BETWEEN CASINOS, SLOT MACHINES AND BINGO: THE DIFFERENTIATED

DEVELOPMENT OF DUTCH GAMBLING MARKETS AS INSTITUTIONALISED RISK

ENVIRONMENTS

Gambling, Politics and Social Issues: 22 September 2015National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki

Sytze F. Kingma

The Alibi Model of gambling regulation

• a) a sharp ideological and political polarization over gambling.

• b) the accommodation of the public demand for moderate gambling pleasures under restrictive conditions.

•c) the countering of illegal gambling by offering legal alternatives, and the external legitimation of gambling in terms of charities, good causes and public interests.

The alibi model implies rules based regulation

• The alibi model legalizes and facilitates a ‘restricted market’.

• The alibi model is rules based because it seeks to prescribe the gambling market with rules concerning for instance: access, volume and location of facilities, prices and prizes, number of providers, destination of proceeds etc.

• The alibimodel should be regarded as an intermediate regulation model in between the prohibition and the risk model of regulation. .

TABLE 1 Prohibition model Alibi model Risk model

Moral meaning of gambling:

It is a sin It is a vice It is entertainment

Political strategy:

Conflict Compromise Consensus

Rationale for gambling law:

Gambling is considered dysfunctional for social order

Gambling can be valued as a social activity, and legalization can be important for countering illegal markets.

Gambling markets are economically important

Destination of returns:

Returns, if any, only go to the treasury

Good causes Private profit is also allowed

Central concern:

Fighting the exploitation of gambling

Criminal involvement in gambling enterprises

External effects like gambling excesses and problem gambling.

Exploitation: Illegal enterprises Monopolies High-risk organizations

Controlling institutions:

Policing Legal norms and social values

Scientific research and health care

Idealtypical state:

The nation state The welfare state The risk society

Derived from: S. Kingma, The Gambling Complex, 2002; see Kingma (2008)

Risk based liberalisation: ‘Risk-model’

Basic features of the risk-model:

a) Legitimation of gambling as commercial entertainmentb) Recognition of the economical importance of the gambling sectorc) Control of gambling in reference to addiction and crime

• The risk model is market driven and focussess on risks and consequences rather than rules. •The governance of gambling is moving into the direction of ‘responsible gambling’

1970s-1980s: post Gambling Act expansions

• 1974 Extension of the Gambling Act with Casinos, Lotto and Bingo • 1986 Extension of the Gambling Act with Slot Machines

• Differentiation of gambling forms: more types of gambling games as well as legal gambling.

• Casino: State monopoly of some tourist casinos.

• Bingo: No private or commercial operation (only small scale charity bingo).

• Slot Machines: Private operation of abundant market

Private game-operation

Game proceed for ‘good causes’  

 

yes 

no 

  

yes  (legal form)

 

Restricted market (totes and lotteries, 1964)

Alibi model

 

Abundant market (slot machines, 1986) 

Risk model  

no  (legal form) 

 

Scarcity (bingo, 1974) Prohibition model

 

Restricted market (casino’s, 1974) Alibi model

Table II: Typology of legal gambling forms.

Institutionalized risk environment (IRE)?

• Legalization and the alibi model de facto lead to an IRE, although initially they are not recognized as such.

• An institutionalized risk environement is based on human ‘decision making’, (regarding the acceptability and legalization of gambling products).

• Risks are also based on ‘decision making’; not only political decision making regarding legalization, but also decision making regarding consumer choices (Beck, 1992).

• IRE’s are ‘”closed,” institutionalised arenas of action’, where ‘risks are actually created by normatively sanctioned forms of activity… ‘ (Giddens 1990, 128).

“Circus Zandvoort”: prominent example of a postmodern

gambling den, or ‘amusement arcade’ Next to design, also

the use of language is a clear sign of the respectabilisation of gambling.

(cf. Gambling versus gaming)

The fate of gambling restrictions• Increasing market pressure due to artificial scarcity.• Increasing demand on law and rule enforcement; problems with maintaining the rules. • ‘Commercialization’ in the case of prohibitions on exploitation (for instance bingo).

• ‘Addiction’ in the case of abundant exploitation (for instance private slot machines market: growing awareness regarding gambling risks).

• ‘Criminalization’ in the case of commercial exploitation (for instance fraud in legal casinos, criminal casinos, golden ten casinos)

Problematisations led to: 1) further differentiation, 2) expansion of the IRE; 3) progressive steps toward a risk model or regulation.

Increasing social controversies over gambling

• The problematisations led to a shift from political and legal controversies toward social and cultural controversies over gambling.

• Fierce public debates on: social inequality and commerce in bingo; crime and elitism regarding casinos; gambling addiction and youth involvement regarding slot machines.

• Emerging issues regarding: the maintenance of the law; the containment of gambling problems; and local versus national responsibilities and policies.

Conclusions

• The problematization of gambling markets under the regime of the alibi model reflected the de facto emergence of gambling markets as an IRE, which precedes and anticipates a risk model of gambling regulation.

• The extension of the 1964 Gambling Act in the 1970s and 1980s led to a differentiation of legal gambling forms and the social problematization of various gambling markets.

• The institutionalization of a risk regime for gambling regulation is not a straightforward and self-evident process.

Questions or comments?

THANK YOU!