontario. Rather, this report will ask questions — most of which have gone unanswered and unaddressed so far during this process. If the city of Toronto decides it wants to allow a casino in the down-town core of the city and on or dominating a significant place on the limited resource that is its waterfront, the city should be well-aware to what it is saying “yes”.

The appendix provides a review of the peer-reviewed academic literature that has been published on the regional economic impact of casinos. That literature forms the basis for this report. It should be carefully noted that this report only focused on the economic impact. The social, moral, individual, and fam-ily impacts of casinos and legalized gambling are separate, but important, issues that should also be considered. However, this report only focuses on the potential regional (Toronto, GTA) impacts of a downtown casino.

This report will focus on three areas: Jobs, Neighbourhood, and City.

JOBS

The number of jobs promised by OLG, casino operators, and some unions seems to be grow-ing exponentially with a doubling of the num-ber of promised jobs and the salaries at every new opportunity and with every new speech. The potential for new jobs associated with the construction and operation of a downtown casino could legitimately be significant, but many important points are being omitted in the discussion by casino boosters.

First are construction jobs. The number of construction and related jobs that would be associated with the construction of a gigantic resort/casino would be significant. However, given all the construction already being undertaken in the GTA, is there really

a need for greater demand for more construction jobs? The unions could be happy as greater demand could lead to greater wages for their members, but, of course, that would also drive up the costs for everyone. So, maybe while good for the unions, the slowdown in Toronto’s construction market that could be created by increased demand and wages might not be so good for either the unions or other developers or the Toronto region. Additionally, one major developer who is finalizing plans for a major commercial, office, and retail space in the downtown core has already expressed grave concerns about being able to complete their project, something equivalent in size and scope to a resort/casino, if a downtown casino is approved. So, maybe the demand for construction jobs and wages and total employ-ment would not increase at all for the casino — just as many, or even more, jobs could be lost as generated by the construction of the mega-resort/casino. The question needs to be not “How many construction jobs would this create?” but instead “How many NEW construction jobs would this create?”

The second set of jobs created are those associated with the seven acres or more of casino (“only 10%”) that would be associ-ated with the mega-casino. Casino profitability is primarily tied to slot machines so the casino’s acreage would be dominated by slot machines, which require very small numbers of employ-ees. Further, it has been reported by workers from Niagara and Windsor that those casinos tend to hire only part-time workers and tend to blame the 24-hour and shift-based work as being unable to support full-time employment. The City of Toronto’s own website reports that casino workers in the city earn roughly $25,000 per year (before taxes). While some of the casino operators have been doing interesting things like talking about their “average salary” which includes all employ-ees including their well-paid CEO, the real statistics tell a very different story. In general, casino jobs are not well-paid. They are not the kind of jobs that any city should be actively pursuing to increase. Further, the jobs at the GTA’s and Ontario’s exist-ing casinos are in jeopardy if a downtown Toronto mega-casino is opened. Once again, the question becomes: How many NEW jobs will the casino create? And, how much will actual workers at that actual casino be paid? How many will have full-time employment with full benefits?

The third promise of jobs comes from the hotel, restaurants, and other amenities that make up the mega-resort/casino. Once again, extravagant promises of all kinds of amazing new jobs being created are being made. But also, once again, the numbers just don’t add up. Toronto already has sufficient hotel rooms to more than meet its needs. In fact, in the aftermath of both

2 | The Economic “Impact” of a Downtown Casino in Toronto

SARS and 9/11, tourism from the US to Toronto has seen significant declines while our number of available hotel rooms has been increased. Adding another mega-hotel to the city will not increase the number of hotel and related workers. In fact, because of the casino operations, a hotel associated with a casino can be operated at a loss. As a “loss leader”, it brings more people to the casino where individual’s losses help to cover their “cheap” hotel room. Existing established Toronto hotels, restaurants and other businesses, who do not have the luxury of collecting money from their customers in a casino, will not be able to com-pete. Once again, the resort/casino adds jobs but the rest of the city loses jobs. So, how many NEW hotel and related jobs will actually be created?

The ability of the casino to subsidize other functions of the resort also creates problems for Toronto’s arts, culture, and entertainment businesses, including high-end restaurants. Many across Toronto’s established entertainment industry have expressed concerns about the impact a mega-resort/ casino would have on their business. Once again, Toronto may find itself in the position of losing more than it gains by

approving the construction of a downtown casino.

“But, wait,” say the casino boosters “the mega-resort casino is going to be a tourist destination. It’s going to attract people from all over the world. We won’t be impacting existing Toronto businesses — we will be creating and tapping into whole new markets! It’s not a ‘zero sum game’. We’ll be making the pie bigger!” An interesting argument and one that might have some validity if they weren’t busily making the exact same pitch in New York, Chicago, and all around the world. The world-class destina-tion argument only works when a very limited number of places truly make a place a desti-nation. If they truly believe their argument and weren’t just planning on tapping into and maybe tapping out the local GTA market, then they should be willing to agree to operating the downtown Toronto casino under the same

Exhibit 1Gambling company stock prices (past year)

Exhibit 2Gambling company stock prices (past 10 years)


restrictions as casinos in the Bahamas. In order to gamble, you have to show a passport from another country. Given Toronto’s diver-sity, that can be more easily done in Toronto than almost any other city in the world. So, are the casino operators willing to still build their mega-resort/casino under the restriction that only non-Canadians will be allowed to gamble?

Exhibit 1 shows the stock performance over the past year for Caesar’s Entertainment (CZR), MGM Resorts International (MGM) and the Las Vegas Sands Corp. (LVS) (chart from Google Finance, March 1, 2013). It is generally quite flat and even after some recent increases, the stock prices are still under where they were a year earlier. These results only go back one year because Caesar’s is a relatively newly issued stock.

Looking back over ten years (Exhibit 2, also Google Finance) shows how poorly these three major players in the gambling indus-try have performed, especially in the past five years. If Toronto, is going to commit to the development and construction of a mega-resort/casino in its downtown core, especially as a way to add jobs, wouldn’t the city be better off ‘placing its bet’ on a growing and thriving industry?

The casinos and their boosters are playing a “shell game” with everyone. “Look over here. Pay attention to this. Ignore what’s happening

on the other side.” They talk about new jobs and jobs that will be added by them but don’t address the corresponding negative impacts of approving their actions. Toronto and its attention need to be focused on NET new jobs not new jobs that will create off-setting losses. And, the focus should be on creating well-paying, stable, full-time jobs. By looking only where they want you to look, only an empty shell will be revealed.

NEIGHBOURHOOD IMPACTS

The two maps below show the current population of Toronto and the regions of the city that have had the highest growth. Current population is shown by tract and is from the 2011 Cen-sus and growth is 2006–2011. Despite claims to the contrary, the highest residential concentrations are in and around the downtown core. And, the areas with the highest growth are also in and around the downtown core. Much of downtown Toronto is already a significant residential area and that is increasing.

While impacts on local businesses have already been dis-cussed, the impact of a mega-resort/casino on these residential areas should be considered. Casinos are 24 hour operations. People are coming and going from them at all hours. Parking and related issues have already been considered by a group from U of T Civil Engineering who found that the typical casino would require significantly more parking spaces than the current plans are providing. The traffic and 24 hour nature of the operations help to explain why studies have found that residential property values are decreased by the presence of a casino. So while the city may collect additional property taxes from the new resort/casino, residents and owners would see a decrease in their

Exhibit 3Toronto population by census tract (2011)


property values which would reduce the amount of property taxes received from surrounding properties. Once again, one is left wondering: What is the NET cost or benefit created by the addition of a mega-resort/casino to these increasingly residen-tial downtown locations?

CITY IMPACTS

The City must also address the NET benefits question. While increased revenue with a provincially-determined share going to the city is clearly a potential benefit, the increased costs are also extensive. While the City Manager’s report is essentially silent on the increase in costs associated with placement of the mega-resort/casino in downtown Toronto, it does mention hundreds of millions of dollars of costs that could be incurred if a neighbour-ing community could be cajoled or enticed into allowing a casino in their city. The academic research shows that the total costs, much which would accrue to the city, are somewhere between two and seven times the benefit received. So, the City Manager’s estimate may well be accurate. The only confusing thing is: Why wouldn’t those same costs apply if the casino was in Toronto?

While individual, social and family costs are included in that 2–7 times estimate, they are not being considered here. How-ever, several more direct economic costs to the City should be considered and will be briefly discussed here.

First is policing costs. Interestingly, the Police Chief was asked a very specific question about increased crime associated with a casino, and based on his discussion with Windsor

and other cities, he noted that crime did not visibly increase. This is in line with other research. However, two important points should be considered. First, what about less visible crime? Much work has been done that docu-ments money laundering, embezzlement, and other financial and internationally significant crimes do increase, especially around “mega-casinos” that typically deal in very large quan- tities of cash. Other less visible crimes also increase.

International and treaty obligations will likely result in an increased need for policing across all levels of government associated with the opening of a mega-casino. Additionally, although visible crimes may not increase, resi-dents and others expect an increased police presence. So, while crime may not increase, typically policing costs do increase. The out-standing question to be answered is not about crime: How much will policing costs for the City of Toronto need to be increased because of the establishment of a mega-casino?

Next is lost revenue from other gambling establishments. The City currently receives sig-nificant revenue from existing gambling opera-tions. With the establishment of a downtown mega-resort/casino, those establishments will see significant declines and may even end up

Exhibit 4Toronto population growth by census tract (2006–2011)


closing. How much current revenue will be lost from existing establishments with the estab-lishment of a downtown mega-resort/casino?

The third consideration is about money, rev-enues, and taxes. Once received by the city, dol-lars are dollars. Whether that revenue comes from taxes, fees, parking meters, or donations from civically minded individuals, once they are in the city’s coffers they are available for the city’s use. This is important to remember as many ways of spending this “casino windfall” are being bandied about. OLG has even gone to the extent of spending millions and millions of dollars advertising all of the wonderful things that are purchased with OLG-based revenue. While that revenue may have made some of those purchases possible, OLG did not buy anything for these towns. OLG gave the town money, and the town prioritized and decided what to do with that money.

Warren Buffett calls gambling “a tax on the ignorant”. Those moneys, whether from the ignorant or the intelligent, are in the end only taxes. It might be a hidden tax, and it might be more fun if every parking meter was a slot machine that gave you spin and a random number of minutes for your quarter, but it’s still a tax. In the end, it is money being collected by the government, and once col-lected, a dollar is a dollar and can be used for any purpose.

If the revenues from the casino are going to be spent on something that the city actually needs (improving roads and public transit, repairing the Gardiner Expressway, what-ever), is “taxing the ignorant” really the best way to get that money? If it is to be used for a truly public good, shouldn’t everyone pay for it? Increased taxes for specific dedicated programs and purposes often receive wide support especially when that purpose is seen as being necessary. If gambling revenues are to be used to pay for things that the city really needs, aren’t we gambling with the city’s future by relying on a less reliable and less predict-able revenue source? It’s rather like saying you will pay your rent with the winnings on the lottery ticket you just purchased.

Alternately, if the gambling revenues really are going to pay for a specific purpose, is the City willing to enact that in its bylaws? If the casino revenue is going to pay for public transit, make that the law so that people under-stand what those revenues will actually be used to do. The same dollars are being col-

lected once but being spent time and time again. What exactly will the increased revenue be used for? Is a significant increase in gambling in the city the most appropriate way to collect that revenue? What happens if the benefits don’t outweigh the costs? How will the city make up the difference?

Finally, the City, from an economic viewpoint, needs to understand the signal that will be sent with the approval of a downtown mega-resort/casino. While many major cities have smaller, unobtrusive casinos tucked away in corners, no major world city has one of the “mega” complexes. Attempts are being made to sell them to many cities — so far without much suc-cess. Further, casinos have only been pursued as an economic development strategy in cities that are desperate for any kind of economic activity. Essentially, a casino has been a last resort move by many cities. Given that perception, what signal does Toronto send to the world by approving a mega-resort/casino taking a significant prominent position both downtown and on the waterfront? Is this the kind of signal we want to be sending? Adding a mega-resort/casino to downtown Toronto will not make the city “world class” — it will make the city “second class”.

