the « responsible gambling » policy model: a strategy ... · gambling introduction gamblers and...

J e a n - M i c h e l C o s t e s

Symposium Glücksspie l forschung und Glücksspie lpol i t ik

Univers i tä t Hamburg, Hamburg 24 March 2016

The « responsible gambling » policy model: a strategy based on the regulation of a legal supply

Assessment questions and related indicators: Concentration in gambling revenues, a proxy for social costs

1

24/03/2016 [email protected]

Toward assessment of a regulation strategy for gambling

Introduction Gamblers and patterns Gambling regulation policy Assessment of this strategy Conclusion

Outline

Introduction

Legal framework in France

Gamblers and gambling patterns in France Main results of the national epidemiological studies

A policy model for gambling

The strategy based on the regulation of a legal supply: « responsible gambling »

Assessment of a responsible gambling policy

2 examples of key assessment questions and related indicators

Conclusion



Gambling legal framework in France

24/03/2016

3

[email protected]

(Tables(games,(Slot(machines) Poker

Off(lineFDJ(

(Française(des(jeux)

FDJ((Française(des(jeux)

PMU((Pari(mutuel(urbain)

On(lineFDJ(


(=(State(monopolies(=(Private(operators(=(Prohibited((except(for(some(FDJ(an(PMU(games)

Gambling(legal(framework(in(France(before&2010

Casinos

Authorization/Concession

LotteriesSports(betting

Horse(racing



Gambling legal framework in France

24/03/2016

4

[email protected]

(Tables(games,(Slot(machines) Poker

Off(lineFDJ(



PMU((Pari(mutuel(urbain)

On(line Licensed(operators


Licensed(operators

Licensed(operators

(=(State(monopolies(=(Private(operators(=(Prohibited

Gambling(legal(framework(in(France(after&2010

CasinosLotteries

Sports(betting

Horse(racing

Authorization/Concession

19.1% GR

19.7% GR 27.8% GR 33.3% GR



Gamblers and gambling patterns in France

24/03/2016

5

[email protected]



National surveys on gambling in France

�  Enquête nationale sur les jeux d’argent 2010; INPES/OFDT (N = 25 000 French people aged 18-75 years) (Costes et al. 2011)

�  Enquête nationale sur les jeux d’argent en ligne 2012; OFDT/ODJ (N = 4 000 online gamblers) (Tovar, Costes, et Eroukmanoff 2013)

�  Enquête nationale sur les jeux d’argent 2014; INPES/ODJ (N = 16 000 French people aged 15-75 years) (Costes et al. 2015)

24/03/2016

6

[email protected]

Introduction Methodology Findings Conclusion

Online risk factor of problem gambling?

Gambling activities


7

off#line on#lineLottery 39.9 97.2 5.4Scratch#card#games 32.5 99.5 1.7Sports#betting 6.3 94.6 9.5Horse#racing 4.1 86.5 23.6Poker 2.7 81.3 39.2Slot#machines 5.4 98.9 1.6Casinos#(excluding#poker) 2.0 99.4 2.2Other#games 1.0 97.6 6.4

Overall 56.2 98.2 7.3Source':'Enquête'nationale'sur'les'jeux'd'argent'et'de'hasard'ODJ/INPES'2014

Gambling5participation5among5French5people5aged515>755years5in52014

Gambling#activitiesLast#year#

prevalence#(%)

Among#those#who#play#this#type#of#game:

%#playing



Problem gambling


8

15635 8784n %****** %******

Non*gamblers 6851 43.8 ( 43.0 & 44.6 ) 6 &Nonproblem*gamblers 7481 47.8 ( 47.1 & 48.6 ) 85.2 ( 84.4 & 85.9 )Low6risk*gamblers 889 5.7 ( 5.3 & 6.0 ) 10.1 ( 9.5 & 10.7 )Moderate6risk*gamblers 340 2.2 ( 1.9 & 2.4 ) 3.9 ( 3.5 & 4.3 )Problem*gamblers 75 0.5 ( 0.4 & 0.6 ) 0.9 ( 0.7 & 1.0 )Source5:5Enquête5nationale5sur5les5jeux5d'argent5et5de5hasard5ODJ/INPES52014

Problem(gambling(prevalence(in(France(in(2014

IC5955% IC5955%

GamblersPGSI

Overall*15675*years*population



Problem gambling associated factors (1)


9

<5(N=8605)

>=5(n=179)

N % % %Overall 8784 - 98.0 2.0 -

GenderMen 4483 51.0 96.9 3.2 3.65 <0.001Women 4302 49.0 99.1 0.9 ref.

Age15-24 1177 13.4 96.5 3.5 3.84 <0.00125-54 5187 59.1 97.8 2.2 2.43 <0.00155-75 2420 27.5 99.1 0.9 ref.

EducationDidnotcompleteBaccalaureate 4876 55.5 97.3 2.7 ref.CompletedBaccalaureate 1783 20.3 98.3 1.7 0.63 0.024CompletedPost-Baccalaureatediploma 2126 24.2 99.2 0.8 0.28 <0.001

Socioprofessionalcategory(SPC)LowSPC 5024 57.2 97.7 2.3 ref.MiddleSPC 2596 29.5 97.9 2.1 0.92 0.635HighSPC 1165 13.3 99.3 0.7 0.30 <0.001

ProfessionnalSituationWorking 5367 61.1 98.3 1.7 ref.Student 632 7.2 96.7 3.3 1.93 0.008Unemployment 891 10.1 94.9 5.1 3.07 <0.001Other(ornoanswer) 1895 21.6 98.9 1.1 0.63 0.057

Demographiccharacteristics OverallProblemgamblingseverityindex

OR P



Problem gambling associated factors (2)


10

<5(N=8605)

>=5(n=179)

N % % %Overall 8784 - 98.0 2.0 -

Gamblingparticipation:(ref=1;nopractice)Lotteryscratchcardgames 8121 92.5 98.2 1.9 0.42 <0.001Sportsbetting 638 7.3 89.1 10.9 9.01 <0.001Horseracing 979 11.1 93.6 6.4 4.56 <0.001Poker 421 4.8 89.7 10.3 7.00 <0.001Casinogames(excludingpoker) 1131 12.9 94.0 6.1 4.39 <0.001

Gamblingfrequency(lastyear)[1;24[ 4729 53.8 99.6 0.4 ref.[24;52[ 1287 14.6 99.2 0.8 2.19 0.043[52;104[ 1417 16.1 97.6 2.4 6.43 <0.001[104;+[ 1352 15.4 91.4 8.6 24.32 <0.001

Gamblingspending(lastyear)<250€(includingnoanswer) 6144 69.9 99.6 0.4 ref.[250;500[€ 975 11.1 99.6 0.4 0.89 0.836[500;1000[€ 780 8.9 96.7 3.4 7.78 <0.001>=1000€ 886 10.1 86.3 13.8 35.77 <0.001

Onlinegamblingno 8142 92.7 98.3 1.7 ref.yes 643 7.3 93.6 6.4 3.98 <0.001

Numberofactivitiespracticed(5categories)1 6824 77.7 99.0 1.0 ref.2 1546 17.6 97.1 2.9 2.93 <0.0013ormore 415 4.7 84.6 15.4 17.62 <0.001

Gamblingpatterns OverallProblemgamblingseverityindex

OR P



Online gambling

24/03/2016

11

[email protected]



Who is gambling online?

24/03/2016

12

[email protected]

Offlinegamblers

Onlinegamblers

n=8,142 n=643GenderWomen 50.9 24.2 ***Men 49.1 75.8 ***Age15-24 13.1 17.8 ***25-34 17.9 27.6 ***35-44 19.7 23.3 *45-54 20.6 17.8 ns55-75 28.7 13.5 ***ProfessionnalSituationWorking 60.4 70.1 ***Student 10.1 10.1 nsUnemployment 7.0 9.2 *Other(ornoanswer) 22.4 10.6 ***Socioprofessionalcategory(SPC)LowSPC 58.3 43.6 ***MiddleSPC 28.9 37.2 ***HighSPC 12.8 19.2 ***EducationDidnotcompleteBaccalaureate 56.8 39.2 ***CompletedBaccalaureate 20.0 23.6 *CompletedPost-Baccalaureatediploma 23.2 37.2 ***

Test:*p≤0.05**p≤0.01

***p≤0.001

Demographiccharacteristics



What are the online gambling patterns?

24/03/2016

13

[email protected]

Offlinegamblers

Onlinegamblers

n=8,142 n=643Gamblingfrequency(lastyear)[1;24[ 55.5 32.9 ***[24;52[ 14.7 13.8 ns[52;104[ 15.8 20.6 **[104;+[ 14.0 32.7 ***

Gamblingspending(lastyear)<250€(includingnoanswer) 72.1 43.0 ***[250;500[€ 10.9 13.4 ns[500;1000[€ 8.4 15.5 ***>=1000€ 8.7 28.1 ***

Numberofactivitiespracticed1 60.2 36.9 ***2 26.6 27.4 ns3ormore 13.2 35.7 ***

Gamblingparticipation:Lottery 68.4 76.2 ***Scratchcardgames 47.9 41.9 **Horseracing 10.4 21.2 ***Sportsbetting 5.4 31.2 ***Poker 2.8 30.1 ***Casinogames(excludingpoker) 12.1 22.8 ***

