European and Nordic authorities require an expanded capacity and greater regulatory coordination to understand the black market on online gambling, an academic review claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This advice leads the findings of a \u2018scoping review\u2019 <\/strong>published in PLOS One<\/em>, noting that current efforts to measure the size and scope of offshore gambling markets across Nordic jurisdictions are marred by data gaps, unclear methodologies that can lead to political fallouts.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conducted by researchers from universities and public health institutes in Finland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, the review covered 32 studies between 2010 and 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As independent researchers, the team found that \u201cthere is no gold standard or one reliable method to conclusively measure offshore gambling.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Instead, the authors conclude that \u201cmethodological choices, data resources that have been used, and political interests can have an effect on the kinds of estimates that are produced.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The report observes that most estimates, whether reported by governments, regulators, or industry groups, are derived from a single source. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This source is H2 Gambling Capital<\/strong>, a private data provider widely cited by the regulated industry, but which the Nordic academics believe has limited transparency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cA significant part of studies included in this review made use of data from H2 gambling capital,\u201d the authors write, \u201ceven regulators are not fully aware of metrics and assumptions based on which these estimates are made.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The study\u2019s authors \u2014 Virve Marionneau <\/strong>(University of Helsinki), S\u00f8ren Kristiansen <\/strong>(Aalborg University), Tomi Roukka <\/strong>(Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare), and H\u00e5kan Wall <\/strong>(Karolinska Institute) \u2014 observe that offshore gambling is \u201ca politically sensitive topic wrought with uncertainties.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Academics question offshore argument<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem is not merely academic. The study observed that \u201coffshore estimates are likely to be political tools.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n The authors highlight how the gambling industry, in particular, has \u201cactively attempted to control the narrative over channelling rates within the Nordic countries,\u201d often by releasing their own studies showing rising offshore participation to resist tighter regulation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One Swedish report included in the review assumed that users of unlicensed websites spend 10\u201320 times more than those on legal platforms \u2014 a bold figure for which the researchers found \u201cno empirical basis nor conclusive descriptions on how these were determined.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Such assumptions, the authors suggest, can significantly skew perceptions of the so-called black market, inflating its threat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIndustry-produced estimates of offshore gambling may be higher than government-produced figures,\u201d the authors write. <\/p>\n\n\n\n They note that \u201cthese estimates diverged from governmental estimates\u201d due in part to differing methodologies, and caution against letting such figures shape policy uncritically. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEvidence-based policy should not be based on methodologically ambiguous evidence or estimates that lack transparency.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The researchers also warn against viewing offshore and onshore markets as entirely distinct. \u201cOffshore gambling is therefore not a separate market segment from onshore gambling,\u201d the report explains.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A large portion of users participate in both. In Finland, for instance, \u201c98% of individuals reporting offshore gambling also gamble within the regulated market,\u201d with around 37% of their total gambling spending still occurring onshore.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Product types also matter. \u201cOffshore consumption typically consists of the most harmful gambling products, including fast-paced online casino products and betting (including live betting),\u201d the authors write, adding that these activities are overrepresented in gambling harm statistics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n