Paternalism and the Pokies: Unjustified State Interference or Justifiable Intervention? [Book Review]

Journal of Business Ethics 110 (3):259-268 (2012)

Abstract
The Australian Productivity Commission and a Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform have recommended implementation of a mandatory pre-commitment system for electronic gambling. Organizations associated with the gambling industry have protested that such interventions reduce individual rights, and will cause a reduction in revenue which will cost jobs and reduce gaming venue support for local communities. This article is not concerned with the design details or the evidence base of the proposed scheme, but rather with the fundamental criticism that a mandatory pre-commitment policy is an unacceptable interference with the liberty of the individual, and of organizations. It is argued that the concept of paternalism is a useful lens with which to study the interactions between business and society on this issue. It is contended that the benefits of a pre-commitment system to problem gamblers and society are socially and economically significant, and the cost to recreational gamblers, particularly the cost in terms of interference with the liberty of the individual, is minimal. Pre-commitment also requires gambling businesses to act in a more socially responsible manner. It is concluded that the proposed legislation constitutes a paternalistic intervention by government on the interaction between business and society, and that this is justified.
Keywords Gambling  Paternalism  Regulation  State intervention  Government policy  Corporate social responsibility
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10551-011-1152-y
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 46,330
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Does Milton Friedman Support a Vigorous Business Ethics?Christopher Cosans - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 87 (3):391-399.
Capitalism and Freedom.Milton Friedman - 1963 - Ethics 74 (1):70-72.
Ulysses and the Sirens.Jon Elster - 1986 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 15 (1):82-95.
Law, Liberty, and Morality.Richard Brandt - 1964 - Philosophical Review 73 (2):271-274.
Legal Paternalism.Joel Feinberg - 1971 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 1 (1):105 - 124.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Liberty, Beneficence, and Involuntary Confinement.Joan C. Callahan - 1984 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 9 (3):261-294.
Paternalism.Kalle Grill - 2011 - In Ruth Chadwick (ed.), Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics. Academic Press.
A Trust-Based Argument Against Paternalism.Simon R. Clarke - 2013 - In Pekka Makela & Cynthia Townley (eds.), Trust: Analytic and Applied Persectives. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Rodopi. pp. 53-75.
Rethinking the Presumption of Innocence.Victor Tadros - 2006 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 1 (2):193-213.
A Dilemma for Libertarianism.Karl Widerquist - 2009 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (1):43-72.
Paternalism, Surrogacy, and Exploitation.Henrik Kjeldgaard Jørgensen - 2000 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 10 (1):39-58.
The Role of Decoherence in Quantum Mechanics.Guido Bacciagaluppi - 2003 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Paternalism and the Ill-Informed Agent.Jason Hanna - 2012 - The Journal of Ethics 16 (4):421-439.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-12-23

Total views
46 ( #193,283 of 2,285,998 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #413,898 of 2,285,998 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature