Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 1441–1455 | Cite as

Web-Based Communication of Socially Responsible Activities by Gambling Operators

  • Libena TetrevovaEmail author
  • Michal Patak
Original Paper


Application of the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is of fundamental importance for the future existence and success of gambling operators, the activity of which is linked to a risk of addiction to gambling together with the negative impacts of this on the health and wellbeing of gamblers, families and society as a whole. Gambling operators must apply and effectively communicate socially responsible activities in the economic, environmental, ethical, social and philanthropic fields and in particular in the field of responsible gambling. Nowadays, it is necessary to ensure communication via modern channels in the form of corporate websites and social networks. This study evaluates the level of web-based CSR communication by gambling operators which operate in one of the post-communist countries—the Czech Republic (114 companies). It at the same time provides an alternative method of evaluating the level of CSR communication by gambling operators which makes it possible to uncover weaknesses and room for improvement on the part of the gambling operator’s CSR communication practices. The results of the study show that the level of web-based CSR communication of gambling operators operating in the Czech Republic is low, both in comparison with controversial companies and also with non-controversial companies. Economic responsibility activities, responsible gambling and philanthropic responsibility activities are communicated to the greatest extent. On the contrary, ethical responsibility activities are communicated the least.


Corporate social responsibility Web-based communication Gambling operators Responsible gambling Czech Republic 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. Act No. 186/2016 Coll., on Gambling.Google Scholar
  2. Act No. 563/1991 Coll., on Accounting.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, M. F. (2008). Non-financial performance metrics for corporate responsibility reporting revisited. Working Paper. Cranfield: A Doughty Centre for Corporate Responsibility.Google Scholar
  4. Blaszczynski, A., Collins, P., Fong, D., Ladouceur, R., Nower, L., Shaffer, H. J., et al. (2011). Responsible gambling: General principles and minimal requirements. Journal of Gambling Studies, 27(4), 565–573. Scholar
  5. Blaszczynski, A., Ladouceur, R., & Shaffer, H. J. (2004). A science-based framework for responsible gambling: The Reno model. Journal of Gambling Studies, 20(3), 301–317. Scholar
  6. Bosetti, L. (2018). Web-based integrated CSR reporting: An empirical analysis. Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Marketing, 1, 18–38.Google Scholar
  7. Buchholz, R. A., & Rosenthal, S. B. (2005). Toward a contemporary conceptual framework for stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(1–3), 137–148. Scholar
  8. Byrd, J. W., Hickman, K., Baker, C. R., & Cohanier, B. (2017). Corporate social responsibility reporting in controversial industries. SSRN Electronic Journal. Scholar
  9. Cai, Y., Jo, H., & Pan, C. (2011). Doing well while doing bad? CSR in controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(4), 467–480. Scholar
  10. Capriotti, P. (2017). The world wide web and the social media as tools of CSR communication. In S. Diehl, M. Karmasin, B. Mueller, R. Terlutter, & F. Weder (Eds.), Handbook of integrated CSR communication (pp. 193–210). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chamber of Deputies Parliament of the Czech Republic. (2016). Government bill amending Act No. 563/1991 Coll., on Accounting, as amended. Chamber of Deputies Parliament of the Czech Republic. Accessed May 10. 2017.
