Online gambling is a profitable industry both in the regulated market and in the unregulated offshore market. Difficulties in regulating the offshore online markets are exacerbated by concerns over lacking consumer protection measures in offshore environments and reduced financial and tax revenue from gambling. Blocking is a measure employed by numerous regulators to prevent access or financial transactions to unregulated gambling sites. Yet, little is known about how well such strategies work. The current scoping review focuses on evidence on the effectiveness of blocking measures. Based on the review, 14 publications were identified. The analysis focused on four themes: implementation, effectiveness, risks, and alternatives. Results show that there is a paucity of empirical research on the effectiveness of blocking measures. The scarce evidence suggests that the effectiveness of blocking measures depends on implementation. Blocking without proper implementation may be an insufficient and disproportionate tool. The effectiveness of blocking is particularly limited by a constant need for updates in terms of technology and blocklists. We argue that research on and the effectiveness of blocking measures is obstructed by an asymmetry in expertise in three dimensions: Between regulators and industry; between ordinary and heavy gamblers; and between gambling and IT researchers.
KEYWORDS: Gamblingonlineblockingoffshorescoping review
Previous article
View latest articles
Next article
Introduction
The online gambling market is rapidly growing. Expansion and introduction of licensing regimes, as well as the boost of online sales in some contexts during COVID-19 have contributed to the growth (Brodeur et al., Citation2021; S. M. Gainsbury et al., Citation2018). The compound annual growth rate of global gambling markets is estimated at over 11% for 2022–2027 (Mordor Intelligence, Citation2021). In 2023, the global online gambling market is estimated to reach 92.9 billion U.S. dollars (Statista, Citation2022). Following recent developments in opening online sports betting markets, North America is currently the fastest growing market for online gambling (Mordor Intelligence, Citation2021). Sports betting can be characterized as a driver of growth in the online gambling market (Nosal, Citation2022). In Europe, online channels are already estimated to make up about one-quarter of all gambling (EGBA, Citation2021), but the share of online channels can reach up to 60% in some European countries, such as Sweden and Denmark (EGBA, Citation2021).
The regulation of online gambling is complicated by the supranational nature of online environments. Online gambling shares many of the characteristics of land-based products, but regulation also needs to take into account online-specific questions related to issues, such as availability, accessibility, data protection, geographical reach, or emerging technologies (Fiedler, Citation2018; Sulkunen et al., Citation2019; Hörnle et al., Citation2018; Laffey et al., Citation2016). Offshore offer of gambling further complicates the regulatory approaches of jurisdictions. Offshore gambling refers to online gambling on websites that are not regulated or is illegal in the jurisdiction of the gambler (cf. Gainsbury et al., Citation2018). A large proportion of online gambling takes place in offshore websites, out of reach of national regulation. In Europe, the offshore market was estimated to be around 17% of the total gambling market in 2021 (EGBA, Citation2021). The importance of offshore markets varies depending on regulatory choices. In tightly regulated monopoly systems, such as Norway, Finland, or Québec, the share of offshore markets is already estimated to make up the bulk of online markets for some products (Nikkinen & Marionneau, Citation2020; Kairouz et al., Citation2018). Under licensing regimes, the share of offshore provision may also be important particularly for unregulated products (Fiedler, Citation2018).
Offshore gambling is highly challenging to regulate and prevent, as it is geographically located beyond the reach of national regulators. A variety of tools have been tested to control non-regulated offer. A recent report to the European Commission on the regulation of offshore online gambling (Hörnle et al., Citation2018) showed that blocking approaches, alongside restrictions on advertisement, were amongst the most used by national regulators. According to the report, 60% of EU/EEA Member States used website blocking while 30% had implemented payment blocking mechanisms. Blocking measures are also used elsewhere. For example, in Australia, the Australian Communications and Media Authority can ask service providers to block access to unauthorized gambling websites (ACMA, Citation2022). In Canada, Québec was the first province to introduce a website blocking scheme in 2015, but the provision was struck down in the Superior Court in 2018 as unconstitutional (French et al., Citation2021).
Blocking measures can take different forms. Website blocking refers to a practice where internet users trying to access unauthorized gambling websites are prevented access. Users are often redirected to landing pages informing them of the illegal nature of the offer (Hörnle et al., Citation2018). Payment blocking refers to targeting payments made to gambling websites, payments from gambling websites, or requests made to payment intermediaries to make their services unavailable (Hörnle et al., Citation2018). In other usage, blocking may also refer to software to block a user’s access to gambling apps and websites (Brownlow, Citation2021). However, these do not target offshore provision but can rather be used as tools for gambler auto-regulation and self-exclusion and are thus not part of this review.
The EU-level policy review conducted by Hörnle et al. (Citation2018) has thus far been the only review study on blocking policies. However, the focus of the study was on practical implementation within Europe only. There has not been a review available on global research on blocking, including how these measures are implemented in practice, and how functional or effective blocking measures have been. In the current study, we address these questions by conducting a scoping review on the research literature on the blocking of websites and of payment services.
Material and methods
Blocking is widely used by regulators. In the current scoping review, we mapped what research evidence is available on blocking, and what are the main findings (Grant & Booth, Citation2009). The main research question guiding the review was what different forms of website and payment blocking are used and how these are implemented.
We conducted a literature search using the search string ‘gambling AND online AND block*’ in four scientific databases: Google Scholar, Scopus, ProQuest, and EBSCOhost (Table 1). Our inclusion criteria included literature addressing the effectiveness and implementation challenges of online gambling blocking measures by regulators. This excluded literature on individual use of blocking programs or applications to prevent the use of gambling websites or applications. In addition, we only included studies that focused mainly on blocking measures. We therefore excluded studies that merely mentioned blocking, such as more generic studies on online gambling regulation. As our interest was mainly in the effectiveness of blocking measures, we included only original empirical work and case studies. We therefore excluded discussion, opinion, and review papers. We did not set any limits on the publication years or geographical contexts of studies. For practical reasons, we excluded literature not available through the University of Helsinki Library services.