Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gambling and Doing Good? On the Relationship Between Gambling Regulations and Welfare Services in Germany

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Gambling Policies in European Welfare States

Part of the book series: Work and Welfare in Europe ((RECOWE))

Abstract

If we accept that it is the duty of the state to protect its citizens, we also need to find ways of dealing with gambling. The German case shows how the regulator abstains from finding adequate gambling regulations. The way in which the German regulators deal with gambling reveals that they apply double standards. The chapter identifies a coalitional equilibrium between the state and gambling beneficiaries which explains institutional inertia and the contradictory behaviour of political actors. Upholding the argument of ‘doing something good’ and backed by powerful actors, the state monopoly for lotteries will possibly survive in the future. The coalitional equilibrium in the different spheres of the gambling market stabilises a powerful actor network and dependencies rather than constraints due to gambler’s protection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adam, C. (2015). Glücksspiel: Sportwetten am Wendepunkt [Gambling: Sport bets at the turning point]. In C. Knill, S. Heichel, C. Preidel, & K. Nebel (Eds.), Moralpolitik in Deutschland: Staatliche Regulierung gesellschaftlicher Wertekonflikte im historischen und internationalen Vergleich [Moralpolitics in Germany: Governmental regulation of value conflicts in society in historic and international comparison] (pp. 185–202). Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T. (2015). Warum scheitert die Regulierung des Glücksspielmarktes? [Why does gambling regulation fail?]. Zeitschrift für Wett- und Glücksspielrecht, 10(6), 410–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckert, J., & Lutter, M. (2008). Die Verteilungswirkungen des Lottos in Deutschland [Distribution effects of state lotteries in Germany]. Zeitschrift für Wett- und Glücksspielrecht, 5, 315–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • BVerfG, 1 BvR 1054/01, 28.03.2006, Paragraph 120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calliess, C. (2006). Schutzpflichten [Duties to protect]. In D. Merten & H.-J. Papier (Eds.), Handbuch der Grundrechte in Deutschland und Europa [Handbook of fundamental rights in Germany and Europe] (Vol. 2, pp. 963–992). Heidelberg: C.F. Müller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capoccia, G. (2016). When do institutions “bite”? Historical institutionalism and the politics of institutional change. Comparative Political Studies, 49(8), 1095–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Case C-46/08, Carmen Media Group. Judgment of 2010, August 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Case 8 B 1028/15. Hessischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof [Upper Administrative Court of Hessie]. 2015, October 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daumann, F., & Breuer, M. (2008). Zur Neuordnung des Lotteriemarktes in Deutschland [Reorganization of lotteries in Germany]. ORDO Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, 59, 287–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Des Laffey, V. D. S., & Laffey, K. (2016). Patriot games: The regulation of online gambling in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(10), 1425–1441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutscher Caritasverband. (2010). Stellungnahme des Deutschen Caritasverbandes zur strukturierten Anhörung zum Thema “Zukunft des Glücksspielwesens in Deutschland” [Comment of the German Caritasverband on the consultation about the “Future of the gambling industry in Germany”]. Freiburg im Breisgau: Deutscher Caritasverband.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diakonie. (2010). Stellungnahme des Diakonischen Werkes der EKD zur strukturierten Anhörung zum Thema “Zukunft des Glücksspielwesens in Deutschland” [Comment of the Diakonie on the consultation about the “Future of the gambling industry in Germany”]. Berlin: Diakonie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dombau-Verein Minden. (2015). Dombau-Verein Minden unterstützt Fortbestand des Lotto-Prinzips [Association (church-related) supports the continuity of the lottery monopole]. Retrieved from www.dombauverein-minden.de. Accessed on 1 May 2017.

