초록 열기/닫기 버튼
This study empirically analyzes whether legalized gambling is a substitute for or a complement to illegal gambling by conducting a case study on sports betting. For this purpose, we first estimate determinants of sales of legal sports betting (e.g., Sports Toto/Proto) and illegal sports betting with a time series econometric model. In addition, from cross-sectional data obtained from 1,000 participants of sports betting, we examine the impacts of increased competitiveness of legal sports betting on illegal sports betting. Through time series analysis, we find that legal and illegal sports betting have a substitute relationship, but the relationship is weak due to the relative competitiveness of illegal sports betting in areas including accessibility, variety of products, and odds of winning. Cross-sectional data analysis reinforces the findings of the time series analysis. That is, instituting measures to deregulate restrictions on legal sports betting such as allowing purchases on mobile phones, 24-hour purchases, and higher odds of winning would significantly increase its substitution effect. The results suggest that policy effectiveness can be enhanced by steering illegal gambling to the legal domain by improving competitiveness of legal gambling, contrary to the prevailing tendency to focus on regulatory and punitive measures.
