Public opinions and attitudes toward a state monopoly: a study of the finnish gambling system.
ATGS
Gambling
Harm Reduction
Monopoly
Public Opinion
Regulation
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 10 2023
16 10 2023
Historique:
received:
08
06
2023
accepted:
06
10
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
17
10
2023
entrez:
16
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Gambling regulated through a state monopoly is often justified for reasons of public health, that is, that monopolies are a more effective means of reducing potential harm. This focus on harm prevention has increased in recent years, particularly as a result of pressures arising from the growth of online gambling and of legislation designed to promote competition. While prior works have examined the role of stakeholders in influencing policy decisions and in public discussions of the monopoly systems, attention has been focused on those with direct financial interests; the opinions of the public have largely been absent from these discussions. In 2017 Finland restructured its monopoly order to improve efficacy of addressing gambling related harms; this restructuring offers a valuable insight into public perceptions of and attitudes toward the suitability of the Finnish system to address gambling-related harm. This work uses Structural Equation Modelling and compares attitudes toward the Finnish system between 2015 (pre-restructuring) and 2019 (post-restructuring). Overall public opinion of the Finnish system as being suitable for addressing gambling harms declined between 2015 and 2019, despite the restructuring. Several predictors of attitudes were identified, however, the majority had small effect sizes, while the model explained little variance. This work concludes that existing approaches to examining public opinions of gambling regulation should be amended to include additional predictors. Furthermore, it is likely that context-specific predictors should be included in models, in order to reflect the socio-cultural history of the population being investigated. Such predictors should be determined in respect to the population of interest but, for example, could include items measuring trust in authority, political orientation, cultural acceptance of gambling, or religious affiliation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Gambling regulated through a state monopoly is often justified for reasons of public health, that is, that monopolies are a more effective means of reducing potential harm. This focus on harm prevention has increased in recent years, particularly as a result of pressures arising from the growth of online gambling and of legislation designed to promote competition. While prior works have examined the role of stakeholders in influencing policy decisions and in public discussions of the monopoly systems, attention has been focused on those with direct financial interests; the opinions of the public have largely been absent from these discussions. In 2017 Finland restructured its monopoly order to improve efficacy of addressing gambling related harms; this restructuring offers a valuable insight into public perceptions of and attitudes toward the suitability of the Finnish system to address gambling-related harm.
METHODS
This work uses Structural Equation Modelling and compares attitudes toward the Finnish system between 2015 (pre-restructuring) and 2019 (post-restructuring).
RESULTS
Overall public opinion of the Finnish system as being suitable for addressing gambling harms declined between 2015 and 2019, despite the restructuring. Several predictors of attitudes were identified, however, the majority had small effect sizes, while the model explained little variance.
CONCLUSION
This work concludes that existing approaches to examining public opinions of gambling regulation should be amended to include additional predictors. Furthermore, it is likely that context-specific predictors should be included in models, in order to reflect the socio-cultural history of the population being investigated. Such predictors should be determined in respect to the population of interest but, for example, could include items measuring trust in authority, political orientation, cultural acceptance of gambling, or religious affiliation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37845653
doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-16917-9
pii: 10.1186/s12889-023-16917-9
pmc: PMC10580558
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2012Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Int J Drug Policy. 2019 Dec;74:223-228
pubmed: 31698164
Harm Reduct J. 2018 Apr 6;15(1):16
pubmed: 29622018
J Public Health (Oxf). 2023 Aug 28;45(3):636-644
pubmed: 37000185
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2015 Jun;49(6):519-39
pubmed: 25735959
Nordisk Alkohol Nark. 2019 Apr;36(2):77-90
pubmed: 32934552
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2022 Dec;46(6):829-834
pubmed: 36190196
Addict Behav. 2015 Jun;45:276-80
pubmed: 25746361
BMC Public Health. 2019 Aug 30;19(1):1198
pubmed: 31470843
Addiction. 2011 Mar;106(3):490-8
pubmed: 21210880
Public Health. 2020 Jul;184:102-106
pubmed: 32591218
Scand J Public Health. 2020 Feb;48(1):80-87
pubmed: 31096858
J Health Commun. 2005 Dec;10(8):681-700
pubmed: 16316933
ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014:304213
pubmed: 25295296
J Gambl Stud. 2016 Mar;32(1):341-61
pubmed: 25722077
Nordisk Alkohol Nark. 2019 Dec;36(6):485-490
pubmed: 32934581
PLoS One. 2021 Aug 26;16(8):e0255145
pubmed: 34437561
Nordisk Alkohol Nark. 2021 Jun;38(3):212-226
pubmed: 35310613
Health Promot Int. 2022 Apr 29;37(2):
pubmed: 34304273