  12. Chernev, A., & Blair, S. (2015). Doing well by doing good: The benevolent halo of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(6), 1412–1425. Scholar
  13. Clarkson, M. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117. Scholar
  14. COM(2011)681. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A Renewed EU Strategy 2011–14 for Corporate Social Responsibility.Google Scholar
  15. Cortado, F. J., Chalmeta, R., & Ntim, C. G. (2016). Use of social networks as a CSR communication tool. Cogent Business & Management, 3(1), 1–18. Scholar
  16. Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 1–13. Scholar
  17. Deegan, C. (2014). An overview of legitimacy theory as applied within the social and environmental accounting literature. In J. Bebbington, J. Unerman, & B. O’Dwyer (Eds.), Sustainability accounting and accountability (pp. 248–272). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups.Google Scholar
  19. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1998). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. Scholar
  20. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19. Scholar
  21. Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open, 4(1), 1–10. Scholar
  22. Fernandez-Feijoo, B., Romero, S., & Ruiz, S. (2014). Commitment to corporate social responsibility measured through global reporting initiative reporting: Factors affecting the behavior of companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 81, 244–254. Scholar
  23. Gallo, P. J., & Christensen, L. J. (2011). Firm size matters: An empirical investigation of organizational size and ownership on sustainability-related behaviors. Business and Society, 50(2), 315–349. Scholar
  24. Gamerschlag, R., Möller, K., & Verbeeten, F. (2011). Determinants of voluntary CSR disclosure: Empirical evidence from Germany. Review of Managerial Science, 5(2–3), 233–262. Scholar
  25. García, A. A., Arimany-Serrat, N., Salazar, C. U., & Aliberch, A. S. (2016). Web communication of CSR and financial performance: A study of Catalan meat companies. Intangible Capital, 12(2), 391–419. Scholar
  26. Grougiou, V., Dedoulis, E., & Leventis, S. (2016). Corporate social responsibility reporting and organizational stigma: The case of “sin” industries. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 905–914. Scholar
  27. Haefeli, J., Lischer, S., & Schwarz, J. (2011). Early detection items and responsible gambling features for online gambling. International Gambling Studies, 11(3), 273–288. Scholar
  28. Hahn, R., & Kühnen, M. (2013). Determinants of sustainability reporting: A review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 59, 5–21. Scholar
  29. Hing, N. (2001). Changing the odds: A study of corporate social principles and practices in addressing problem gambling. Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 115–144. Scholar
  30. Hing, N. (2003). Principles, processes and practices in responsible provision of gambling: A conceptual discussion. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 7(1), 33–47.Google Scholar
  31. Hing, N., & McKellar, J. (2004). Challenges in responsible provision of gambling: Questions of efficacy, effectiveness and efficiency. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 8(1), 43–58.Google Scholar
  32. Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. Scholar
  33. IPSOS. (2019). IPSOS CSR & Reputation Research. IPSOS. Accessed February 22, 2019.
  34. Jawad, C., & Griffiths, S. (2008). A critical analysis of online gambling websites. Paper presented at the 2008 EBEN-UK annual conference, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  35. Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133. Scholar
  36. Jones, T. M. (1980). Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined. California Management Review, 22(3), 59–67. Scholar
  37. Jones, P., Hillier, D., & Comfort, D. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in the UK gambling industry. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 9(2), 189–201. Scholar
  38. Kang, K. H., Lee, S., & Huh, C. (2010). Impacts of positive and negative corporate social responsibility activities on company performance in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(1), 72–82. Scholar
  39. Khasharmeh, H. A., & Desoky, A. M. (2013). On-line corporate social responsibility disclosures: The case of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Global Review of Accounting and Finance, 4(2), 39–64.Google Scholar
  40. Kilian, T., & Hennigs, N. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and environmental reporting in controversial industries. European Business Review, 26(1), 79–101. Scholar
  41. Kim, J. S., Song, H. J., & Lee, C. K. (2016). Effects of corporate social responsibility and internal marketing on organizational commitment and turnover intentions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 55, 25–32. Scholar
  42. Kolk, A. (2010). Trajectories of sustainability reporting by MNCs. Journal of World Business, 45(4), 367–374. Scholar
  43. Konrad, A., Steurer, R., Langer, M. E., & Martinuzzi, A. (2006). Empirical findings on business–society relations in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 63(1), 89–105. Scholar
  44. KPMG. (2017). The road ahead: The KPMG survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2017. KPMG. Accessed June 10, 2018.
