Author: kp14237

By Dr Selma Iilonga, Dr Albert Shikongo, and Ms. Jacobina Mwiiyale, University of Namibia.

This blog describes a research project made possible by a Strategic Award from the Hub’s Research Innovation Fund. The Strategic Award is an annual competition that funds innovative and interdisciplinary research to understand and tackle gambling harms.

Namibia has seen exponential growth in gambling among the population, with regular high-profile media stories that celebrate large wins from sports betting. However, we know very little about how gambling impacts individuals and communities or how best to protect people from gambling harms. This groundbreaking interdisciplinary research project was the first empirical study on gambling in Namibia. Its main aim was to investigate how the dissemination of gambling information impacts consumer behaviour and to design a mitigating model to address harmful gambling. We conducted field work in Feb-May 2024 in betting/gambling houses in four regions of Namibia (Erongo, Khomas, Oshana, and Zambezi) and collected data from people who gambled using survey questionnaires (1,598 responses) and 60 semi-structured interviews. We also conducted covert observation in around 60 betting/gambling houses.

What we learned:

• People who gamble in Namibia are more likely to be young and male: Our survey showed that young Namibians were most likely to be involved in gambling activities, with 19% of those aged 15-24 and 47% of people aged between 25 and 34 years actively gambling. More men (69%) than women (31%) were participating in gambling activities.
• Word-of-mouth plays a key role in people’s exposure to gambling: The highest proportion of our survey participants (40%) were exposed to gambling through word of mouth. Other sources included gambling adverts (15%), billboards (14%) and WhatsApp or other forms of social media (13%).
• Money is a strong motivator for gambling: Around half of our survey participants (48%) said they gambled to win money. Other reasons included for fun/entertainment (16%), for competition and skills (9%), to kill boredom (8%), social interaction (8%), stress relief (5%), having more money to spend (3%), and because they cannot stop (2%).

Based on the research, we recommended a range of strategies for mitigating gambling harms in Namibia, including the introduction of live counselling TV and local radio programmes providing gambling education, including testimonies from people who have experienced gambling harms; educational tailor-made gambling information literacy programs for all ages; and amendments to the current gambling act to regulate gambling advertisements.

The implementation of these strategies requires collaboration between stakeholders and change agents. We therefore hosted a workshop for policymakers and other stakeholders in July 2024 to discuss the research findings and recommendations. We were delighted that the workshop was attended by 70 expert participants including public health researchers, local council members, social workers, experts from the Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Gambling Division (the regulating body of gambling activities in Namibia) and Mr John Erastus, CEO of the Gambling Board of Namibia. Participants expressed strong support for the study to be rolled out across Namibia; and for improved consumer protection, including greater availability of gambling treatment centres, changes to gambling licensing, and better monitoring of gambling and betting outlets to prevent underage participation in gambling activities. Further information about the policy workshop is provided in this blog. You can also watch a YouTube video of Dr Iilonga’s presentation of the research at the Hub’s 2024 Colloquium.

About the project team: The project was conducted by the University of Namibia, led by Dr Selma Iilonga (Library and Information Services Unit), with Co-Investigators Dr Albert Shikongo (Department of Computing, Mathematical and Statistical Sciences) and Ms. Jacobina Mwiiyale, (Library and Information Services Unit).

By Dr Oluwole Adeniyi and Professor Andy Newton (Nottingham Trent University), Dr Ferhat Tura and Professor John McAlaney (Bournemouth University)

This blog describes a research project made possible by a Strategic Award from the Hub’s Research Innovation Fund. The Strategic Award funds innovative and interdisciplinary research to understand and tackle gambling harms. 

This project investigated the relationship between betting shops and crime in seven cities in England (Birmingham, Bristol, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle, Nottingham and Sheffield) and two Police Force Areas (Dorset and Surrey). We conducted spatial and multilevel analysis on data obtained from the Gambling Commission’s register of licensed gambling premises, police-recorded crime data, UK Census, point of interest data from the Ordinance Survey and access to health assets and Hazards (AHAH) from Consumer Data Research Centre across three time points (2015, 2019 and 2022). This project builds on our previous study that found a relationship between betting shops and crime at a national level in England, by exploring whether similar relationships exist at sub-national geographies.

Key Finding #1: There is a relationship between betting shops and crime at the level of cities and Police Force Areas in England. Our cluster analysis (which organises items into groups, or clusters, based on how closely associated they are) provides evidence of co-location in the patterns of betting shops and overall crime across similar neighbourhoods in our seven cities, with strong evidence in Birmingham, Sheffield, Liverpool and Bristol compared to Nottingham and Newcastle.

Furthermore, we used a multilevel model (designed for data where units like neighbourhoods are grouped or clustered within larger units like cities and PFAs) to explore the relationship between betting shops and anti-social behaviour, burglary, bike theft, drugs, public disorder, shoplifting and theft from the person, while controlling for the resident populations and year. We found a significant positive relationship between betting shops and all the crime categories across the seven cities.

In the two PFAs, Dorset showed evidence of co-location of betting shops and overall crime, but Surrey did not. Like the cities, our multi-level models found a positive association between betting shops and all crime types in both PFAs.

It is important to note that our analysis does not show that having betting shops in cities or PFAs causes crime. Rather, our focus is on the co-location of crime with betting shops, and our analysis shows that betting shops are places around which crime occurs.

Key finding #2: The relationship between betting shops and crime is impacted by neighbourhood characteristics, but there are key differences between cities and PFAs. Delving into the data in more detail, we conducted multilevel modelling that controlled for a range of neighbourhood characteristics such as education deprivation, access to healthy assets and hazards, occupation, housing tenure and point of interest data (e.g. bus stops and food and drink places).

This showed that the relationship between betting shops and crime is impacted by neighbourhood characteristics, but there are differences across the cities and PFAs. For instance, the presence of betting shops increases the likelihood of at least one type of crime in Birmingham (ASB and shoplifting), Bristol (all crimes, anti-social behaviour, public disorder and burglary), Liverpool (ASB, public disorder, shoplifting and burglary), Newcastle (shoplifting) and Nottingham (all crime, ASB and shoplifting). On the contrary, there is no relationship between betting shops and crime in Leeds, whereas, in Sheffield, a negative relationship is observed between number of betting shops and bicycle theft. Across the cities and PFAs, the crimes with the greatest association with betting shops were ASB and shoplifting.

We also identified some key correlates of crime. Factors such as higher numbers of private and social renters, food and drink shops as well as bus stops in a neighbourhood further exacerbate the relationship between betting shops and crime. Based on other academic literature, these attributes suggest high residential mobility, low collective efficacy, high population density and high footfall associated with structural and concentrated disadvantages. The concentration of these risk factors of crime together with betting shops will further increase the level of disorganisation and riskiness, which serve as catalysts for crime occurrence.

Potential impacts
This study provides a nuanced picture of the relationship between betting shops and crime across different geographies in England. The results highlight that – irrespective of the similarities in the relationship between betting shops and the different crime types – there are clear differences with cities and PFAs. This emphasises the importance of local policies to tackle the negative impacts of provisioning of gambling activities; and the importance of local councils having sufficient powers to develop tailored approaches that work in their neighbourhoods and for their communities.

About the project team: The project was led by Dr Oluwole Adeniyi, Nottingham Trent University (Nottingham Business School) working with Dr Ferhat Tura, Bournemouth University (Department of Social Sciences and Social Work), Prof Andy Newton, Nottingham Trent University (Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice) and Prof John McAlaney, Bournemouth University (Department of Psychology).