Public Policy and Casino Gambling in Japan - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 19
About This Presentation
Title:

Public Policy and Casino Gambling in Japan

Description:

Director, Salford University Centre for the Study of Gambling and Executive ... Rational: Cogent reasons can be given for all actions and decisions ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:34
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 20
Provided by: peterc128
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Public Policy and Casino Gambling in Japan


1
Public Policy and Casino Gambling in Japan
  • Professor Peter Collins
  • Director, Salford University Centre for the Study
    of Gambling and Executive Director of the South
    African Responsible Gambling Programme
  • Tokyo, Sept 2008

2
Three Questions
  • Do casinos bring greater benefits than costs?
    Sometimes yes, and sometimes, no.
  • Can Japan have a casino industry which brings
    significant economic benefits AND reduces
    negative impacts like crime and addiction? Yes,
    in about two years.
  • How? With strong and intelligent political
    leadership.

3
Overview
  • Who decides?
  • General Policy Background
  • Managing Public Opinion in Advance
  • Democratic Consensus and a Public- Private
    Partnership
  • Minimising the potential negatives, especially
    Problem Gambling
  • Gambling Policy and Problem Gambling
  • Maximising Economic Benefits
  • Thinking about Japan

4
So who should decide (Casino) Gambling Policy?
  • Local Public Opinion
  • Not me and not any other expert whether
    pro-choice or anti-gambling
  • My own commitments commitment to, individual
    freedom honest research sceptical about
    puritanism in relation to all pleasures but
    neutral about gambling as entertainment option,
    provided it is not undertaken engaged in
    addictively or excessively personally find
    gambling much more interesting to study than to
    do
  • Democracy means that government must do not what
    I want but must conform its behaviour to public
    opinion, i.e. what most people think should
    happen
  • But public opinion, especially about gambling, is
    always the amalgam of many different and often
    ambivalent individual opinions

5
General Background
  • In Japan, as elsewhere, consideration of whether
    to legalise large casino projects takes place
    against a background where traditionally gambling
    has been prohibited or severely restricted
  • But has flourished illegally or semi-legally (cp
    UK in 1960s)
  • Regulation comes to be seen as better than
    prohibition
  • Also may be a good way of raising comparatively
    unresented taxes and securing investment in
    tourism-enhancing projects and popular local
    amenities
  • Casino may deliver exceptional economic benefits
    in relation to tourism and regeneration
  • People think governments should not interfere
    with individuals private choices providing others
    are not harmed
  • But they may think the negative social impacts
    will outweigh any benefits
  • Thus, especially, big casinos always generate the
    most passion both for and against precisely
    because they are very big and highly visible and
    it is thought (rightly) that, depending on how
    well or badly they are introduced, licensed,
    taxed and regulated, their positive and negative
    impacts will both be correspondingly large and
    visible.

6
How is Public Opinion Composed?
  • Most people wont have strong views either way
    (more important things to worry about)
  • Two groups will have strong opinions against
    those with moral objections to all legal gambling
    and those would face commercial competition from
    new casinos
  • Two groups will have strong opinions pro those
    who want to build and operate casinos and the
    local communities who will most benefit from the
    economic development benefits
  • Whatever government decides it must
  • - expect controversy
  • - master the relevant evidence and argument on
    both sides
  • - secure public approval in advance (cp
    Singapore and contrast UK)

7
A Typical Democratic Consensus
  • Some casino gambling but not too much
  • No prohibition but no free market either
  • High prize machines in casinos only
  • Small number of large rather than large number of
    small casinos
  • Eliminate or minimise all negative impacts,
    including crime, sleaze, addiction and unfair
    displacement
  • Attractive amenities
  • Economic benefits to non-gamblers/communities as
    wholes

8
Public-Private Partnership
  • Common interest by government and industry in
  • Stable and profitable industry (bulk of revenues
    typically go to governments rather than
    share-holders
  • Regarded by public as providing harmless
    entertainment responsibly and funding good causes
    not exploiting human frailty to maximise
    profits and taxes
  • NB profits and taxes depend on public opinion and
    public opinion is most shaped by perceptions of
    the problem gambling issue

9
CRIME
  • Crime is not a a problem
  • Prohibition brings crime
  • Casinos are extra safe because casino operators
    protect patrons
  • Casinos do not launder or promote sale of drugs
    because their license is too valuable

10
Problem Gambling Policy
  • Most people (95) gamble harmlessly less than 1
    are addicted a further 4 periodically get into
    some level of trouble
  • Gambling is risky in proportion as the action is
    continuous the price of playing time high
    gambling is unplanned gamblers play is driven
    by false beliefs
  • People who set sensible limits and stick to them
    do not get into trouble
  • All this (and more) can be achieved by smart
    cards which allow for monitoring of wins and
    losses and setting limits to both

11
A National Responsible Gambling Programme
  • A National Responsible Gambling Programme should
    be instituted, funded by industry, independently
    supervised, accountable to government
  • It should fund
  • - free, confidential and expert treatment by
    phone, internet and face-to-face
  • - public awareness campaigns about the dangers
    of gambling and how to avoid them
  • - research which will improve the work of
    prevention, treatment and regulation regarding
    problem gambling.

12
Economic Benefits
  • Consumer surplus
  • Unresented taxation
  • Attracting gambling tourists
  • Enhancing tourism product through funding of
    non-gambling infrastructure and attractions from
    gambling profits
  • Preventing gambling spend by locals from going
    abroad
  • Funding non-gambling amenities for locals
  • Redistributing from richer to poorer

13
Capturing Abnormal Profits
  • Restriction of supply consumers willingness to
    pay more than total cost of supply abnormal
    profits (economic rents, monopoly or
    oligopoly profits)
  • Can be captured for the public good by
  • - gambling privilege taxes (Europe)
  • - auctioning the licence (Australia)
  • - competitive tendering (Singapore)
  • - combination of above (South Africa)
  • Harnessing the Creativity of the Private Sector

14
Calculating the Value of the Licence
  • Estimate Gross Gambling Revenues (money staked
    less money paid out in prizes) over a given
    period (say, ten years)
  • Deduct tax
  • Deduct required return on investment (cost of
    capital) higher for casinos because of higher
    (mainly political) risks
  • Calculate total capex which can be supported by
    these revenues
  • Deduct cost of generating revenues
  • Remainder money available to secure licence

15
What are costs of generating gambling revenues
  • Land best on publicly owned sites
  • Building core casino parking minimum food
    and beverage
  • Furnishings and furbishings
  • Equipment, including gambling and surveillance
    equipment
  • Pre-opening costs bid costs, advertising etc
  • Usually these total about half of one years
    anticipated GGR

16
The Competitive Tendering Process
  • Avoid litigation and corruption by establishing a
    process which is
  • Transparent advance knowledge of procedures and
    criteria
  • Fair all bidders treated impartially and equally
  • Rational Cogent reasons can be given for all
    actions and decisions
  • Demonstrably in the public interest

17
Criteria
  • Qualified in terms of probity, competence and
    resources
  • Overall attractiveness of buildings
  • Genuineness of Concern for Social responsibility
    (not lip service)
  • Value of bid in relation to anticipated
    revenues
  • Value of Commercial Add-ons (e.g. hotel)
  • Value of subsidised add-ons (e.g. conference
    centre, must-see attraction, transport upgrade
    etc)

18
Specific Considerations Concerning Japan
  • Crucial importance of developments in China
  • Options for policy on Pachinko and other
    convenience gambling opportunities protect
    restrict or prohibit expose to market forces
  • Be clear about objectives tourism, regeneration,
    other

19
Thank You
  • Contact Details
  • p.collins_at_salford.ac.uk
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com