CONCLUSIONS

Much has been said and much has been offered as justification for approving a downtown mega-resort/casino in Toronto. So far it has been nothing but words. While the social and moral arguments can be solely based on belief and ideals, economic arguments rely on facts and numbers. So far, those have been conspicuously absent from this discussion. Yes, many numbers have been offered. But, as noted above, they have all been only one side of the coin. Almost every one of those numbers has an undiscussed, undisclosed, unknowable counterpart that takes a lot off the glow of the casino neon. Yes, jobs will be created, but what kind of jobs? And, how many jobs will also be lost? There will be new revenue and lost revenue. In the end, the total NET impact requires considering both the benefits and the costs — not just the benefits. And, while honest, reliable estimates of those costs are not available for the City of Toronto, the existing research and evidence clearly indicates that those costs are sig-nificant and very real. And, that they likely exceed benefits by a significant amount. It is difficult to hold up the possibility of lost jobs (inevitable as those losses may be) against the promise of 10,000 or more shiny, new, wonderful jobs. All that is left is to ask some serious questions.

In the end however, even the promise of jobs or any of the other benefits are just that — they are worth no more than the web page they are printed on. At this point, the city can basically make a “yes or no” decision. The casino boosters are happily offering up all kinds of amazing promises and fabulous oppor-tunities — all you have to do is say “yes”. Just put your dollar in the machine and let the spinning wheels and flashing lights take care of the rest. Don’t worry. A jackpot is assured. Just put your dollar in the machine…..


APPENDIX: LITERATURE REVIEW

CASINOS & CITIES

Casinos, the “most successful entertainment industry of the 1990s” (Grinols & Omorov, 1996 pp. 418) have once again en-tered public discussion surrounding the use of these facilities as an economic development tool, due to a growing number of cities endorsing mega projects to spur economic growth. There is also a small but growing literature examining these enter-tainment establishments across a wide range of issues, ranging from social and moral concerns, to purely profit driven motives. While a great deal of academic attention is placed on American casinos, this is an international phenomenon with a great deal of controversy.

While Grinols & Omorov cite gambling revenues doubling between 1990 and 1999 to $18 billion annually, it is argued that social costs of $39 billion – $145 billion are also accrued (1996). Eadington (1999) examines the economic success of casino based economic development in Nevada, which had experienced rapid economic growth during the decades from the 1970s–1990s. Las Vegas is cited as being in the top five fastest growth metropolises during these decades (ibid). However, it is argued this was not without its opposition; such as the National Gambling Impact Study Commission mandated by US Congress formed to examine the economic and social outcomes of gambling on society with members including regulators and Christian groups (ibid).

A comprehensive study by Lambert et al (2010) examines the impact of legalized gambling in the United States over the past thirty years, examining the states of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa and Missouri in the mid-west, and Louisiana and Mississippi in the south, arguing there is a need to examine external factors such as location and size of market in the success or failure of a casino. In particular, it is found that despite conventional logic lending itself to the ideal location of casinos being in major urban centres, numerous casinos are in fact in smaller towns and semi-rural areas (ibid). The authors also propose that further research is needed into the policy decisions that result in casino locations, as these factors may overrule eco-nomic arguments. A recent article by Barrow and Borges (2010) examines undertakes a review of the criticisms the publication, New England Casino Gambling Updates, has received. The authors utilize patron origin analysis and gaming behaviour surveys to get at their findings, arguing these methods can pro-vide the foundation for policy decisions, while also highlighting challenges that remain in quantifying benefits of casinos. For example, it is unclear how much more tourists spend on a visit without casinos than with them (ibid).

INTERNATIONAL EXAMPLES

No longer merely an American phenomenon, casino mega projects are increasingly global, and the focus of academic attention. For example, Lee (2011) examines the economic impact of opening a large gaming venue in Australia for a broad range of stakeholders; from government to community and industry. This comprehensive analysis considers a broad range of economic impacts associated with this industry, ranging from revenue generation and direct taxation, to employment rates and household disposable income (ibid). The use of casinos as an economic development strategy is Macao has gained international attention, Zheng and Hung (2011) take a closer look at the “Las Vegas of the east” to examine where the economic benefits of this development have accrued. Through examining both objec-tive and subjective indicators at the micro-lev-el, it is found that while economic liberaliza-tion that brought the proliferation of casinos has induced a great deal of economic growth, the vast majority of the population has not experienced positive benefits of this develop-ment (ibid). Wee (2011) examines Singapore’s decision to legalize casinos, whereby the gov-ernment desires to attract tourists to gamble, rather than locals gambling; demonstrating the ways in which the state is attempting to control and regulate the gambling industry, and providing an example of the consequences of legalizing casinos.

ATLANTIC CITY CASE STUDY

In examining Atlantic City, Teske and Sur (1991) juxtapose extravagant casinos to urban slums, as it is argued the economic rewards of developing casinos have been unevenly distributed, with much of the population un-able to reap economic benefits. Moreover, it is argued the, “anticipated multiplier effect has not moved much beyond the core industry. Many local residents are still poor and un-employed, half of the population still receives public assistance, and city services continue to be substandard. Social problems, including increased crime and prostitution, are worse


than ever. Since most people holding the bet-ter casino jobs live in Atlantic City suburbs, they contribute little directly to the city” (ibid, pp. 130). The economic impact of legalized gambling in Illinois has also been considered. Truitt traces the arguments for legalization — intended to capture tax revenues, while attracting tourists and keeping local money in the local economy — and finds in the case of ‘riverboat communities’ in Illinois, gambling has failed to live up to the economic expecta-tions, both tourist and economic development wise, that had been expected (ibid).

WHY A CASINO?

At present, several states and provinces are considering either the legalization or state funding of mega casinos. Richard (2009) ex-amined the rational and economic conditions that were associated with the legalization of gambling facilities in thirteen countries. It was found that economic development needs, as measured by unemployment rates — was asso-ciated with the decision to legalize gambling, while religiosity on the other hand was found to be a barrier, and tourism, income and fiscal stress had no significant relationship with these decisions (ibid). As a result, Richard’s argues that further research, and attention, is needed into the exploratory variables cited in the decision to legalize casino gambling. It was also found by Hunter (2010) that the positive benefits of opening a casino may not only be short-lived (as the positive economic impact is strongest early on in the existence of a casino), but this competition negatively impacts the economic development outcomes of existing casinos. Thompson (2011) also acknowledges the increased attention placed on casinos as a tool for economic development to improve the situation as it relates to jobs and taxes. He very strongly argues casinos are not a stable or ma-jor source of state government revenues, and the cost of casino tax collection is also inef-ficient. Finally, he argues, “most importantly, the rate of casino taxes is inversely correlated with development in the tourism sector of the economy. Higher taxes stifle economic growth” (Thompson, 2011, pp. 608).

While much of the literature focuses on the negative impacts of gambling, Li, Gui & Sui (2009) utilize a general equilibrium frame-work in arguing casinos bring in foreign and

domestic investments, with positive spillover effects on the local economy and related sectors. It is also argued that dur-ing the current time, when casinos are seen as a method of economic recovery, there will be opportunity to further expand gambling resorts and the development of new markets (ibid).

SOCIAL CONCERNS

As Eadington asks, “what is the appropriate presence of per-mitted gambling in modern society?” (1998, pp. 54). While recognizing the growth of this industry has seen its far share of controversy, it has still gained relative acceptance in society, and seeks to turn to economic rationales to explain this growth (ibid). Eadington considers the sources of revenue from gam-bling; whether that be from tourism (with gambling acting as a ‘regional export’) or local residents (as reallocation of resources within the local economy), but still contends that gambling as a ‘prohibited vice’ may win out over gambling as ‘acceptable consumer activity” (pp.64). In addition to social vices, the work of Friedman, Hakin and Weinblatt considers the relationship between casino location and crime (1989). Walker and Kelly (2011) argue that many of the indicators used to evaluate the social costs of gambling are extremely arbitrary and have meth-odological challenges, as they argue issues such as consumer sovereignty and the role of government should be considered in evaluating these critical issues.

In examining crime spillovers resulting from Atlantic City, it is found that crime levels rose significantly due to casino development, and were higher than if casinos were absent (ibid). However, Park and Stokowski (2011) examine the impact of casinos on crime levels in a rural context in Colorado, where ski towns were found to have higher levels of crime than areas with a casino and gambling. However, they acknowledge the importance of public perception and the belief that gaming would increase crime levels, which may result in strategies such as increased investment in police staffing in order to mitigate public concern (ibid). It is also acknowledged that crime levels in rural gaming development have different characteristics than urban, such as scale of development (ibid).

Mele (2011) examines the growth of casinos in the context of neoliberal urban strategies whereby governments bow to the whims of corporate policies aimed at increasing consumption opportunities. Using a case study of Chester, Pennsylvania, privatized urban redevelopment schemes, such as casinos, are examined in the context of creating exclusive spaces that become legitimized by their very existence in an increasingly isolated city (ibid). Also in a neoliberal context, Calvano and Andersson (2010) examine the controversy of casino legaliza-tion in Philadelphia, where casinos were a development tool for ‘cash-strapped states and municipalities’ and faced limited community opposition. In this case, it is argued that Philadel-phia represents ‘value extraction’ of government and corporate elites from citizens, which has serious implications for commu-nity life (ibid).


PUBLIC PERCEPTION

However, Lee and Beck contribute to this discussion through a broad review of resident perception of gambling development over a nearly thirty year period, and conclude that public per-ception demands policy makers carefully weigh their actions, which in fact may lower negative outcomes associated with casinos, while increasing positive impacts (2009). However, in Lee and Beck’s previous work in 2006, longitudinal assess-ments of public perceptions are utilized to examine public opinion before and after casino development. Public percep-tions were found to persist for two-years after the opening of a casino, and it was found that the positive economic impact of a casino was the most significant factor in predicting per-ceived benefit (ibid). Finally, Lee et al (2010) examined public opinion of casino developments in Colorado and South Korea, which both had depressed mining economies, utilizing social exchange theory to explain differences in public opinion.


REFERENCES

Akee, R., Copeland, W., Keeler, G., Angold, A., & Costello, J. (2010). Parents’ Incomes and Children’s Outcomes: A Quasi-Experiment Using Transfer Payments from Casino Profits. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2(1), 86–115. doi:10.1257/app.2.1.86

Barrow, C. W., & Borges, D. R. (2010). New England Casino Gaming Update: Patron Origin Analysis and a Critique of its Critics. Gaming Law Review and Economics, 14(3), 175–186. doi:10.1089/glre.2010.14305

Belanger, Y. D., Williams, R. J., & Arthur, J. N. (2011). Casi-nos and Economic Well-Being: Evaluating the Alberta First Nations’ Experience. The Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 5(1), 23–46.

Calvano, L., & Andersson, L. (2010). Hitting the jack-pot (or not): an attempt to extract value in Philadel-phia’s casino controversy. Organization, 17(5), 583–597. doi:10.1177/1350508410372619

D’Hauteserre, A. (1998). Foxwoods Casino Resort: An Unusual Experiment in Economic Development. Economic Geogra-phy, 74, 112–121. doi:10.1111/j.1944-8287.1998.tb00034.x

Eadington, W. R. (1998). Contributions of Casino-Style Gam-bling to Local Economies. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 556, 53–65.

Eadington, W. R. (1999). The Economics of Casino Gambling. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(3), 173–192.

Friedman, J., Hakim, S., & Weinblatt, J. (1989). Casino Gambling as a “growth Pole” Strategy and Its Effect on Crime. Journal of Regional Science, 29(4), 615–623. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9787.1989.tb01247.x

Grinols, E. L., & Omorov, J. D. (1996). Development or Dream-field Delusions: Assessing Casino Gambling’s Costs and Benefits. Journal of Law and Commerce, 16, 49.

Henriksson, L. E. (1996). Hardly a Quick Fix: Casino Gambling in Canada. Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques, 22(2), 116–128. doi:10.2307/3551903

Hunter, G. P. (2010). Winning, losing, and breaking even : new casinos’ effects on economic development impacts of existing casinos (Thesis). Retrieved from http://18.7.29.232/handle/1721.1/59742

Kayseas, B., Schneider, B., & Goodpipe, J.-anne. (2010). First Nations gaming in Saskatchewan: fostering entrepreneur-ship, economic diversification, cultural preservation and awareness: a proposed research agenda. Global Busi-ness and Economics Review, 12(1), 21–41. doi:10.1504/GBER.2010.032316

Lambert, T. E., Srinivasan, A. K., Dufrene, U., & Min, H. (2010). Urban Location and the Success of Casinos in Five States. Interna-tional Journal of Management and Market-ing Research, 3(3), 1–16.

Lee, T. J. (2011). Research note: The economic impact of opening a gaming venue in Aus-tralia. Tourism Economics, 17(2), 457–464. doi:10.5367/te.2011.0043

Lee, C.-K., & Back, K.-J. (2009). An over-view of residents’ perceptions toward gaming development in local community: Theory and practice. Worldwide Hospital-ity and Tourism Themes, 1(4), 300–319. doi:10.1108/17554210911002156

Lee, C.-K., & Back, K.-J. (2006). Examining structural relationships among perceived impact, benefit, and support for casino development based on 4 year longitudinal data. Tourism Management, 27(3), 466–480. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2004.11.009

Lee, C.-K., Kang, S. K., Long, P., & Reisinger, Y. (2010). Residents’ perceptions of casino impacts: A comparative study. Tourism Management, 31(2), 189–201. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.011

Li, G., Gu, X., & Siu, R. C. S. (2009). The Impacts of Gaming Expansion on Eco-nomic Growth: A Theoretical Reconsidera-tion. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(2), 269–285. doi:10.1007/s10899-009-9165-5

Mele, C. (2011). Casinos, Prisons, Incinerators, and Other Fragments of Neoliberal Urban Development. Social Science History, 35(3), 423–452. doi:10.1215/01455532-1273357

Park, M., & Stokowski, P. A. (2011). Casino Gaming and Crime: Comparisons among Gaming Counties and Other Tourism Places. Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 289–302. doi:10.1177/0047287510363616

Richard, B. (2009). Diffusion of an Economic Development Policy Innovation: Explaining the International Spread of Casino Gam-bling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(2), 287–300. doi:10.1007/s10899-009-9166-4

http://18.7.29.232/handle/1721.1/59742


Teske, P., & Sur, B. (1991). Winners and Losers: Politics, Casino Gambling, and Development in Atlantic City. Review of Pol-icy Research, 10(2–3), 130–137. doi:10.1111/j.1541-1338.1991.tb00101.x

Thompson, W. N. (2011). Casino Taxes—Accentuating the Nega-tive. Gaming Law Review and Economics, 15(10), 599–608. doi:10.1089/glre.2011.151009

Truitt, L. J. (1996). Casino Gambling in Illinois: Riverboats, Revenues, and Economic Development. Journal of Travel Research, 34(3), 89–96. doi:10.1177/004728759603400313

Walker, D. M., & Kelly, S. M. (2011). The Roots of Modern “social Cost of Gambling” Estimates. Economic Affairs, 31(1), 38–42. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0270.2010.02046.x

Wee, L. (2011). Neoliberalism and the regulation of consumers: legalizing casinos in Singapore. Critical Discourse Studies, 9(1), 15–27. doi:10.1080/17405904.2011.632137

Vinje, D. L. (1996). Native American Economic Development on Selected Reservations. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 55(4), 427–442. doi:10.1111/j.1536-7150.1996.tb02641.x

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

OUR TEAM Authors

Kevin Stolarick, Research DirectorTaylor Brydges

Project Team

Ibrahim DiaMelanie FascheShawn GilliganMichelle Hopgood Mohamad KhodrKaren King Zara Matheson Garrett MorganKim Silk

CONTACT US

Phone: (416) 946-7300 Fax: (416) 946-7606 Email: [email protected] Martin Prosperity Institute Joseph L. Rotman School of Management University of Toronto 105 St. George Street, Suite 9000 Toronto, Ontario M5S 3E6 Richard Florida, Director Jamison Steeve, Executive Director

Design by Michelle Hopgood. Maps by Zara Matheson.

the economic “impact” of a downtown casino in...

Documents