Skip to main content

Implementing a Social Responsibility Agenda in the Regulation of Gambling in Great Britain

  • Chapter
Problem Gambling
  • 347 Accesses

Abstract

Chapter 7 set out some central elements concerning the regulation of commercial gambling facilities in Great Britain. In this chapter, the focus turns to a core feature of the Gambling Act 2005 and of the Gambling Commission’s responsibilities: the promotion and implementation of a social responsibility agenda in the provision of those facilities. The narrative also remarks on the National Lottery Commission’s (NLC) particular responsibilities concerning underage participation in the Lottery. The chapter comprises four sections. The first asks what the NLC and the Gambling Commission (which, as was noted in Chapter 7 has assumed overall responsibility for the NLC, which continues to be the Lottery’s regulator) understand by social responsibility and gives some examples of their approach to the provision of the gambling products that they regulate, in particular concerning underage and remote gambling. The second section analyses the institutional arrangements recognised by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) to formulate a responsible gambling strategy (the Responsible Gambling Strategy Board (RGSB)) and to fund its implementation, while the third comprises a resume of the work undertaken by the RGSB and the commissioning bodies over the past three years. The narrative remarks on both the tensions that inevitably arise when gambling operators see regulatory ambitions concerning a social responsibility agenda as commercially onerous and the positive features of the new relationship between the institutions charged with driving that agenda forward.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abbott, M., Volberg, R., Bellringer, M. & Reith, G. (2004). A review of research on aspects of problem gambling. Final Report to the Responsibility in Gambling Tmst. Gambling Research Centre, Auckland University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, P. (2008). Gambling, freedom and democracy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, P. (2011). Ways in which gambling researchers receive funding from gambling industry sources. International Gambling Studies, 11, 145–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association of British Bookmakers. (2013). The ABB’s code for responsible gambling and player protection in licensed betting offices in Great Britain (September 2013). Retrieved 9 December 2013 from http://bylb.iceni.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/ 10/ABB-code-for-responsible-gambling.pdf.

  • Australian Productivity Commission. (2010). Gambling. Inquiry Report (2 volumes). Report No. 1 (23 June 2010). Canberra: Australian Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkharn, M. & Mellor-Clark, J. (2003). Bridging evidence-based practice and practice-based evidence: Developing a rigorous and relevant knowledge for the psychological therapies. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 10, 319–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, R. (2013). Partial convergence: Social gaming and real-money gambling. In R. Cassidy, A. Pisac & C. Loussouarn (Eds.), Qualitative research in gambling (pp. 74–91). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • DCMS. (2001). Gambling Review Report (2001, Cm 5206; Chairman, Sir Alan Budd).

    Google Scholar 

  • DCMS. (2008). Proposal to introduce a levy under section 123 of the Gambling Act 2005: Consultation document (January 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • DCMS. (2011). Memorandum to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee on the Post-Legislative Assessment of the Gambling Act 2005. (Cm 8188, October 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • DCMS. (2012). Draft Gambling (Licensing & Advertising) Bill (Cm 8497, December 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • DCMS. (2013a). Government Response to the Select Committee Report: The Gambling Act 2005: A bet worth taking? (Cm 8351, 15 January 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • DCMS. (2013b). Gambling Act 2005: Triennial review of gaming machine stake and prize limits: Proposals for changes to maximum stake and prize limits for Category B, C and D gaming machines (15 January 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • DCMS. (2013c). Gambling Act 2005: Triennial review of gaming machine stake and prize limits: Government response to consultation on proposals for changes to maximum stake and prize limits for Category B, C and D gaming machines (October 2013). Retrieved 9 December 2013 from https://www.gov.uk/governrnent/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/73077/Con_Doc_Triennial_review.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • DCMS. (2014). Gambling Protections and Controls (April 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • Delfabbro, P., King, L. & Griffiths, M. (2012). Behavioural profiling of problem gamblers: a summary and review. International Gambling Studies, 12, 349–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Disley, E., Pollitt, A., Culley, D. M. & Rubin, J. (2011). Map the gap: A critical review of the literature on gambling-related harm. RAND Europe. Sponsored by the Responsible Gambling Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emond, A., Doerner, R. & Griffiths, M. (2011). Avon longitudinal study of parents and children (ALSPAC): Gambling behaviour in adolescents aged 17 years. Final Report to the Responsible Gambling Fund. Centre for Child and Adolescent Health, Bristol.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011). On on-line gambling in the Internal Market. Sec (2011) 321 final, Brussels, 24 March 2011, Corn (2011) 128 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2012). Towards a comprehensive European framework for online gambling. Strasbourg, 23 October 2012, Corn (2012) 345 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Committee for Standardization. (2011). Responsible remote gambling measures CWA 16259: 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gainsbury, S. & Wood, R. (2012). Online clinical support for people with gambling problems. In R. Williams, R. Wood & J. Parke (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of Internet gambling (pp. 250–267). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2008). Review of research, education and treatment: Final report and recommendations (October 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2009a). Annual report and accounts 2008/09 (HC 701, July 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2009b). Remote gambling and software technical standards (August 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2011a). Licence conditions and codes of practice (consolidated version) (December 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2011b). Annual report and accounts 2010/11 (HC 1115, July 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2012b). What to look for when gambling online. Retrieved 27 February 2014 from http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/pdf/what%20to%201ook%20out%20for%20when%20gambling%20online%20-%20november%202008.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2012c). Annual Report and Accounts 2011/12 (HC 253, 3 July 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2012d). New arrangements for prioritising, commissioning, funding and evaluating research, education and treatment: Statement of intent (August 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2013a). Proposed amendments to licence conditions and codes ofpractice for all operators (LCCP) Consultation Document (September 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2013b). Gambling codes of practice: Consolidated for all forms ofgambling (March 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2013c). Industry statistics April 2009 to March 2013 (November 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambling Commission. (2013d). Letter to Rt Hon Maria Miller re Triennial advice (20 June 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. (2012). Internet gambling, player protection, and social responsibility. In R. Williams, R. Wood & J. Parke (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of Internetgambling (pp. 227–249). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M., Derevensky, J. & Parke, J. (2012). Online gambling and youth: Cause for concern? In R. Williams, R. Wood & J. Parke (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of Internet gambling (pp. 183–199). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons. (2012). The Gambling Act 2005: A bet worth taking? Culture, Media and Sport Committee: First Report of Session 2012–12, HC 421 (24 July 2012), Volume I.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hugel, P. & Kelly, J. (2002). Internet gambling, credit cards and money laundering. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 6, 57–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husain, F., Wardle, H., Kenny, T., Balarajan, M. & Collins, D. (2013). Examining machine player behaviour: A qualitative exploration. Prepared for the Responsible Gambling Trust. London: National Centre for Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ipsos MORI. (2013). Young People Omnibus 2013: A research study among 11–16 year-olds on behalf of the National Lottery Commission (September 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladouceur, R., Blaszczynski, A. & Lalande, D. (2012). Pre-commitment in gambling: A review of the empirical evidence. International Gambling Studies, 12, 215–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaPlante, D., Nelson, E., LaBrie, R. & Shaffer, H. (2012). The bwin.party division on addiction research collaborative: Challenges for the “normal science” of Internet gambling. In R. Williams, R. Wood & J. Parke (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of Internet gambling (pp. 161–179). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesieur, H. & Rosenthal, M. (1991). Pathological gambling: A review of the literature (prepared for the American Psychiatric Association Task Force on DSM-IV Committee on disorders of impulse control not elsewhere classified). Journal of Gambling Studies, 7, 5–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindgreen, A. & Swaen, V. (2010). Corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May-Chahal, C., Wilson, A., Anderson, J. & Humphries, L. (2011). OffGam: An evidence informed approach to addressing problem gambling in prison populations. Final Report to the Responsible Gambling Fund. University of Lancaster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miers, D. (2004). Regulating commercial gambling: Past, present and future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miers, D. (2008). Gambling in Great Britain: Implementing a social responsibility agenda. Gaming Law Review, 12, 585–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miers, D. (2013). The relationship between the regulatory environment governing commercial gambling and the shape of the market in the supply and game parameters of gaming machines. The Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 7, 55–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moodie, C. & Reith, G. (2009). Responsible gambling signage on electronic gaming machines, before and after the implementation of the United Kingdom Gambling Act: An observational study. International Gambling Studies, 9, 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Casino Forum. (2013). Playing safe: Responsible gambling: Our statement of principles.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Lottery Commission. (2008). Consultation on the use of gaming and betting themes on National Lottery scratchcards (15th May 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • National Lottery Commission. (2009). National Lottery Scratchcard Games Licence (November 2009; varied with consent from 1st June 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • National Lottery Commission. (2011). Response to the findings of the 2011 Ipsos MORI Young People Omnibus. Retrieved 28 September 2011 from www.natlotcomm.gov.uk/publications-and-research/research-programme/underage-play/ipsos-mori-young-people-omnibus-2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Lottery Commission. (2012). Licence to Operate the Lottery (Section 5 Licence). www.natlotcomm.gov.uk/assets-uploaded/documents/amended-licence-042012_1334591538.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orford, J. (2011). An unsafe bet: The dangerous rise of gambling and the debate we should be having. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orford, J., Wardle, H. & Griffiths, M. (2013). What proportion of gambling is problem gambling? Estimates from the 2010 British Gambling Prevalence Survey. International Gambling Studies, 13, 4–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Overington, L. & Ionita, G. (2012). Progress monitoring measures: A brief guide. Canadian Psychology, 53, 82–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parke, J., Parke, A., Rigbye, J., Suhonen, N. & Vaughan-Williams, L. (2012). The eCOGRA global online gambling report. In R. Williams, R. Wood & J. Parke (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of Internetgambling (pp. 140–160). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Responsible Gambling Fund. (2011a). Responsible Gambling Fund submission to the select committee inquiry into the Gambling Act 2005 (June 2011); see http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/croselect/cmcumeds/421/421vw36.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Responsible Gambling Fund. (2011b). Responsible Gambling fund supplementary submission to the select committee inquiry into the Gambling Act 2005 (October 2011); see http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmcumeds/421/421vw58.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • RGSB. (2009). Responsible Gambling Strategy Board. Research, education and treatment: Initial strategy and priorities (October 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • RGSB. (2010). Responsible Gambling Strategy Board. Strategy2010 (October 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • RGSB. (2011). Responsible Gambling Strategy Board. Strategy2011 (November 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • RGSB. (2012). Responsible Gambling Strategy Board. Strategy2013–14 to 2015–16 (December 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • RGSB. (2013). RGSB advice to the Commission on the Triennial Review consultation (June 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, L., Hinchcliffe, S. & Sharpe, C. (2012). The Scottish health survey. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wardle, H., Keily, R., Thurstain-Goodwin, M. & Astbury, G. (2011a). Mapping the social and economic characteristics of high density gaming machines. Prepared by Geofutures and NatCen for the Responsible Gambling Fund and the Responsible Gambling Strategy Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wardle, H., Moody, A., Spence, S., Orford, J., Volberg, R., Jotangia, D., Griffiths, M. & Dobbie, R. (2011b). British gambling prevalence survey 2010. London: National Centre for Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wardle, H., Seabury, C., Ahmed, H. & Coshall, C. (2013). Scoping the coping use of industry data on Category B gaming machines. Prepared for the Responsible Gambling Trust. London: National Centre for Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R., Wood, R. & Parke, J. (2012). History, current issues and concerns. In R. Williams, R. Wood & J. Parke (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of Internetgambling (pp. 3–25). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, R. & Williams, R. (2012). The Casino City study: A large-scale international study of online gamblers. In R. Williams, R. Wood & J. Parke (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of Internet gambling (pp. 103–125). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2014 David Miers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Miers, D. (2014). Implementing a Social Responsibility Agenda in the Regulation of Gambling in Great Britain. In: Gobet, F., Schiller, M. (eds) Problem Gambling. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137272423_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics