WOMEN'S PARTICIPATION IN GAMBLING: WHOSE REALITY?

A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE

PHILLIDA BUNKLE AND JOHN LEPPER*

Presentation to

European Association for the Study of Gambling Conference,

Barcelona,

October 2002.

THE PROBLEMATIC

Experience suggests that there is a rapidly changing pattern of women's gambling and that this is associated with the perceived 'normalization' of gambling and proliferation of machine gambling, particularly into accessible neighborhood sites. Experience also suggests that ethnicity is a crucial variable, and that the change has been greatest among indigenous, Pacific Islands and Asian women.

These observations are not, however, consistently endorsed by existing research. There are a number of perspectives on machine gambling. Each has its own way of portraying the phenomenon and each perspective is to some extent incompatible.

We explore the situation by asking some simple questions about women gambling in New Zealand and looking for answers to them in the available research. We find that it is hard to obtain reliable answers to these straightforward questions. We also find that the alternative answers, where they at least partially exist, are often contradictory.

We argue that a key perspective is missing from the question of women's participation in gambling; namely, the views and experiences of the women themselves. When one observes women gambling a number of new questions require answer. Answers to these questions require detailed socio-economic research and form the basis of a public health approach to gambling policy.

I. QUANTITATIVE MEASURES OF WOMEN'S GAMBLING

There are three main sources of quantitative information on gambling in New Zealand. First, there are tax and licensing data collected by government. Second research data has been commissioned by the government measuring prevalence, and third, data are collected by treatment providers.

These sources assume that for most people gambling is a benign activity but for a small minority it has every appearance of mental illness. This pathological perspective means that many of the wider issues surrounding gambling are missing from view. It also means that the data collected are not necessarily consistent with observed social reality. These points are illustrated by interrogating the available data to see if they can yield reliable information about the nature of women gambling.

How Much Gambling?

Official government figures show a very rapid rise in the supply of gambling products, including casinos, lottery products, scratchies and sports betting, particularly in the 1990s. In this decade, 6 casinos opened serving New Zealand's population of 3.9 million and there are now 24,500 (one for every 159 men, women and children) non-casino gambling machines giving New Zealand the second highest concentration of machines per head after NSW and Victoria. This exponential increase is continuing. This concentration and its rapid development makes New Zealand a useful laboratory for understanding of the gendered dynamic of gambling participation.

Official figures show that New Zealanders lost 1.5 billion New Zealand Dollars (roughly USD 0.75 billion) gambling over 2001/02, equivalent to 1 to 1.5% of GDP. Sky City the major casino owner is extremely profitable. Its share price recently reached an all time high for any New Zealand stock at $7.78, even after a 2 to 1 share split in 2001[1]. There is no official measure of non-financial impacts.

It is possible to tell from official figures who owns machines but not where they are located. A detailed examination of were they are on the ground, done by the Mayor of Manakau, a major city, shows however a clear concentration of machines in areas of low socio economic status and relative depravation.[2]

Who Gambles?

Research from Abbott and Volberg has been commissioned by the New Zealand government's Department of Internal Affairs to provide an information base for gambling policy development. According to the research of Abbott and Volberg[3], overall, the number of regular gamblers increased from 1,037,150 in 1991 to 1,105,028 in 1999. In terms of the percentage of adults involved however this represents a major decrease. In 1991[4] 48% of the adult population[5] were found to be regular gamblers. But only about 40.8% of the adult New Zealand population [6] gambled regularly in 1999.

Reid and Searle[7] however found that in 1995 the rate of weekly participation was either higher or lower than in 1990 depending on the type of gambling.[8]

Gender Ratio

Abbot and Volberg's research shows major changes in the gender composition of these figures. By re-analyzing their data it can be shown that in 1991 they found approximately[9] 674,300 men and 362,850 women gambled in some form at least weekly. In 1999, by contrast, they found the equivalent figures were 566,153 men and 538,875 women. [10]

Thus, their figures suggest that between 1991 and 1999, just when the number of regular women gamblers was rising by 5.1% a year that of men fell by –2.2% per annum. In 1991, 1.86 men to every women gambled regularly, but in 1999 it was 1.05 man to every woman. In other words the gender figures had converged until women's activity is almost the same as men's. Abbott and Volberg do not comment on this.

Significantly, Reid and Searle found no evidence of the large reduction in participation by men, which was found by Abbott and Volberg. In all but two forms of gambling they found that more women and more men had participated at least weekly in the previous year. The exceptions were Instant Kiwi and non-casino poker machines.

Depending on which data one accepts compared with the early 1990s there is either more or less regular gambling, and either more men or fewer men are gambling.

There is, however, agreement that more women have become regular gamblers.

Who Doesn't Gamble?

Abbot and Volberg showed that during the 1990s, the numbers of men and women who did not gamble rose. In 1991, 11% of all adults either had never gambled or did not bet in the last 6 months. [11] By 1999, this figure had risen to 13.8%. [12]

In 1991, 4.5% of adults had never gambled in their lives. Women were reported as twice as likely to have never gambled than men.[13] Thus 6% of women and only 3% of men had never made a bet.

Our reanalysis shows that if we assume that these same proportions held true for the 6.5% of adults who did not punt in the last 6 months then the following picture emerges. Between 1991 and 1999 the number of women non-gamblers rose from 159,000 to 201,000. At the same time the number of men non-gamblers rose from 80,000 to 172,000.

Reid and Searle[14] showed directly the opposite pattern. Between 1985 and 1995 they found that there was a drop not a rise in those who did not gamble. In 1985, 15% of people had not gambled in the last 12 months whereas by 1995 only 10% did not gamble (the same level of abstinence as in 1990).

Depending on which data one accepts either fewer adults or more adults never gamble compared with the early 1990s.

Why Do People Gamble?

Through the 1990s, the reasons given for engaging in gambling remained relatively unchanged. More than half of all gamblers consistently state that they gamble in order to win money. In this regard New Zealand is similar to Victoria, Australia.

Gambling is a negative-sum game for punters. Most people lose but a very few win in a big way. Such widespread and consistent irrationality requires explanation. Indeed, the entire area of motivation of gamblers deserves careful study. It will emerge that we have reason to believe women gamblers have different motivations from men. However, this hypothesis has not been tested by any of the investigations which have taken place in New Zealand.

Which Communities Gamble?

Gambling machines are providers of equal opportunities because the chances are supplied equally to all regardless of gender, ethnicity, skill, intellectual ability, language proficiency, education and location. The very factors that determine life chances in the general economy are irrelevant to success in machine gambling.

The interrelation of gender, culture and ethnicity may well be critical in comprehending the social impacts of gambling participation. Experience suggests that there has been particularly rapid change in participation of Maori, Pacific Islands and Asian women and men.

Treatment providers using a comprehensive and reliable data base have found a rapid and sustained rise in women callers so that now 52% of new callers are women, and of Maori and Pacific Islands callers 80% are women. Treatment providers have also established services specific to Asian communities based on perceived need. [15]

The available quantitative measures however do not correspond to this perception. Abbott and Volberg found in 1999 no Asian problem gamblers and low participation rates for indigenous and Pacific people.

Depending on which source is used either more or less indigenous, Pacific and Asian people gamble, and either many or no Asian people are problem gamblers.

Gender and Problem Gambling

Abbott et al 2000 calculated that in 1999 there were 80,108 lifetime problem and pathological gamblers in New Zealand.[16] This is 3% of the adult population. At the same time it was estimated that 2,629,522 had never had problems.

Abbott et al 2000 found that throughout the 1990s men consistently suffered from gambling problems at double the rate of women. However, there is extensive evidence from treatment providers to suggest that the ratio of men to women among problem gamblers is much closer to one-to-one.[17]

Between 1998 and 2000 treatment services received 2,880 pathological gamblers.[18] But this would represent 9.8% of the total lifetime pathological gamblers estimated by Abbott et al. to be in New Zealand in 1999. [19].[20]

In 2000 treatment providers assessed 1,274 new cases using a SOGS scale. Only 1.7% of these were found not to be problem or pathological gamblers. Of those 758 were men and 516 were women. The Productivity Commission argued that there was a rising proportion of women among problem gamblers.[21] It called it the "increased feminization of problem gambling". [22]

Depending on which data one accepts either men are twice as likely or just as likely as women to suffer from gambling problems.

Are Problems Increasing?

Abbott and Volberg found in 1999 that the prevalence of problem gambling declined during the 1990s.[23] If these results are to be believed there was a significant fall in the prevalence of gambling problems and pathology amongst men and gambling problems among women during the 1990s. They, however, found no significant change in the prevalence of pathological gambling among women.

These figures mean that in 1991[24] between 125,000 and 174,000 men and women suffered from lifetime problem and pathological gambling but in 1999[25] only between 58,000 and 107,700 similarly suffered. In other words, each year between 1991 and 1999 there was an average reduction of 8,330 cases of problem and pathological gambling.

Thus Abbott and Volberg's research found that for most people problem gambling occurred in inverse proportion to the consumption of this product. This has been an important finding in the formulation of policy options. This finding would make New Zealand's experience of gambling consumption unique.

The reported reduction in problem gambling is also underlined by a separate longitudinal study conducted by Abbott, Williams and Volberg. Of a sample of 217 selected in 1991 for intensive interview 77 (35.5% of the original sample) were found to be either problem or pathological gamblers. But only 42 out of the 143 remaining in the sample (29.4% of the common sample) were similarly categorized in 1998.[26] The reassuring conclusion that problem gamblers 'matured out' of their problem without intervention received considerable publicity.

Our retro-analysis shows that the sample had reduced from 217 to 143. This means that while 35.5% of the original sample had problems this had fallen 29.4% at the latter date. However, the 1991 data for the common sample was not described hence it is not clear that this represents a statistically significant reduction. Thus, the conclusion that problem gamblers mature out of their habit may not be valid. This conclusion has, nevertheless, had significant impact on policy debate about treatment provision in New Zealand.

Furthermore our interpretation is to an extent confirmed by the fact that in 1991 21 (9.7% of the original sample) of those intensively interviewed were classified as pathological gamblers[27] whereas in 1998 18 gamblers (12.5% of the common sample) were classified as pathological in 1998.[28] The "maturing out" thesis is also seriously questioned by the fact that people approaching treatment services for the first time rose from 2,923 in 1997 to 5,632 in 2000[29] a growth rate of 24.4% per annum.

Depending on which data one accepts either the prevalence of problem gambling is declining or it is increasing very rapidly.

What Forms of Gambling Cause Problems?

In both 1991 and 1999, Abbott and Volberg explored the favorite form of gambling engaged in by problem gamblers. They found that in both years track gambling was the most popular single form of gambling among problem gamblers.[30] However, if casino and non-casino pokies are combined their importance rose in the 1990s until pokies in general became the most important form of gambling among problem gamblers in 1999.

The survey results are partially at odds with the experience of treatment providers. The latter find that non-casino pokies are by far the most popular form of gambling among problem gamblers and that track betting is relatively unimportant. In this respect, the data from the providers seem to be more in tune with the experience in other countries than were Abbott and his colleagues.[31]

Depending on which data one accepts either poker machines are by far the most dangerous of betting modes or they vie with track betting for that honour.

Who Spends on Gambling?

Our retro-analysis of Abbott and Volberg's figures suggests that between 1991 and 1999 average spending rose from $37 per month per adult to $41.42 per month. Men spent less in 1999 than in 1991 although women spent more. Both at the beginning and the end of the period men spent more than women each month, but by 1999 the gap between them had narrowed substantially.

We must, however, hold these estimates in considerable doubt. The 1991 data imply that total spending on gambling in 1991 was $970 million compared with a Department of Internal Affairs estimate of only $575 million.[32] In 1999, spending of $1,346.8 million is implied which compares with a Department of Internal Affairs estimate of $1,167 million.

Depending on which data one accepts men spend far more heavily on gambling than women (or they lie more extravagantly about their spending than women) or men and women spend very similar amounts.

Those with a history of gambling problems (only about 3% of the adult population) account for more than 20% of expenditure.[33] In 1999, the Productivity Commission found that Australian problem gamblers contributed 33% of all gambling expenditure.[34] It also reported that a similar pattern existed in the USA. Lepper found a similar result in the case of the proposed Riverside Casino in Hamilton.[35]

In 1999, Abbott and Volberg estimated that problem gamblers lost an average of $284.50 per month. These losses are substantially below those found by treatment providers. They found in 1999 that in the 4 weeks prior to their approach for treatment men lost an average of $2,849 and women $1,542.[36] A year later the gap between men and women was virtually non-existent ($2,703 for men and $2,619 for women).[37]

Given women's much lower average income such expenditure by women is more significant in its impact than for men.

Between 1991 and 1999, it was found that regular gamblers contributed an increasing proportion of total spending. There was a large increase in the dependence of the industry on regular gambling during the 1990s, especially in its continuous forms. The fact that this increase was accompanied by a fall in the prevalence of problem gambling appears inconsistent. Indeed, Abbott et al 2000 noted:

"The association between regular participation in and high expenditure on continuous forms of gambling…..and problem gambling is a consistent finding in the literature."[38]

All data confirm that a large proportion of gambling revenues are drawn from customers who have gambling problems. Indeed, some sources suggest that if gambling problems no longer existed most gambling modes would not be financially viable.

Thus depending on the source of data one accepts either problem gamblers are spending more or substantially the same as those without problems. Women's expenditure is the same or significantly less than men's.

II WOMEN'S GAMBLING EXPERIENCES

The doubt and inconsistency detailed above is hardly surprising given the perspective of the studies involved. Prevalence surveys generate the hypotheses they test from a theory of individual pathology. The focus of such studies is bound to be on unusual and abnormal mental states rather than widespread social and economic processes. As a consequence, the most basic elements of the social and economic basis of gambling are not adequately explored by such investigations.

If the studies which have been conducted in New Zealand cannot provide us with answers to a set of relatively simple questions then what is to be done? Our approach is to directly observe gambling by women and to hear the stories the women themselves tell about it. We have pieced together some parts of the story which have emerged but much of our narrative is speculative and preliminary. Although the full story has yet to be heard the little we already know shows that the reality of women gambling goes considerably beyond the addiction of a few. Indeed, it appears complex and deeply embedded in society.

Women's Experience

Visit any small New Zealand town at 10 in the morning on any weekday and you will see a queue of women outside the pub waiting for it to open. When you ask what is going on you are told that the women are queuing to play the poker machines in the pub.

There is no defensiveness about this response. Indeed, it is often said with defiance. It is almost like our mothers smoking in the street. Here are women taking a place in a male bastion.[39] They feel safe provided they are playing the machines because it is clear they are not even contingently available. Their presence is not interpreted as trying to attract male attention. While playing the machines they are observers rather than the observed, they are not objects of sexual evaluation. While playing the machines they are players, subjects, not objects, consumers not the consumed. They can claim a space in the pub without challenging men's space or exposing themselves to the sexual market place. They also enjoy the fact that they can be part of a crowd without having to risk rejection. [40]

Women are also visiting other gambling sites. Already by 1998 as many women as men were attending New Zealand casinos.[41] The same is reported to be true of participation in Internet gambling[42] where there are at least two casino sites aimed specifically at women. In Las Vegas casinos women can even earn mammograms by playing pokies or card games. [43]

Most women, like most men, gamble to make money. However, treatment providers report that they do this not by engaging gambling such as horse racing or cards which are thought to require some skill but rather in relatively passive games such as pokies.[44]

The identification of passivity in relation to women should however, be approached with considerable caution. The perception of skill requirements and risk need further evaluation. One feature of machine gambling, which remains relatively unexplored, is that it is equally available to all players. The machines do not discriminate between participants. A woman can choose to be a player without qualifying as 'attractive'. Since no skill is required participation does not depend on physical, mental, linguistic or sexual capacity. Neither are there class barriers to access. It may be that the machines are equal opportunity facilities rather than passive that is critical in explaining their attraction. The machines appeal maybe that they include the otherwise socially excluded.

A workshop held by the Centre of Gambling Studies, Auckland University, reported that some women, when confronted with their actual losses, react in disbelief. They simply do not accept that a morning at the pokies could cost that much. Instead, they tend to blame other factors such as inflation or income tax for their lack of money. A researcher working with Pacific Islands women reported that some may go into debt with loan sharks to make ends meet. Others may increase their gambling in order to try to rid themselves of debts once and for all.[45]

Perceptions of 'luck' are important and may well be determined by gender as well as culture.[46] For Maori, for example it would be wrong to ignore the portents of 'luck'. Doing so might insult the ancestors or energies imparting the prediction. If the bet does not win then the better has misinterpreted the portent, but the belief in such omens will not be diminished.

From an economic point of view gambling is irrational. We all know that on average for every dollar put into a poker machine only 88 cents come back to punters. But the irrationality is justified by saying: "You've got to be in to win". Again the perception that the chance of winning is equally accessible and not skill dependant may make being 'in' more attractive. For women in small town New Zealand that is probably a correct and a sad reflection on their limited access to real life chances.

Discourse analysis of 'luck' might show why the activity appears rational. Indeed it may be rational within the environment of the punter as the only investment available to the deprived. The fortunes of women in much of New Zealand are totally dependent on world prices for basic commodities like butter, lamb, beef, cheese and logs. Their lives must take the full brunt of the fluctuations of these prices on world markets well beyond their control and the variation in work and income those rises and falls bring. Moreover, these women have been taught that risk-taking is good by successive governments pushing New Right economics in the interest of global capital. The worldview associated with this ideology judges everyone a winner or a looser. For such women, the only places they have a chance of winning is the state lottery and the pub pokies. [47]

So our hypothesis is that like their glittering sisters in Las Vegas, women in New Zealand are pursuing their own hopes and aspirations in one of the few ways left open to them.

III. UNASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT WOMEN'S GAMBLING

Family and Community

Most women's activity is non-market. There is no information available on

the non-economic costs especially the time costs of women's activity. The opportunity costs may well be the loss of activities to sustain crucial social networks, but because these are invisible to the market model they are not generally considered in the literature.

Furthermore, women's capacity to sustain social networks is also affected by the gambling activity of others. 75% of new callers to the helpline who were 'others affected' rather than gamblers themselves are women. There is no measure of the effects on children's well being of changes in levels of gambling consumption.

What Does Gambling Mean to Women?

The relationship between gambling and economic depravation demands elucidation. Is gambling a response or a cause of imporvishment? And is this relationship gendered?

Most men and women gamblers agree that the main reason for gambling is to win money. But those simple words may mean completely different things to women than to men. The difference may be so pronounced that gambling may hold a different place in the lives of women from the place it holds in the lives of men.

We might hypothesise that for men, gambling is a sign of failure because it represents a failure to meet the needs of families and personal aspirations out of regular income. Rather than admitting to this failure men may see themselves as exercising skill at picking horses or playing cards to enhance their family’s material well-being. Their risk taking may be the result of too much not too little self-esteem. This may be the reason why some treatment providers report a long time lag between the onset of problems among men and their seeking assistance for those problems.

By contrast, we could argue that for women gambling is a chance of escape from the absence of life chances. Some treatment providers report that women with gambling problems have a background of abusive and otherwise dysfunctional family relationships.[48] Gambling for such people may simply be the only means of escape available. It is, therefore, “the way out” which a few manage to achieve but most do not. For such people the problem may be very low self-esteem. It is presumably why pokies operators locate their machines in the most deprived neighborhoods. It is also why women with problems seek help much more readily than their male counterparts. It may also be why women appear to start gambling later in life and to develop problems rather more rapidly than men. [49]

Which Women Gamble?

Kiata found that women from many different walks of life gamble.[50] This may have been the result of the self-selected nature of her interview sample. By contrast, some treatment providers argue that many women gamblers with problems are relatively poorly educated from low-income families. Again this impression may be the result simply of self-selection.

Until very recently, gambling has been analyzed in analogy with other types of addiction. As with other potentially addictive behaviors like smoking tobacco and consuming alcohol young women appear to be gambling more than in the past. The validity of this inference must be explored.

In addition, the question of whether or not women take longer to become addicted to gambling and enter that state at a later age requires investigation. Because if there is any truth in that supposition it is to be expected that women's gambling problems will start to rise as the population ages.

How Should Problem Gambling Among Women be Defined?

In most studies the existence or otherwise of problem gambling has been defined in terms of responses to one or other of the standard gambling screens. Accordingly, those scoring 3 or 4 on SOGS are defined as problem gamblers and those scoring 5 or more are regarded as pathological. Such screens have been changed for use with young people and have to be regularly updated as behavior changes over time. They are, therefore, relational definitions of problem gambling and only have meaning in the appropriate social context.

It has also been suggested by Rossen that screens (including SOGS) used to define problem gambling are biased against finding women problem gamblers because the pathology of problem gambling has been based on male stereotypes.[51] It may be that we have yet to find the most appropriate methods of identifying women problem gamblers. For example, the problems that women face as a result of gambling may be more tied to financial difficulties and social isolation than among men. It should be remembered that the only problems that are counted are those identified using the SOGS test which are entirely

psychological. Social problems which may result from gambling and which a gambler may have suffered from are not included.[52]

The symptoms of women’s problem gambling may be more social than individual. In most societies, it is women rather than men that are the cement which ensures that society hangs together. Most of this work is unpaid and largely goes unmeasured. The time spent gambling which is not devoted to the managing of social networks may be more damaging to society as a whole than the money diverted from other needs. Hence, it may be more appropriate to enquire whether or not a person had left children in a risky situation (i.e. in the street, in a locked car or home alone) while gambling than if they were going though a suicidal state of mind, which is, in any case, more unusual for men than for women.

What is the Pattern of Women’s Gambling?

Over the past 10 years, New Zealand providers have seen increasing presentations by women and the young. They report rapid increases among Pacific Island women and young Asian men. Most of these increases appear to be associated with poker machines both inside and outside casinos. The clear implication of such reports is that the actual incidence of problem gambling is much more common than the prevalence studies show. Studies are urgently required to confirm or deny the maturing out hypothesis among women.

It is possible that women's individual session losses are smaller but more frequent than those of men. As gambling machines become more widely dispersed in suburban situations gambling by women may occur when some other activity is going on like shopping or socializing and so goes unnoticed. Women may be more likely to suffer from multiple addictions than men may and so their gambling is more commonly masked by other problems.

It is also possible that women take up gambling later in life than men. In that case they should be seen as maturing in rather than out! Nevertheless, it is also likely that the older a person is the more likely they are to have the confidence to seek help and the knowledge of where to find it. This is especially so as the constraints, placed upon women by the needs and attitudes of husbands, are dismantled with the latter's death. Hence, there may be a rapid rise in presentations as the population of women ages. It is noteworthy the Christchurch casino in New Zealand specifically targets single, older women as customers.[53] The impact on the voluntary sector of changed behavior of older women is potentially of great importance. The attitudes of this group may be particularly affected by the funding of voluntary sector activities by gambling machine operators.

What are the Effects on Economic and Social Development?

Some say that gambling is just another branch of the entertainment industry.

As with other industries, as women become more economically independent they will spend more on gambling. Gambling will be one of a number of other similar activities like drinking coffee or belonging to a gym. Seen in this light, increased gambling by women might be seen by some as a measure of their growing economic and financial autonomy.

The behavior that sets problem gamblers apart from ordinary consumers is that they chase their losses. This means, the greater the price they pay in terms of losses the more they engage in gambling. Hence, for a crucial segment of their market suppliers of gambling services face a rising not a falling demand curve.

In the absence of evidence that women are different from men in this regard, increased problem gambling by women means less saving and less spending on other items whether luxuries or necessities.

The results amongst this market segment might be hunger, loss of housing and even bankruptcy. It may mean that the needs of children and other dependents are ignored. The effects on the wider community may include increased defalcations, theft and other criminal activities aimed at financing gambling habits.[54]

Perhaps from an economic standpoint the most serious result is the erosion of the ability to save and hence to build new capital and enterprise within the local community. Jobs provided at a far-off casino or overseas pokies factory are no substitute for those that would otherwise be created locally. The fact that in most societies it is the women's networks that are crucial to local job creation means that increased gambling by women has a particularly negative effect on future employment.

But most activity for women is not market activity. It is in the maintenance of relationship and networks, in caring for and socializing the young, the ill and the old. The real impact on such invisible work is of critical significance for sustainable economic development.

It may, of course, be that gambling is a symptom, rather than the cause, of a breakdown of the very possibility of collective action through women’s networks. In other words, the individualization of society has gone so far as to destroy the networks on which future social and economic development normally depends. When that happens it is every woman for herself.

The drag on local and regional development of gambling has yet to be properly analyzed. There have been reports of increased gambling even in Moslem countries in the aftermath of the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s.[55] Suppose that poker machines existed in Bangladeshi society at the time that the Grameen Bank was being set up. Could we really say that the successes of the Bank would have occurred anyway?

IV APPROACHES TO GAMBLING POLICY

It is of importance to gather information on the factors underlying women's gambling. The pathological model is compatible with a laissez faire, demand and supply approach to gambling regulation because it suggests that the characteristics of the individual demander rather than the proliferation of supply explain prevalence. So long as those who develop the pathology are managed, there is no problem with the supply. Left undisturbed price will create equilibrium.

The introduction of machine gambling into New Zealand in the 1990s was part of a liberalization of the economy based on the market model and was part of a much more extensive deregulation. Gambling was seen as just one more commodity, which demanders could choose to buy and provision could therefore be safely left to the market to regulate.

The prevalence studies of Abbott and Volberg generated findings, which justified and reinforced this policy approach.

Experience however suggests that gambling does not follow a demand /supply model regulated by price. Rather the problem gambler chases his/her losses. The more the costs the more she/he spends. The profitability of gambling to the supplier is crucially linked to the activity of the problem gambler.

The issue of cost is significant. What are the costs associated with this activity for women? Are economic measures sufficient? Much of women's activity is invisible to the market yet socially critical. In examing women's pattern of consumption questions must be asked about the impact on family and community function. Again experience suggests significant impacts on the family and the community which are beyond the range of demand /supply market models. These are not included in the calculation of GDP.

The Pathology Approach

Prevalence studies assume the pathology approach. The problem lies 'ín' the characteristics of individuals that make them susceptible. These people are abnormal demanders. Once they are removed the normal relationships of demand and supply are assumed to be applicable. The problem does not, therefore, lie 'in' the supply.

Prevalence studies seek to find problem gamblers on the basis of mental health data. Their narrow focus allows us to accept a limited approach to the management of gambling in a modern society. It inspires the belief that once we have identified the small minority of gamblers who are problem gamblers we can design and distribute an appropriate treatment service to those individuals affected.

Having done that, the industry can be allowed to operate as any other part of the entertainment market. This means that no special tax regime should be applied to it and that it is of no concern should the government’s revenues become highly dependent on gambling taxes. The only real concerns for public policy are to make sure all customers of gambling firms should be well informed or at least not misled and that unscrupulous business practices are rare and consumers make valid choices.

For the past decade or so this view has dominated New Zealand government gambling policy and treatment strategies. It follows that a sufficient response is to use psychological screens to identify problem gamblers and to use the treatment regimes developed for other addictions for their treatment. Problem gamblers are ill and require treatment when their illness manifests itself.

For example, Easton argues that the main adverse effects of gambling are "external" ones.[56] By this he means the results of pathological gambling affect some people who are not direct consumers of gambling "products". However, the term "externality" also implies that the effects are not inherent to the supply of gambling, which remains unproblematic. This view underlies the Budd Report which justifies a huge increase in gambling machines in the UK.

This view means that once the 'at risk' consumer has been identified and isolated then there is no problem about increasing the supply to whatever the market will bear. However, this view is misleading. The key impacts are not externalities to otherwise unproblematic market activities.

The pathological model does not answer a crucial question. If the problem lies in the make up of the susceptible individual, how is it that change has been so rapid? Were those who are now 'at risk' safe from harm all the while gambling machines had not been invented? Was the danger just lurking there all those millennia only to be unleashed in the present generation? A theory based on individual susceptibility does not explain a sudden mass change in social behaviour.

Prevalence analysis is of very limited assistance in designing policy. The issue of levels of consumption, regulation and the context of gambling are invisible in this pathology model. It accepts the view that the treatment ambulance must be placed at the bottom of a cliff. But it cannot tell us which cliff the patients are likely to fall over, when and in what numbers and so cannot accurately predict how many of what sort of ambulances will be needed to take them to treatment. Indeed, we could take the gambling pathology ambulance to the sample average house in the sample average street in the sample average community and find no problem gamblers to take away.

For the purposes of public policy treatment incidence data is considerably more help than prevalence surveys. They at least show which cliff the ambulance should wait beside. They also tell us how many ambulances we needed last year. If we suppose nothing much will change in the future that is useful knowledge.

However, these data do not assist us to predict future incidence in the population as a whole. In other words, they do not tell who should be in the ambulance but are currently receiving no treatment and they do not assist us to design programmes, which might reduce harm in the future. To develop a harm minimisation approach we must employ a public health approach to the problem.

The Public Health Approach

Our preliminary exploration of women gambling casts fundamental doubt on this pathology approach to policy. In the case of women gamblers, the problems appear to go far beyond the mental health of a small minority of individuals with a proclivity towards addiction to gambling. Supply is critical. It seems likely that there are complex motivational issues involved along with a number of diverse socio-economic processes. The very cement which holds society together is likely to be radically altered should gambling by women become widespread. This effect is quite apart from the need to individually treat those women who are suffering personal problems as a result of their gambling habit.

The key to this approach is the realisation that gambling by women is just one more expression of the power imbalances in society. It is insufficient to provide information. The quantity, quality and the means of dissemination of that information must be appropriate. Women need information but they also have to be taught how to use it when making choices about gambling. Not just in the classroom but in the midst of a winning or losing streak. Their children, their families and their communities must be armed with that information together with the means to intervene to ensure safe gambling behaviors.

Unless treatment regimes take account of these key social dynamics they are unlikely to be successful. Worse, pathology based treatment providers are likely to actively deny the existence of wider social and economic problems as they compete for scarce resources. This may lead to the harmful socio-economic effects of gambling being ignored or untreated.

The approach which seeks to base treatment around socio-economic factors and to encompass mental health issues is called the public health approach. It is called this because it seeks to place gambling in a framework which is safe for individuals and which is not disruptive to society at large. A public health approach to gambling is one which takes accounts for, and addresses, the cost and benefits of gambling which accrue to both individuals and communities. It aims to develop strategies which minimise the negative impacts of gambling while nurturing its possible benefits.

A public health approach, therefore, seeks to promote healthy and responsible gambling behaviors and does not aim to single out just those addicted to gambling. Healthy gambling involves making informed choices and can enhance the well-being of gamblers and the community. The public health approach is characterized by being holistic, based on socio-economic research, controlled by the community and provided through community-based institutions. Like the cases of alcohol and tobacco, its programmes of harm minimisation should be widely available at minimal cost.

This approach attempts to take all relevant factors behind gambling problems into account. It is, therefore, holistic not reductionist in that it seeks to treat gambling problems within the social and economic context that gave them birth. For this reason, it has to be based on a thorough investigation of the socio-economic dynamics within which problem gambling thrives. For example, the most satisfactory anti-problem gambling treatment may be the provision of adequate local economic development opportunities in constructive competition with gambling rather than prohibition.

Together with other consumer information on sex or drugs, education on safe gambling should be widely available. This means that information about risks and advice on how to deal with them should be part of the normal education of children and young people. Users of gambling products should be presented with accurate information about the odds they face, the losses and wins they have accumulated, the time of day and the length of the gambling session. Pokie players should be forced to set loss limits before they start. Advertising of gambling should tell the truth about how many losers there are to every winner.[57] Internet gamblers, just like other consumers of goods and services provided at home, should be able to take advantage of “cooling off” periods.

The community should have charge of all gambling activities. Suppliers of gambling services should not be able to dictate the type of treatment or the amount to be spent on it. They should be subject to the will of the people when it comes to the type, location and availability of gambling opportunities. This means that local democracy should dictate how gambling products are made available within a local community. It means that there should be monitoring of all gambling suppliers to ensure that they are honest, promote safe gambling and do not allow gambling addicts to continue to punt. It also means that communities should be able to set conditions on how gambling premises are operated.

It also means that the delivery of treatment must be through community institutions which are strong enough to withstand the huge, conflicting pressures which problem gamblers and the suppliers of gambling products will bring to bear upon them. This speaks for professionally staffed institutions sufficiently well funded to allow a continuity of treatment in any circumstances. The governance of these institutions must be independent of the industry and in the hands of the community. Access to such institutions should be available to whomsoever needs them wherever that person may be. The opportunities to obtain assistance should be at least as easily accessed as the gambling opportunities which are part of the problem.

In practice, these key requirements mean that the treatment of problem gambling should be a matter of state provision financed out of general taxation. It appears particularly counterproductive to finance such a service out of a levy on gambling the majority of which is paid out of revenue extracted from problem gamblers in the first place.

CONCLUSION

We have argued that the prevalence approach to the investigation of gambling problems appears to illumine only part of the reality of women gambling. As a consequence, the pathology approach to the design of gambling treatment is probably inadequate for the purpose of dealing with the wider results of women gambling. A public health approach to policy should be substituted in its place.

However, there is still much we do not know. There is clearly a need to undertake sound socio-economic research in order to elucidate the extent and nature of women's gambling. However, this research cannot be based upon women gamblers as some kind of honorary male phenomenon. It must instead be based upon a set of hypotheses about why women gamble and how they gamble in ways that are different from men.

REFERENCES

Dr Max Abbott and Dr Rachel Volberg: "Gambling and Problem Gambling in New Zealand: A Report on Phase One of the National Survey", Department of Internal Affairs, Research Series No. 12, Wellington, December 1991.

"Frequent Gamblers and Problem Gamblers in New Zealand: Report of Phase Two of the National Survey", Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, June 1992.

Max Wenden Abbott, Maynard Michael Williams and Rachel Ann Volberg: "Seven Years On: A Follow-Up Study of Frequent and Problem Gamblers Living in the Community: Report Number Two of the New Zealand Gaming Survey", Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, December 1999.

Max Wendon Abbott and Rachel Ann Volberg in association with Statistics New Zealand: "Taking the Pulse on Gambling and Problem Gambling in New Zealand: A Report on Phase One of the 1999 National Prevalence Survey", Report Number Three of the New Zealand Gambling Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, June 2000.

Australian Institute for Gambling Research: "Study of the Social and Economic Impacts of New Zealand Casinos", Final Report, Australian Institute for Gambling Research, Campbelltown, NSW, 1998.

Roberta Boughton: “The Voices of Women Who Gamble”, sano.camh.net/women/gamblwin.htm.

Phillida Bunkle: "Keynote Address", First National Maori Women's Hui on Gambling", Auckland, 1998.

“Making a Safer Bet for Consumers”, Address to First International Gambling Impact Conference, Adelaide, 14th April 2000.

‘Addicted to Hope’, Women’s Health Watch, Newsletter of the Women’s Health Action Trust and The Women’s Health Information Service, issue 59, December 2001, pp.10-11

Gary Clifford: "Expanding the Role of First Contact Services: A Helpline Health Promotion and Client Follow-Up", presentation to 5^th European Conference on Gambling Studies and Policy Issues, Barcelona, 2^nd to 5^th October, 2002.

Tim Costello and Roy Millar: "Wanna Bet: winners and losers in gambling's luck myth", Allen and Unwin, St Leonard’s, NSW, 2000.

Bruce Curtis ed: "Gambling in New Zealand", Dunmore Press, Palmerston North, 2002.

Department of Internal Affairs: "Problem Gambling Counselling in New Zealand 1997-1999: A New Zealand Gaming Survey Supplementary Report", Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, August 2000.

Richel Dursin: “Development Indonesia: In Hard Times, People Bet on Gambling” www:oneworld.org/ips2/feb01/06_15_008.html.

Brian Easton: "Gambling in New Zealand: An Economic Overview", Chapter 3, pp 45-58 in Curtis ed.

Ricardo Gazel: “Economic Impacts of Casino Gambling”, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, No 556, March 1998, pp 66-84.

Liz Kiata: "Looking for Lady Luck: Women's Gambling in New Zealand", Chapter 12, pp 181-192 in Curtis ed.

Las Vegas Sun, 30th March 2000, www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/gaming/2000/mar/30/510063078.html.

John Lepper: “Economic Assessment of Riverside Casino: Further Brief of Evidence to Casino Control Authority”, Integrated Economic Services Ltd., Wellington, 8th March 1999.

Jay Lyman: “Women Dominate Web Gambling”, www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/6069.html.

G.R. Paton-Simpson, M.A. Gruys and J.B. Hannifin: "Problem Gambling Counseling in New Zealand: 2000 National Statistics", Problem Gambling Purchasing Agency, Palmerston North, April 2001.

Nancy M. Petry: “Women Start Later, Get Treatment Sooner”, report at www.laurushealth.com/healthnews/reuters/NewsStory0906200114.htm.

Policy Research Unit Department of Internal Affairs: "The Social Impact of Gaming in New Zealand", Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, November 1995.

Marc N. Potenza, Marvin A. Steinberg, Susan D. McLauglin, Ran Wu, Bruce C. Rounsaville, and Stephanie S. O’Malley: The American Journal of Psychiatry, September 2001.

Productivity Commission: "Australia's Gambling Industries", Report No 10, AusInfo, Canberra, 1999.

Kate Reid and Wendy Searle: "People's Participation In and Attitudes Towards Gambling: Final Result of the 1995 Survey", Research Series No 22, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, March 1996.

Fiona Rossen: "Youth Gambling: Critical Review of the Public Health Literature", Centre for Gambling Studies, University of Auckland, Auckland, n.d.

* A women's expert and economist respectively, they are currently Visiting Professors at the Centre for Gender Studies, Foreign Languages College, Dalian University, China. They can be contacted at 256 Mangaone South Road, RD, Waikanae, New Zealand or at bunklepp@xtra.co.nz. The authors wish to thank the staff members of the Centre for Gambling Studies at the University of Auckland for much encouragement and many helpful discussions. However, all errors of fact, logic or judgement remain their responsibility.

[1] New Zealand Herald, Business Section, September 25^th 2002.

[2] Submission of Sir Barry Curtis, Mayor of Manukau City, to the Government Administration Select Committee, June 2002.

[3] Max Wendon Abbott and Rachel Ann Volberg in association with Statistics New Zealand: "Taking the Pulse on Gambling and Problem Gambling in New Zealand: A Report on Phase One of the 1999 National Prevalence Survey", Report Number Three of the New Zealand Gambling Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, June 2000.

[4] Dr Max Abbott and Dr Rachel Volberg: "Gambling and Problem Gambling in New Zealand: A Report on Phase One of the National Survey", Department of Internal Affairs, Research Series No. 12, Wellington, December 1991.

[5] Abbott and Volberg 1991, op cit, report on p. 25 that total spending on gambling was $970 million and the average per capita spend was $37 per month. This means that the adult population was 2,184,685.

[6] In 1999, the population of New Zealand over 18 years of age was 2,709,630 Abbott et al 2000, ibid, Table 9a, p.97.

[7] Kate Reid and Wendy Searle: "People's Participation In and Attitudes Towards Gambling: Final Result of the 1995 Survey", Research Series No 22, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, March 1996.

[8] Reid and Searle 1996, ibid, Table 2.2, p.14.

[9] Because the results of the 1991 survey are not presented in a manner to allow, except indirectly by inference, reporting of levels and numbers all such data derived from it have been rounded to the nearest 50.

[10] Abbott et al 2000, ibid, Table 9a, p. 97.

[12] Abbott et al, 2000, ibid, Table 9a, p.97 and p. 101.

[14] Department of Internal Affairs 1996, op cit, Figure 2.1, p.12.

[15] Gary Clifford: "Expanding the Role of First Contact Services: A Helpline Health Promotion and Client Follow-Up", presentation to 5^th European Conference on Gambling Studies and Policy Issues, Barcelona, 2^nd to 5^th October, 2002.

[16] Abbott et al 2000, op cit, Table 20 p. 149.

[17] G.R. Paton-Simpson, M.A. Gruys and J.B. Hannifin: "Problem Gambling Counselling in New Zealand: 2000 National Statistics", Problem Gambling Purchasing Agency, Palmerston North, April 2001, p. 43.

[18] Department of Internal Affairs: "Problem Gambling Counseling in New Zealand 1997-1999: A New Zealand Gaming Survey Supplementary Report", Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, August 2000, p. 42 and Paton-Simpson, Gruys and Hannifin, ibid, p. 43.

[19] Abbott et al, 2000, op cit, Table 18, p. 138.

[20] Paton-Simpson, Gruys and Hannifin, ibid, p 43.

[21] Productivity Commission: "Australia's Gambling Industries", Report No 10, AusInfo, Canberra, 1999, Vol. 3, Appendices, p. Q9-Q12.

[23] Abbott et al 2000, op cit, Table 40, p.182.

[25] Abbott et al 2000, op cit, Table 18, p. 138.

[26] Max Wenden Abbott, Maynard Michael Williams and Rachel Ann Volberg: "Seven Years On: A Follow-Up Study of Frequent and Problem Gamblers Living in the Community: Report Number Two of the New Zealand Gaming Survey", Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, December 1999. Tables 7 to 10, pp 61-64.

[27] Dr Max Abbott and Dr Rachel Volberg: "Frequent Gamblers and Problem Gamblers in New Zealand: Report of Phase Two of the National Survey", Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, June 1992. Table 11, p. 33.

[28] Abbott, Williams and Volberg 1999, op cit, Tables 7 to 10, pp 61-64.

[29] Paton-Simpson, Gruys and Hannifin 2001, op cit, p.8.

[30] Abbott and Volberg 1991, op cit, Table 12, p. 53 and Abbott et al 2000, op cit, Table 33, p. 167.

[31] Productivity Commission, Vol 3, pp Q9-Q12.

[32] The Department of Internal Affairs estimates annual spending on gambling indirectly. It knows the total taxation and duty paid by gambling operators and the rates of tax and duty which apply. From these it estimates either the turnover or the net loss associated with that tax payment. Where appropriate, turnover is converted into net loss by applying an average loss factor. Such estimates will prove highly inaccurate if there is systematic underpayment of tax or losses are different from the average.

[33] Brian Easton: "Gambling in New Zealand: An Economic Overview", Chapter 3, pp 45-58 in "Gambling in New Zealand", ed. Bruce Curtis, Dunmore Press, Palmerston North, 2002.

[34] Productivity Commission, Vol 1, Part C, p. 7.41.

[35] John Lepper: “Economic Assessment of Riverside Casino: Further Brief of Evidence to Casino Control Authority”, Integrated Economic Services Ltd., Wellington, 8th March 1999.

[36] Department of Internal Affairs 2000, op cit, p. 94.

[37] Paton-Simpson, Gruys and Hannifin 2001, p. 48.

[39] Australian Institute for Gambling Research: "Study of the Social and Economic Impacts of New Zealand Casinos", Final Report, Australian Institute for Gambling Research, Campbelltown, NSW, 1998, p 334 reported that New Zealand pubs had become more friendly environments to women as a result of the growth of gambling opportunities on offer in them.

[40] Liz Kiata: "Looking for Lady Luck: Women's Gambling in New Zealand", Chapter 12, pp 181-192 in Curtis ed., op cit.

[41] Australian Institute for Gambling Research, op cit, Tables 2.33 and 2.34, pp 75-78.

[42] See for example Jay Lyman: “Women Dominate Web Gambling”, www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/6069.html.

[43] Las Vegas Sun, 30th March 2000, www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/gaming/2000/mar/30/510063078.html.

[44] Marc. N. Potenza, Marvin A. Steinberg, Susan D. McLauglin, Ran Wu, Bruce C. Rounsaville, and Stephanie S. O’Malley: The American Journal of Psychiatry, September 2001.

[45] This paragraph is based on discussions held at the University of Auckland Centre for Gambling Studies Workshop on Gambling Policy, 22nd. March, 2002.

[46]Phillida Bunkle, "Keynote Address", First National Maori Women's Hui on Gambling", Auckland, 1998.

[47] See Tim Costello and Roy Millar: "Wanna Bet: winners and losers in gambling's luck myth", Allen and Unwin, St Leonard’s, NSW, 2000, p 130 who argue that society has been redefined in individualistic terms. See also Phillida Bunkle: ‘Addicted to Hope’, Women’s Health Watch, Newsletter of the Women’s Health Action Trust and The Women’s Health Information Service, Auckland, issue 59, December 2001, pp.10-11

[48] Roberta Boughton: “The Voices of Women Who Gamble”, sano.camh.net/women/gamblwin.htm

[49] Nancy M. Petry reported on www.laurushealth.com/healthnews/reuters/NewsStory0906200114.htm.

[51] Fiona Rossen: "Youth Gambling: Critical Review of the Public Health Literature", Centre for Gambling Studies, University of Auckland, Auckland, n.d., p. 8.

[52] Policy Research Unit Department of Internal Affairs: "The Social Impact of Gaming in New Zealand", Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, November 1995.

[53] Statement by Arthur Pitcher, CEO of Christchurch Casino at Compulsive Gambling Society National Conference, Auckland 1999.

[54] Ricardo Gazel: “Economic Impacts of Casino Gambling”, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, No 556, March 1998, pp 66-84.

[55] Richel Dursin: “Development Indonesia: In Hard Times, People Bet on Gambling” www:oneworld.org/ips2/feb01/06_15_008.html. A similar relationship between rising TAB receipts and the depressed state of local and regional economies used to be employed by economic forecasters in New Zealand.

[57] Phillida Bunkle: “Making a Safer Bet for Consumers”, Address to First International Gambling Impact Conference, Adelaide, 14th April 2000.