英语论文网

Abstract
     During the 1990s, states embraced legalised gambling as ameans of supplementing state revenue. But gamingmachines (EGMs,pokies, VLTs, Slots) have become increasingly controversial in countries such as Australia, Canada and New Zealand, whichexperienced unprecedented roll-out of gaming machines in casino and community settings; alongside revenue windfalls for bothgovernments and the gambling industry. Governments have recognised that gambling results in a range of social and economicharms and, similar to tobacco and alcohol, have introduced public policies predicated on harm minimisation. Yet despite these,gaming losses have continued to climb in most jurisdictions, along with concerns about gambling-related harms. The first part ofthis article discusses an emerging debate in Ontario Canada, that draws parallels between host responsibility in alcohol andgambling venues. In Canada, where government owns and operates the gaming industry, this debate prompts important questions onthe role of the state, duty of care and regulation ‘in the public interest’ and on CSR, host responsibility and consumer protection.This prompts the question: Do governments owe a duty of care to gamblers?The article then discusses three domains of accumulating research evidence to inform questions raised in the Ontario debate:evidence that visible behavioural indicators can be used with high confidence to identify problem gamblers on-site in venues as theygamble; new systems using player tracking and loyalty data that can provide management with high precision identification ofproblem gamblers and associated risk (for protective interventions); and research on technological design features of newgeneration gaming products in interaction with players, that shows how EGM machines can be the site for monitoring/protectingplayers. We then canvass some leading international jurisdictions on gambling policy CSR and consumer protection.In light of this new research, we ask whether the risk of legal liability poses a tipping point for more interventionist public policyresponses by both the state and industry. This includes a proactive role for the state in re-regulating the gambling industry/products;instituting new forms of gaming machine product control/protection; and reinforcing corporate social responsibility (CSR) and hostresponsibility obligations on gambling providers – beyond self-regulatory codes. We argue the ground is shifting, there is newevidence to inform public policy and government regulation and there are new pressures on gambling providers and regulators toavail themselves of the new technology – or risk litigation.

留学生论文https://www.51lunwen.org/
1. Is gambling harmful?
2. The Ontario host responsibility duty of care debate and corporate social responsibility of gambling
industry
3. Research on identifying problem gamblers on-site in venues
4. Using loyalty player tracking CMS data systems to provide management with high confidence
identification of problem gamblers using new software to track and analyse player behaviour
5. Research on harm/protection dimensions of EGM machines
6. Globalisation and gambling harms –the international evidence
7. Conclusion

Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the feedback provided by anonymous referees. Linda Hancock would like to thank theDalhousie University Faculty of Management for its hospitality during a recent sabbatical 本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。