  • Dörr, O. (2010). Das Verbot gewerblicher Internetvermittlung von Lotto auf dem Prüfstand der EG-Grundfreiheiten [The prohibition of commercial online lotteries being tested with regard to the fundamental freedoms of the EC internal market]. Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt, 125(1), 69–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glöckner, A., & Towfigh, E. (2010). Geschicktes Glücksspiel. Die Sportwette als Grenzfall des Glücksspielrechts [Lucky gambling. Sport bets as edge case of gambling law]. Juristenzeitung, 65(21), 1027–1035.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glücksspielaufsichtsbehörden der Länder. (2016). Jahresreport 2015 der Glücksspielaufsichtsbehörden der Länder. Der deutsche Glücksspielmarkt 2015 - Eine ökonomische Darstellung [Annual report of the German regulation authorities: The German gambling market 2015].

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. (1996). Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haltern, U. (2016). Soziokulturelle Präferenzen als Grenze des Marktes [Socio-cultural preferences as limits of the market]. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handelsblatt Research Institute. (2017). Der Glücksspielmarkt in Deutschland. Eine volkswirtschaftliche Betrachtung [The gambling market in Germany: A macro-economic view]. Retrieved from http://research.handelsblatt.com/assets/uploads/Glücksspiel_Studie1_010417.pdf. Accessed on 1 May 2017.

  • Haß, W., & Lang, P. (2016). Glücksspielverhalten und Glücksspielsucht in Deutschland. Ergebnisse des Surveys 2015 und Trends [Gambling behaviour and pathological gambling in Germany: Results and trends from the survey 2015]. Forschungsbericht der BZgA. Köln: Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchhof, G. (2015). Das Glücksspielkollegium - eine verfassungswidrige Kooperation zwischen den Ländern [The Gambling council—A unconstitutional cooperation of federal states]. Retrieved from https://gluecksspiel.uni-hohenheim.de/fileadmin/einrichtungen/gluecksspiel/Regulierung/Gutachten_Kirchhof_2015.pdf. Accessed on 1 May 2017.

  • Kuske, T., & Timmann, P. (2015). Studie: Expansion der Spielhallen ausgebremst [Report: Growth of gamling halls thwarted]. Eur.Activ.de—Yellow Paper: Glücksspiel & Verbraucherschutz. Regulierung vor neuen Herausforderungen, 10–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law 284–287, of November 13th 1998, German Criminal Code.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littler, A. (2011). Member States versus the European Union. The regulation of gambling. Leiden and Boston: Marinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Münsteraner Erklärung. (2015). Erklärung eines Zusammenschlusses aus Stiftungen und Wohlfahrtsorganisationen [Declaration of Foundations and Welfare Organisations in order to lobby the lottery monopole]. Deutschland. Retrieved from http://www.nrw-stiftung.de/download/2015_muensteranererklaerung.pdf. Accessed on 1 May 2017.

  • Rombach, G. (2008). Zur Lotteriegeschichte [On the history of lottery]. In I. Gebhardt & S. M. Grüsser-Sinopoli (Eds.), Glücksspiel in Deutschland: Ökonomie, Recht, Spielsucht [Gambling in Germany: Economy, law and pathologic gambling] (pp. 11–29). Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Declaration of conflicts of interest

I declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fernuniversität in Hagen (Institute for Political Science), Hagen, Germany

    Kathrin Loer

Authors
  1. Kathrin Loer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathrin Loer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Research on Addiction, Control and Governance (CEACG), Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki , Helsinki, Finland

    Michael Egerer

  2. Centre for Research on Addiction, Control and Governance (CEACG), Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki , Helsinki, Finland

    Virve Marionneau

  3. Centre for Research on Addiction, Control and Governance (CEACG), Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki , Helsinki, Finland

    Janne Nikkinen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Loer, K. (2018). Gambling and Doing Good? On the Relationship Between Gambling Regulations and Welfare Services in Germany. In: Egerer, M., Marionneau, V., Nikkinen, J. (eds) Gambling Policies in European Welfare States . Work and Welfare in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90620-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90620-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90619-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90620-1

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation