What was it like to evaluate the regulation of the online gambling market?

It was a unique evaluation. Evaluations often occur after a law or policy has been in effect for five years. This time, the evaluation took place after only three years, during which many changes occurred. For example, the Minister adjusted the rules for advertising to prohibit untargeted advertising, such as on TV or at bus stops. Furthermore, during the evaluation, the field was still evolving. Given the rapid evaluation timeline and ongoing rule changes, it was an exciting and sometimes complex evaluation.

How did you deal with these changes in the evaluation? Does it affect your approach?

Yes, it certainly does! We knew in advance that certain aspects would be very challenging to measure. For instance, addiction figures are known to lag behind the actual number of addicted individuals because people must first seek help before appearing in the statistics. Hence, we chose to examine three separate aspects.

Firstly, we illustrated the policy and its expected effects. This depiction shows the assumptions made about the anticipated impact and highlights some inconsistencies. Next, we looked at the implementation practice: How is the policy playing out in reality? Although we may not know the effects yet, we can assess whether the policy is being executed as expected (and hoped for). Finally, we examined what we can already ascertain about the effects. Together, these elements provide the best possible insight into what we can currently say about the policy's effectiveness.

You also logged into gambling sites for the evaluation. What did this add to the research?

Aside from providing an interesting view into the player's world, logging into these sites helped us concretely map out how the policy is unfolding in practice. The legislation sets requirements on how the player's experience should be, where the licensee must provide information, and where they need to intervene. Our observations of the gambling interface proved to be a perfect complement to the population surveys previously conducted by Ipsos I&O for the WODC. By combining the player experiences from those studies with insights into how the gambling sites operate, we gained a clear understanding of how the legislation is being implemented in practice and its effects on players.

Why was it so crucial to map out this practice?

The precise effects of regulation are challenging to measure accurately. Addiction manifests in a help-seeking behaviour after a few years, meaning we can only observe whether it has led to an increase in addiction 5-8 years post-legalisation. It is also difficult to determine if there has been a rise in the number of players. There are a few studies on Dutch gambling behaviour before legalisation, but comparing them with the period after is complex. The timing of the studies matters, and people may discuss it more openly now that it is legal. Therefore, we combine different sources: on one hand, we use data to paint a picture of aspects like the number of players as accurately as possible. On the other hand, we supplement this picture where possible with expectations based on the implementation practice.

For example, we have figures on the number of new player accounts which show a significant increase, including amongst young adults who were supposed to be protected by the policy. In population surveys, a large portion of gamblers mentioned they started after the legal market opened in October 2021. This strongly indicates an increase in players. When combined with ineffective addiction prevention measures, it suggests that the policy may lead to more gambling addiction, especially among young adults.

Does the extensive political debate on gambling affect your work?

The political debate does not affect the research. We can conduct our work independently. When we engage with stakeholders in the gambling field, it is clear that the topic is significant. Everyone was eager to participate in the evaluation. Our role is to listen to all perspectives and interests attentively and present them honestly, but we also need to make considerations.

Sometimes, the political debate can be intriguing. Our research is often shared with the House of Representatives, but usually stays somewhat in the background. Those active in the field are aware of it, but the broader public may not be. Currently, there is greater media interest in the research. It's exciting, but it can also be daunting to appear in front of the camera when you don't usually do so.

What did you enjoy most about the evaluation?

The most enjoyable aspect of the evaluation was the insights we gained everywhere. For many people, it's a black box: from the outside, you cannot see what's happening inside. We had the opportunity to observe from all angles. The Gambling Authority explained their supervision methods and how they tackle illegal operators. Addiction care providers shared their experiences with gambling addicts and the insights they have gained. License holders told us about their efforts to notice and guide players who may be crossing the line. These behind-the-scenes glimpses were incredibly enjoyable and enhanced our evaluation.