Problemgambling(PGSI≥5)yes 1.7 6.4 ***

Test:*p≤0.05**p≤0.01

***p≤0.001

Gamblingpatterns



A policy model for gambling: regulation of a legal supply

24/03/2016

14

[email protected]



Policy model: regulation of a legal supply

24/03/2016

15

[email protected]

Actions Long-termeffects Goals

Logicmodelofapublicpolicyongamblingbasedontheregulationofalegalsupply

Strategy

Regulationofresponsible

gamblingsupply

Security

component

Socio-

economic

component

Health

component

Reducethecriminaluse

Protecttheintegrityofsport

Protectstaterevenues

Treatpathologicalgamblers

Protectplayersafety

Reduceproblemgambling

Protectthegamblingeconomicsectors

Protectpublicsafety

Protecttheeconomy

Protectpublichealth

Se:nguptreatment

Se:nguppreven;on

Ac;onsagainstcriminaluses(money

laundering)

Ac;onsagainstillegalsupply

Ac;onsagainstfraudongames

se:ngtaxes

managementofaregulatedsupply



Toward assessment of a “regulation of a legal supply” strategy

To assess the overall Effectiveness of this gambling strategy: Ø  Social cost (Costs/Benefits) measures Ø  Another way: indicators to assess specific goal,

long term effect or action 2 examples of key assessment questions and related indicators

1.   Do a legal gambling supply effective and safer?

2.   Is problem gambling reduced? 24/03/2016

16

[email protected]



Policy model: regulation of a legal supply

24/03/2016

17

[email protected]

Actions Long-termeffects Goals

Logicmodelofapublicpolicyongamblingbasedontheregulationofalegalsupply

Strategy

Regulationofresponsible

gamblingsupply

Security

component

Socio-

economic

component

Health

component

Reducethecriminaluse

Protecttheintegrityofsport

Protectstaterevenues

Treatpathologicalgamblers

Protectplayersafety

Reduceproblemgambling

Protectthegamblingeconomicsectors

Protectpublicsafety

Protecttheeconomy

Protectpublichealth

Se:nguptreatment

Se:nguppreven;on

Ac;onsagainstcriminaluses(money

laundering)

Ac;onsagainstillegalsupply

Ac;onsagainstfraudongames

se:ngtaxes

managementofaregulatedsupply



Do a legal gambling supply effective and safer?

Key questions

1.   Do people gamble on regulated websites?

2.   Practices on the regulated supply are they safer?

24/03/2016

18

[email protected]



Do people gamble on regulated supply? (1)

24/03/2016

19

[email protected]

6,6#

14,7#

2,1#

13,0#

11,8#

8,9#

66,4#

72,1#

4,0#

7,2#

11,6#

13,8#

16,4#

19,2#

20,4#

58,2#

100,0#

0,0# 20,0# 40,0# 60,0# 80,0# 100,0#

Casinos#(excluding#poker)#

Slot#machines#

Other#games#

Horse#racing#

Sports#beFng#

Poker#

LoIery,#scratch#card#games#K#others#

LoIery,#scratch#card#games#K#FDJ*#

All#games#combined#

*FDJ:#state#company#which#manages#legal#loIery#and#scratch#card#games###Source':'Enquête'e.ENJEU2012';'OFDT'/'ODJ#

Prevalence)of)last)12)months)gamblingamong)online)gamblers)by)type)of)games)(in)%)))

Online#

Offline#

Unregulated games



Do people gamble on regulated supply? (2)

24/03/2016

20

[email protected]

in#%######Poker

(n=335)*Sport/Horse#Bet##(n=317)*

only%regulated%web%sites 54% 53% 70%only%unregulated%web%sites 19% 23% 6%both 27% 24% 24%source':'Enquête'e.ENJEU2012;'OFDT/ODJ

Distribution#of#gamblers#according#to#the#regulated#status#of#web#sites#they#use

*%%exclusifs%gamblers

Regulated#field#(2010#law)All#gamblers#(N=4042)



Practices on the regulated supply are they safer? (1)

24/03/2016

21

[email protected]

Regulated sites only

Unregulated sites

% % OR1

Steady involvement in gambling Frequent gambling (≥ 52 times in the past 12 months) 41,4 47,6 0.69***Important spending (pent ≥ 500 € in the past 12months) 25,2 26,8 0.65***

Problematic gambling (score of 3+ on the PGSI) 12,1 17,3 0.67***

Associated ConsequencesLifestyle behaviours

Sleep disturbance 9,7 20,1 0.47***Unhealthy eating 9,1 17,9 0.51***Interpersonal problems (arguments. conflicts) 2 1,6 1,2

Substance use behavioursIncreased concern about alcohol consumption 3 3,5 1,09Increased concern about tobacco use 6,3 12,2 0.69*Increased concern about cannabis use 1,3 2,2 0,94Increased concern about use of illicit drugs (excluding cannabis) 1,1 1,2 1,32

1 Significant odds ratio (OR) adjusted for age and sex: *p<=.05, ** p<=.01, ***p<=.001*regulated activities: lotteries, poker, horse racing and sports betting

Gambling patterns of individuals who participated to a regulated online gambling activity* according to the regulatory status of gambling sites (N=3,230).

Overall (N=3,230)



Practices on the regulated supply are they safer? (2)

24/03/2016

22

[email protected]

0" 10" 20" 30" 40" 50" 60" 70"

Problema2c"gambling"(score"of"3+"on"the"PGSI)"

Increased"concern"about"alcohol"consump2on"

Increased"concern"about"tobacco"use"

Sleep"disturbance"

Unhealthy"ea2ng"

Important"spending"(spent"≥"500"€""in"the"past"12months)"

Frequent"gambling"(≥"52"2mes"in"the"past"12"months)"

significant)differences)

%))

Lo1ery)

Unregulated"Regulated"

0" 10" 20" 30" 40" 50" 60" 70"




Sleep"disturbance"

Unhealthy"ea2ng"




%))

Poker)


0" 10" 20" 30" 40" 50" 60" 70"




Sleep"disturbance"

Unhealthy"ea2ng"




%))

Sports)be3ng)


0" 10" 20" 30" 40" 50" 60" 70"




Sleep"disturbance"

Unhealthy"ea2ng"




%))

Horse)be2ng)




2. Is problem gambling reduced?

2 main indicators to adress this question : ü  % of problem gamblers

ü  % of gambling revenue related to problem gamblers

24/03/2016

23

[email protected]



% of problem gamblers

24/03/2016

24

[email protected]

4.7 5.4

19.2

12.1

18.615.9

9.9 12.4

4.7

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Lo/eries Scratchcards

Sportsbe<ng

Horseracing Poker Casinotablegames(w/o

poker)

Slotmachines

Onlinegambling

Overall

Source:Enquêtena/onalesurlesjeuxd'argentetdehasardODJ/INPES2014,calculODJ

Problemgambling

PGSI≥8

3≤PGSI≤7



% of gambling revenue related to problem gamblers

24/03/2016

25

[email protected]

24.2 26.1

58.5

40.3

63.3

76.1

41.0

56.8

40.3

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Lo/eries Scratchcards

Sportsbe<ng

Horseracing Poker Casinotablegames(w/o

poker)

Slotmachines

Onlinegambling

Overall


Problemgambling

PGSI≥8

3≤PGSI≤7



Spending concentration (1)

24/03/2016

26

[email protected]

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Cumula&

veSpe

nding(%

)

Cumula&venumberofgamblers(%)Source:Enquêtena/onalesurlesjeuxd'argentetdehasardODJ/INPES2014,calculODJ

Distribu&onofcumula&vespendingforgamblinginFrancein2014(Overallgamblingac&vi&es)

Gamblers Spending50% 98%10% 76%1% 62%




24/03/2016

27

[email protected]

0.74000

0.76000

0.78000

0.80000

0.82000

0.84000

0.86000

0.88000

0.90000

LOTTERIES SCRATCHCARDS

SPORTSBETTING

OVERALLGAMBLING

HORSERACING

CASINO POKER SLOTMACHINES

GINICoe

fficien

t


Concentra/onofdemandforgamblingac/vi/esmeasuredbytheGINIcoefficient




24/03/2016

28

[email protected]

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

0.740 0.760 0.780 0.800 0.820 0.840 0.860

%Problem

gam

bling

Ginicoefficient

r=0.72;p-value=0.03

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

0.740 0.760 0.780 0.800 0.820 0.840 0.860 0.880 0.900

Prob

lemgam

blingsharerevenu

e

Ginicoefficient

r=0,73;p-value=0.02



Conclusions

Responsible gambling ü This strategy, based on the regulation of a legal supply, aims at reducing problem gambling Facts ü Among the many factors associated with PG, the most significant are the intensity of the practice : frequency and spending Assessment of responsible gambling ü Overall, the social cost measures ü More specifically, to assess fulfilment and effectiveness of the operators responsible gaming strategies

ü Assessment of the means being deployed is not good enough ü Results assessment is needful ü Spending or Revenue Concentration is a good proxy assessment indicator for this

24/03/2016

29

[email protected]



Thank you for your attention

To know more :

http://www.economie.gouv.fr/observatoire-des-jeux

24/03/2016

30

[email protected]

the « responsible gambling » policy model: a strategy ... · gambling introduction gamblers and...

Documents