November 2011: We’re delighted to see the publication of Geofutures’ research for the Responsible Gambling Fund, in collaboration with the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen).
The results were featured in the Observer this weekend (though sadly our namecheck hit the cutting room floor – an error we have asked them to correct).
The study found that areas of Great Britain with the highest densities of gambling machines were on average poorer than the rest of the country, with higher levels of economic inactivity, low-status occupations and both the youngest and oldest sections of the adult population.
Geofutures mapped zones surrounding all venues licensed to offer gambling machines, weighted them according to industry information on the number of machines per venue, and then used a statistical distribution to define what constitutes ‘high’ density – more than 1 machine per hectare. The results were then used to characterise the highest density zones according to census-led economic and social data on their local populations.
The research was timely, as debate continued on the growing presence of bookmakers’ shops on the high street including comments by Harriet Harman, but it will have wider application in informing future research on the potential for gambling harm.
The benefits of mapping and spatial analysis in simply defining where the most machines are found were noted by all those involved: this is baseline evidence which has been lacking so far, and there’s nothing like a map for revealing what’s going on and where.
The gambling industry is regularly accused of targeting poorer populations, and robustly refutes this claim. The machines research does address this question directly, but together with the headline results, it suggests a more complex picture.
Bookmakers’ shops are highly visible and host higher-stakes machines but these are limited to four per shop, so in terms of absolute machines numbers they are not contributing greatly to the densities found.
Many low-income areas have low machine densities, and the greatest clusters were found in suburban centres, ‘satellite’ towns outside major cities, New Towns and in many of the expected tourist locations by the coast, though not all.
Understanding the significance of these findings for gambling regulation will need deeper insights. It’s likely that a lack of alternative leisure amenities will increase the presence of machine arcades in less vibrant locations, but this may reflect long-term economic issues which would need addressing alongside any direct changes to gambling regulation.
Our thanks go to all involved in a stimulating and worthwhile project.
See the NatCen and Geofutures press release here with accompanying FAQs:
18 Nov 2011 press release: Geofutures and NatCen gambling machines research for RGF/RGSB
18 Nov 2011 FAQs Geofutures and NatCen Machines research report
