This paper aims to investigate the Italian multilevel gambling legislation (national and regional) to highlight how and to what extent different regional styles of regulation are associated with different performances in policy gambling regulation.
Italy presents a paradox: it has one of the highest gambling expenditures in the world, a growing number of addicted adults and exposed youth, and at the same time, its multilevel regulatory framework is one of the most innovative in Europe. Gambling affects individual health, and according to the 2030 Agenda (SGD 3), it is a crucial dimension of social sustainability. The Institutional Grammar Tool (IGT) can help understanding, convergence, and differences in the complex regulatory framework, thanks to its methodological robustness (Siddiki, S., Weible, C. M., Basurto, X., & Calanni, J., 2011; Dunlop, Kamkhaji and Radaelli, 2019). According to the existing literature, national law is pro-gambling, while regional laws and local rules are anti-gambling (PedroniM M. 2014). However, little empirical research supports any of these statements.
Moreover, no comparative work has been done on the 21 regional laws adopted.
The present paper has, therefore, a twofold purpose. First, it aims to test the national legal framework vis-à-vis the regional one. Second, it analyses whether and how the regional rules differ from case to case in specific relevant variables and dimensions and whether such differences reflect a different degree of gambling addiction existing at the regional level.
Adopting the typology of rules identification (Ostrom, E. 2011) on the Balducci Degree (2011) and the 21 regional laws (Marotta, G. 2019), the analysis shows that the legal framework seeks to curb gambling consumption by mixing regulatory tools such as information and position rules, and (limited) administrative sanctions. Finally, those regions including choice rules in their bill(s) are also better performing in curbing gambling expenditure.