  45. Krippendorf, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Leung, T. C. H., & Gray, R. (2016). Social responsibility disclosure in the international gambling industry: A research note. Meditari Accountancy Research, 24(1), 73–90. Scholar
  47. Loh, C. M., Deegan, C., & Inglis, R. (2014). The changing trends of corporate social and environmental disclosure within the Australian gambling industry. Accounting & Finance, 55(3), 783–823. Scholar
  48. Luo, J. M. (2018). A measurement scale of corporate social responsibility in gambling industry. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 19(4), 460–475. Scholar
  49. Luo, J. M., Lam, C. F., Li, X., & Shen, H. (2016). Corporate social responsibility in Macau’s gambling industry. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 17(3), 237–256. Scholar
  50. Mayer, I. (2015). Qualitative research with a focus on qualitative data analysis. International Journal of Sales, Retailing and Marketing, 4(9), 53–67.Google Scholar
  51. Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Klagenfurt: SSOAR.Google Scholar
  52. Monaghan, S. (2009). Responsible gambling strategies for internet gambling: The theoretical and empirical base of using pop-up messages to encourage self-awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 202–207. Scholar
  53. Morsing, M., & Schultz, M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication: Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 323–338. Scholar
  54. Mravcik, V. (Ed.). (2014). Hazardní hraní v České republice a jeho dopady. Prague: The Government of the Czech Republic.Google Scholar
  55. Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  56. Ong, T., Trireksani, T., & Djajadikerta, H. G. (2016). Hard and soft sustainability disclosures: Australia’s resources industry. Accounting Research Journal, 29(2), 198–217. Scholar
  57. Petera, P., Wagner, J., & Bouckova, M. (2014). An empirical investigation into CSR reporting by the largest companies with their seat in the Czech Republic. Paper presented at the 22nd interdisciplinary information management talks, Poděbrady, CZ.Google Scholar
  58. Reverte, C. (2014). Corporate social responsibility disclosure and market valuation: Evidence from Spanish listed firms. Review of Managerial Science, 10(2), 411–435. Scholar
  59. Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595–612. Scholar
  60. Seele, P., & Lock, I. (2015). Instrumental and/or deliberative? A typology of CSR communication tools. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(2), 401–414. Scholar
  61. Strauss, J. (2015). Communicating CSR in the casino industry: An update. In U. Golob et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd international CSR communication conference (pp. 287–298). Ljubljana, SI: Faculty of Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  62. Sweeney, L., & Coughlan, J. (2008). Do different industries report corporate social responsibility differently? An investigation through the lens of stakeholder theory. Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(2), 113–124. Scholar
  63. Szczepankiewicz, E., & Mućko, P. (2016). CSR reporting practices of Polish energy and mining companies. Sustainability, 8(2), 126. Scholar
  64. Tetrevova, L. (2017). Communication of socially responsible activities by sugar-producing companies. Listy cukrovarnické a řepařské, 133(12), 394–396.Google Scholar
  65. Tetrevova, L. (2018a). Communicating socially responsible activities of chemical companies in the Czech Republic. Chemické listy, 112(2), 122–127.Google Scholar
  66. Tetrevova, L. (2018b). Communicating CSR in high profile industries: Case study of Czech chemical industry. Engineering Economics, 29(4), 478–487. Scholar
  67. Tetrevova, L., Patak, M., & Kyrylenko, I. (2019). Web-based CSR communication in post-communist countries. Applied Economics Letters, 26(10), 866–871. Scholar
  68. Tetrevova, L., Vavra, J., Bednarikova, M., Munzarova, S., & Kostalova, J. (2017). Společenská odpovědnost firem společensky citlivých odvětví [Corporate social responsibility in socially sensitive sectors]. Prague: Grada Publishing.Google Scholar
  69. van Wensen, K., Broer, W., Klein, J., & Knopf, J. (2011). The state of play in sustainability reporting in the EU. Research Study. Accessed February 25, 2019.
  70. Wanderley, L. S. O., Lucian, R., Farache, F., & de Sousa Filho, J. M. (2008). CSR information disclosure on the web: A context-based approach analysing the influence of country of origin and industry sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(2), 369–378. Scholar
  71. Yani-de-Soriano, M., Javed, U., & Yousafzai, S. (2012). Can an industry be socially responsible if its products harm consumers? The case of online gambling. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 481–497. Scholar
  72. Zhang, J., Djajadikerta, H. G., & Trireksani, T. (2018). Determinants of corporate environmental and social disclosures in China: A comparative study within high-profile industries. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting, 10(1), 308–335. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of PardubicePardubiceCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations