Content uploaded by Libena Tetrevova
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Libena Tetrevova on Aug 19, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Gambling Industry and Corporate Social Responsibility – the Czech
Experience
LIBĚNA TETŘEVOVÁ, JAN SVĚDÍK
Department of Economy and Management of Chemical and Food Industry
University of Pardubice
Studentská 95, 532 10 Pardubice
CZECH REPUBLIC
Libena.Tetrevova@upce.cz, Jan.Svedik@upce.cz, http://www.upce.cz/fcht/kemch.html
Abstract: This article deals with the context of the social responsibility of enterprises and the gambling
industry, and it illustrates these interactions and links on the example of gambling operators in the Czech
Republic. The introduction defines the term of the corporate social responsibility within an alternative concept
and discusses possible areas of the corporate social responsibility. Furthermore, the attention is paid to the
methods of measuring social responsibility and to its indicators from the general point of view. Subsequently,
we suggest indicators of corporate social responsibility measurement in the gambling industry in the economic,
social, environmental, ethical and philanthropic areas. On the basis of these indicators, we assess behaviour of
gambling operators in the Czech Republic and recommend the areas and measures of possible changes.
Key-Words: corporate social responsibility, areas of corporate social responsibility, indicators of corporate
social responsibility, gambling, gambling providers, gambling industry, stakeholders.
1 Introduction
Gambling providers are generally considered as
entities that cannot be connected with a socially
responsible behaviour, as well as the armaments and
tobacco industries, or producers of alcoholic
beverages. The reasons can be mainly seen in the
negative externalities that are connected with
gambling.
It is a well-known fact, that gambling is
connected with a number of negative externalities
relating to, above all, pathological gamblers
(financial problems, family breakdown, suicide,
crime, health system costs etc.), and potential non-
transparent monetary transactions (e.g. money
laundering) or displacement of existing business and
spending [15]. On the other hand, it is also
necessary to take the positive externalities into
account, i.e. where gambling is an important source
of income of the public budgets, a source of job
opportunities, and a supporter of a number of public
activities.
And it is the nature of gambling with its various
effects that evokes the necessity to discuss these
problems and apply the corporate social
responsibility concept principles to the gambling
industry. This article aims to define the main areas
of the corporate social responsibility as the basis for
identification of the corporate social responsibility
indicators, to suggest the corporate social
responsibility indicators for gambling providers and
evaluate, using these indicators, the corporate social
responsibility of gambling providers in the Czech
Republic.
The authors of the paper used the following
research methods: interpretative-theoretical
research, descriptive research, correlation research
and structured interviews.
The professional literature pays minimum
attention to the problems of gambling. The paper
enhances the knowledge of the given area, and its
main contribution can be seen in redefinition of the
corporate social responsibility areas and in
identification of the corporate social responsibility
indicators from the point of view of the gambling
industry.
2 CSR and its Areas
Literature includes a number of definitions of the
corporate social responsibility (CSR), see Table 1. It
is a subject matter of the interest of both
academicians and a number of institutions to define
this term. In the efforts to achieve the author’s
originality, each of them accentuates another aspect.
However, most of the authors agree to voluntariness
of the corporate social responsibility.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
116
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
Table 1 - Corporate Social Responsibility - Selected Definitions
Study Conceptions of Social Responsibility
Bowen, H. R. (1953) Businessmen have an obligation to pursue those policies, to make those decisions,
or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives
and values of our society.
Davis, K. (1960) The social responsibility refers to businessmen’s decisions and actions taken for
reasons at least partially beyond the firm’s direct economic or technical interest.
Davis, K. & Blomstrom, R. L.
(1960) The social responsibility refers to a person’s obligation to consider the effects of
his decisions and actions on the whole social system.
Frederick, W. C. (1960) The social responsibility means that businessmen should oversee the operation of
an economic system that fulfils the expectations of the public.
McGuire, J. W. (1963) The firm has not only economic and legal obligations, but also certain
responsibilities to society which extend beyond these obligations.
Johnson, H. L. (1971)
A social responsible firm is one whose managerial staff balances a multiplicity of
interests. Instead of striving only for larger profits for its stockholders, a
responsible enterprise also takes into account employees, suppliers, dealers, local
communities, and the nation.
Manne, H. G. & Wallich, H. C.
(1972) The main aspect of corporate social responsibility is that the behaviour of the
firms must be voluntary.
Eilbert, H. & Parket, I. R.
(1973)
The corporate social responsibility concept involves two phases. On one hand, it
means not doing things that spoil the neighbourhood. On the other, it may be
expressed as the voluntary assumption of the obligation to help solve
neighbourhood problems.
Backman, J. (1975) The social responsibility refers to the objectives or motives that should be given
weight by business in addition to those dealing with economic performance (e.g.
profits).
Sethi, S. P. (1975) The social responsibility implies bringing corporate behaviour up to a level where
it is congruent with the prevailing social norms, values, and expectations.
Steiner, G. A. (1975) The corporate social responsibility is a continuum of responsibilities ranging from
“traditional economic production” to “government dictated” to a “voluntary area”
and lastly to “expectations beyond reality”.
Hay, R. D., Gray, E. R. &
Gates, J. E. (1976)
The social responsibility requires the firm to make decisions and actually commit
resources of various kinds in some of the following areas: pollution problems,
discrimination problems, consumerism and other social problem areas.
Carroll, A. B. (1979) The social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical,
and discretionary expectations that society has of organizations at a given point in
time.
Jones, T. M. (1980) The corporate social responsibility is the notion that corporations have an
obligation to constituent groups (stakeholders) in society other than stockholders
and beyond that prescribed by law and union contract.
Wartick, S. L. & Cochran, P. L.
(1985)
Business exists at the pleasure of society; its behaviour and methods of operation
must fall within the guidelines set by society. Like government, business has a
social contract – an implied set of rights and obligations.
European Commission (2001) The corporate social responsibility is a concept whereby companies integrate
social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their
interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis.
Source: Modified according to [8, 10, 12, 28, 30, 31].
In our opinion, the corporate social responsibility
represents a superstructure of the corporate statutory
responsibility, where the firm management and staff
behave the way they not only fulfil the corporate
economic mission itself, but they also facilitate
meeting the intentions and objectives of all
stakeholders.
Not only can we meet a number of definitions of
the corporate social responsibility, there is also a
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
117
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
wide range of opinions on the corporate social
responsibility areas.
According to Carroll the corporate social
responsibility consists of economic, legal, ethical
and philanthropic responsibilities. The economic
responsibility represents the obligation to produce
goods and services that society wants and to sell
them at a profit. The legal responsibility is
determined by the laws and regulations under which
firm is expected to operate. The ethical component
of the CSR includes additional activities and
behaviours that are not codified into law but
nevertheless are expected of business by society.
The philanthropic responsibility rests mainly in
implementation of giver activities [8].
Muijen [23], Pavlík & Bělčík [24] define 3P of
social responsibility, which refer to the economic
area (Profit), the social area (People) and the
environmental area (Planet).
Another point of view of the focus of social
responsibility can be found in the work of
Steinerová & Makovski [27], who distinguish four
main components of the CSR - the market (focus on
transparent business, positive relationships to the
investors, the customers, the suppliers and other
business partners, the company’s positive impact on
the economy), the working environment (focus on
the employees, their remuneration, working
environment, quality and loyalty), the local
community (establishing good relationships with the
neighbours, and taking part in solving local
problems), and the environment (i.e. diminishing the
negative impacts on the environment, and activities
in the area of the environment).
Blowfield & Murray [5] identify seven areas of
corporate responsible activities and divide them into
31 classes of activities - leadership, vision and
values (defining and setting the corporate purpose,
values, and vision; translating this into policies and
procedures; putting it into practice, including
empowering and embedding; ethical leadership and
championing), marketplace activities (responsible
customer relations, including marketing and
advertising; product responsibility; using corporate
responsibility product labelling; ethical competition;
making markets work for all), workforce activities
(employee communication and representation;
ensuring employability and skills development;
diversity and equality; responsible/fair
remuneration; work-life balance; health, safety, and
well-being; responsible restructuring), supply chain
activities (being a fair customer; driving social and
environmental standards through the supply chain;
promoting social and economic inclusion via the
supply chain), stakeholder engagement (mapping
key stakeholders and their main concerns;
stakeholder consultation; responding to and
managing stakeholders; transparent reporting and
communication), community activities (financial
donations; volunteering employee time; giving gifts
in kind; being a good neighbour), environmental
activities (resource and energy use; pollution and
waste management; environmental product
responsibility; transport planning).
If we proceed from the classical concept by
Carroll and take into account both the idea of
voluntariness of the CSR beyond the framework of
law, and the alternative opinions concerning the
CSR areas, we can state that the CSR covers the
following five areas (see Figure 1):
economic area – provision of products and
services that are useful for the society in the
required quantity and quality and for
reasonable price, together with generation of
an adequate profit for the owners;
social area – respecting a wide range of needs
and interests of the human resources;
environmental area – preventing occurrence
of negative externalities and pro-active
environmental measures;
ethical area – creation, fulfilment and
promotion of wide application of ethical
standards;
philanthropic area – support of volunteer
activities of the employees and donor ship.
And at the same time, each business should be
socially responsible towards all its stakeholders
(interest groups, constituencies or publics) in the
specified areas. A stakeholder is “any group or
individual who can affect or is affected by the
achievement of an organization’s purpose” [14],
“any individual or group who can affect or is
affected by the actions, decisions, policies,
practices, or goals of the organization” [9], any
group “with a direct interest in the survival of the
corporation; without its support the corporation
might cease to exist” [2]. The typical corporate
stakeholders are customers, suppliers, employees,
owners, competitors, trade associations,
governments and their institutions, communities,
environmental groups, consumer protection groups
and media.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
118
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
Figure 1 - CSR Pillars
3 CSR Assessment and Indicators
The problems broadly discussed in connection with
the social responsibility also include the possibilities
of measuring and assessing the CSR (see e.g. [4, 6,
7, 11, 13, 16, 30]).
The following methods can be considered as the
main ones: measurements based on analysing of the
contents of annual reports, pollution indices,
perceptual measurements derived from
questionnaire-based surveys, corporate reputation
indicators (e.g. Dow Jones Sustainability Index,
Ethibel Sustainability Index, FTSE4Good, Domini
400 Social Index, Calvert Social Index) and data
produced by measurement organizations [16]. Then,
we can consider structured interviews or analyses of
the contents of companies’ websites as alternative
methods.
While assessing the CSR, attention is focussed
on various areas and subsequently on various
aspects of the CSR. Table 2 shows the possible CSR
indicators.
Table 2 - CSR Indicators
Areas of CSR DJSI Ethibel FTSE4
Good Domini
400 Calvert
Economic
Customer Relationship Management x x
Scorecards/Strategic Planning x
Product Quality/Future Value x x
Environmental
Presence of Environmental Policy x x x x
Environmental Reporting x x x
Measurement of Company Impacts x x x x
Measurement of Product Impacts x x
Environmental Management Systems x x
Production Initiatives x x
Monitoring of Suppliers x x
Employee Training x
Social – Internal
Equal Opportunities and Diversity x x x x x
Human Capital Development x x x x
Employee Participation x x
Health & Safety of Workers x x x
Employee Relations x x x x x
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
119
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
Table 2 - CSR Indicators (cont’d.)
Areas of CSR DJSI Ethibel FTSE4
Good Domini
400 Calvert
Social – External
Stakeholder Consultation x x x x
Corporate Citizenship/Philanthropy x x x x x
Social Reporting x x
Product Safety & Social Impact x x
Human Rights Policy & Monitoring x x x x x
Human Rights Impact Assessment x
Indigenous Peoples‘ Rights x x
Supplier monitoring x x
Corporate Governance
Board Composition x x x
Audit Issues x
Governance & Ethics x x x x
Investor Relations x
Risk & Crisis Management x
Source: [4, 22].
4 CSR Indicators in the Gambling
Industry
The gambling industry represents a specific branch
of the national economy. As the research carried out
in the form of structured interviews with the
representatives of gambling providers operating in
the Czech Republic implies, it is necessary to
modify some of the general CSR indicators to be
applicable to the gambling industry.
As for the economic area, the gambling industry
specifics show mainly in the area of their relation to
their stakeholders, particularly to gamblers and the
state authorities. From the point of view of the
gambling provider, a gambler is a customer, where
as well as in the case of any other entrepreneur, the
gambling provider tries to attract customers and thus
increase the demand for their products. However, in
view of the nature of gambling, it is necessary to
choose both the target groups and the applied means
carefully. At the same time, it is also necessary to
show care for gamblers from the point of view of
their protection from unhealthy gambling. As for the
relation between the gambling providers and the
state authorities, they are very close relationships,
resulting from the strict legal regulation of gambling
and the necessity to obtain a licence to operate it,
where there is even an effort to establish a state
monopoly on gambling in some countries. However,
we also cannot forget transparency of this
entrepreneurial activity, particularly from the point
of view of the information openness concerning the
winning ratios.
From the point of view of the social area, the
specifics may include education of employees in the
area of client relations, where it is necessary to
ensure training of the employees in the area of
responsible gambling. “Responsible gambling refers
to a safer approach to gambling involving informed
and educated decision making by consumers.
Responsible gambling also incorporates harm
minimization approaches.” [21] The employees of
gambling providers that deal personally with
gamblers should, above all, learn how to recognize
potential problem gamblers, and they should know
the procedures and methods how to ensure help for
them.
Very important specifics can be found in the
ethical area. As a result of the necessity to obtain a
licence for provision of gambling and the limited
number of entities that can get this licence, this area
of business is often connected with bribery. Another
problem resides in the codes of ethics that would be
binding for gambling providers, where a number of
gambling providers are not bound by any code of
ethics.
The essential specifics can be seen in the
philanthropic area. In most countries, gambling
providers have a legal obligation to give a part of
their yields to the public purposes. From the point of
view of the CSR, it is necessary to pay attention to
the volumes and purposes of the financial means
beyond the framework of the legal obligations. At
the same time, we cannot forget the possibility of
using the means for the public purposes by the
donor’s friendly companies.
For the proposed recommended CSR indicators
from the point of view of gambling providers,
see Table 3.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
120
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
Table 3 - CSR Indicators of Gambling Providers
Economic Area
• Corporate governance principles
• Relationships with stakeholders
(especially clients, employees, government
bodies, suppliers, competitors and the public)
• Corporate transparency
• Quality and safety of the provided products
and services
Social Area
• Staff training and qualifications
growth
• Remuneration Policy
• Working conditions
• Equal opportunities in the workplace
• Employee participation
Environmental Area
• Recycling
• Resource savings
• Investments into environmental technologies
Ethical Area
• Corruption disclaimer
• Code of ethics
• Intellectual property protection
Philanthropic Area
• Sponsorship and endowment activities
• Cooperation with not-for-profit organizations
5 CSR and Gambling Providers in
the Czech Republic
In the Czech Republic, gambling is governed by Act
No. 202/1990, on lotteries and other similar games.
According to this Act, gambling is defined as games
in which persons who pay bet take a voluntary part
while no return on the bet is guaranteed. It is a
chance, a circumstance unknown in advance or an
event in accordance with the gaming conditions that
decides on a win or a loss. Gambling can have the
form of cash or non-cash lotteries based on lots, a
raffle, a number lottery, an instant lottery, gambling
machines, betting on match scores and other sports
results, a bingo, odds bets, horse bets, or betting
games in casinos. [1]
Nowadays (June 2011), the Ministry of Finance
has granted a licence to operate lotteries and betting
games in the area of the Czech Republic to 119
operators [18]. They are legal entities that, in
compliance with the legal requirements, have in
most cases the legal form of a joint-stock company,
while their registered capital must be at least
CZK100 million (i.e. about EUR4 million) and their
shares are registered.
The lottery and betting games market leader,
with the market share of 6.9%, is Sazka, a.s. The
reason is, above all, its competition advantage given
by the tradition of this company, which was
established in 1956, and until 1990 it enjoyed a
monopoly position in the Czech Republic.
See Table 4 for an overview of the results of the
lottery and other similar games operators in the
Czech Republic in 2009. You will find not only the
bets, paid winnings and the resulting income of the
gambling providers, but also the operators’
expenditure related to the administrative and local
fees, the charges for the state supervision and
payments going to the public purposes, and all of
that divided by the kinds of game.
Table 4 - Overview of the Results of the Lottery and Other Similar Games Operators in the Czech Republic in
2009 (in CZK million)
Bets Paid winnings Resulting income
of gambling
providers
Administrative
fees Charges
for state
supervision
Local fees Public
purposes
Lotteries 7 282,2 3 616,5 3 665,7 61,3 x x 719,2
Odds 8 819,3 6 216,7 2 602,6 77,0 26,0 x 287,9
Bingo 28,0 19,6 8,4 0,8 x x 0,5
Casinos 9 555,8 7 841,2 1 714,6 171,3 17,2 143,4
Gambling
Machines
48 728,7 36 575,3 12 153,4 1 745,0 x 1 036,0 677,1
Technical
games 53 416,7 41 101,1 12 315,6 482,0 123,2 x 1 485,8
Total 127 830,7 95 370,4 32 460,3 2 537,4 166,4 1 036,0 3 313,9
Source: [19].
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
121
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
If we pay our attention to the fact how the CSR
indicators are met by the gambling providers in the
Czech Republic, we can, on the basis of the results
of structured interviews with the managers of
gambling providers, analyses of the annual reports
and Internet pages of the gambling providers and the
documents of the Ministry of Finance of the Czech
Republic, state the following. For the time being,
the CSR principles are basically not applied in the
Czech Republic in the gambling industry, as well
as in the other branches of the national economy.
Table 5 shows that most areas respect the legal
requirements. However, there are still areas where
we can see efforts of most gambling providers to
evade the legal requirements. Table 5 provides
generalized conclusions of the research and shows
the prevailing way of conduct of most gambling
providers in the individual areas.
Table 5 - CSR Indicators of Gambling Providers in the Czech Republic
CSR Areas/Indicators Evasion of
the legislative
requirements
Respecting
the legislative
requirements
Respecting
the CSR
principles
Economic Area
Corporate governance principles x
Relationships with gamblers x
Relationships with Ministry of Finance x
Relationships with other stakeholders x
Corporate transparency x
Quality and safety of the provided products
and services x
Social Area
Staff training and qualifications growth x
Remuneration Policy x
Working conditions x
Equal opportunities in the workplace x
Employee participation x
Environmental Area
Recycling x
Resource savings x
Investments into environmental
technologies x
Ethical Area
Corruption disclaimer x
Code of ethics x
Intellectual property protection x
Philanthropic Area
Sponsorship and endowment activities x
Cooperation with not-for-profit
organizations x
As for the economic area, most gambling
providers respect the legal requirements relating to
this area. From the point of view of application of
the CSR, we can see a positive relationship with
selected stakeholders only. They are the gamblers
and the government, but only in certain aspects of
their behaviour. With regard to the gamblers, there
are a number of activities aiming to keep the
existing and attracting new gamblers and to prolong
the time they spend playing. The tools used are both
loyalty programmes or various extra competitions
for real prizes (e.g. motorbikes or cars), and the way
how the gambling rooms are designed from the
point of view of the players’ comfort (particularly
comfortable seating in the gambling rooms, privacy
for gamblers). On the other hand, we can negatively
evaluate the fact that the only condition that restricts
access to gambling and is respected by the gambling
providers is reaching the age of 18 years, as
provided by law. There are also no activities aiming
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
122
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
to solve the problems of the gambling addicts. The
relationships between the gambling providers and
the government, specifically the Ministry of
Finance, which is also the regulatory and
supervisory body in this area and grants licences to
operate lotteries and betting games, can be
considered as the above-standard ones. The fact that
can be particularly negatively evaluated in the
economic area is the information openness, where
the public has no relevant information of the
winning shares or of the intentions or specific use of
the individual gambling operators’ means for the
public purposes.
As for the social area, also there most companies
meet the legal requirements only. It is the education
and the related improvement in the employees’
qualifications what we can generally consider as
socially responsible. However, this education is
mainly focussed on the professional problems from
the point of view of the professional specialization
of the workers and what is completely absent is
education in the area of interpersonal competences
focussed on the gambler. What can be positively
assesses from the point of view of application of the
CSR principles, it is the corporate wage policy,
although some workers get the legal minimum
salary only, and this salary is then illegally
increased by cash in hand without paying taxes or
health and social insurance. As for the social area,
behaviour of small “family companies” can be
evaluated as considerably positive from the point of
view of both the working conditions and the
employee participation.
In the environmental area, the said indicators are
fulfilled from the point of view of the requirements
as provided by law, where an important indicator is
the obligation to certify all gaming devices by a
state testing laboratory, where the impact on the
environment is also assessed. However, there are
generally no other activities beyond the legal
obligations.
In the ethical area, a material problem is
corruption, which, on the one hand, arises from the
mentality of the nation significantly affected by the
forty-year period of a totalitarian regime and, on the
other hand, from the fact that provision of gambling
requires getting a licence and meeting a number of
administrative obligations. What can also be
considered as a drawback is failing to adopt the
ethical codes of the gaming industry. For instance,
there is only one out of 119 gambling providers in
the Czech Republic who has committed to observe
the code of ethics of the European Lotteries
Association. Another problem in this area resides in
breaching the copyright, particularly in the area of
software.
As for the philanthropic area, most gambling
operators provide means for the public purposes at
the amount as provided by law. They have to
contribute the fixed percentage of their yield (6-20%
depending on the amount of the yield) to social,
health, sports, environmental, cultural, or other
public purposes. Table 6 shows distribution of the
means to the public purposes in 2009. However, a
problem is the fact that the law does not stipulate a
particular purpose for using these means, and so
most of them go to friendly organizations financing
activities connected with the donor. However, some
of the companies sponsor selected not-for-profit
organizations beyond the scope of their legal
obligations. The fact is that they are usually
organizations in which the family members or
friends of the owners of companies providing
gambling are active.
Table 6 – Distribution of the Means to the Public Purposes in 2009 in CZK Thousand and in %
Ecology Culture Foundations Municipalities Social
purposes Sport Education Health
service Total
36 823 228 532 342 668 735 618 136 942 1 762 784 21 954 95 971 3 361 292
1,1 % 6,8 % 10,2 % 21,9 % 4,1 % 52,4 % 0,6 % 2,9 % 100 %
Source: [20].
6 Conclusion
Gambling, i.e. games for money, is considered as a
serious social problem. However, this problem
shows almost exclusively in connection with
problem gamblers and pathological gamblers. It is
the fact that only a small part of the population is
really addicted to gaming, and, in comparison with
e.g. addiction to alcohol, it is a small percentage
(e.g. in 2008 in the Czech Republic, 25,293 people
were treated for addiction to alcohol, while only
1,383 people were treated for pathological
gambling, i.e. almost twenty times as few [3]). As a
matter of fact, pathological gambling is often only
used as an excuse for committing various criminal
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
123
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
offences. It is necessary to realize that, as stated by
Pratten & Walton: “Most of the activities which
individuals undertake can be harmful if taken to
excess. Eating unhealthy foods can cause problems.
Even drinking too much water can be lethal.” [25].
People have been playing certain games for ages
as they bring them entertainment, excitement, and
enjoyment of playing. The primary reason for
providing gambling is to ensure human leisure
activities. In the case gamblers apply the principles
of responsible gambling – playing is their personal
choice, they know when to stop playing, they
determine the maximum acceptable loss and respect
it, they do not borrow money for playing, and they
perceive the game as entertainment, but not as a way
how to earn money, then gambling cannot be a
source of negative social effects.
However, responsible gamblers cannot exist
without responsible gambling providers. Only such
gambling providers that are aware of and apply the
principles of the CSR can guarantee responsible
gambling. As the performed research implies, there
is a space for one thing in introduction of the
general CSR principles in the gambling industry, for
another in enforcing specific measures respecting
the specifics of gambling providers.
As for the measures specific for the area of
gambling, it is necessary, in the first place, to solve
the problem of informational imbalance (e.g.
informing not only about the winning shares, but
also about the ways of using the means going to the
public purposes) and support information openness
in this area (particularly to inform the gamblers of
the risks of gambling and of the responsible
gambling principles). A way how to solve the
problem lies in informational and educational
campaigns focussed not only directly on the
gamblers, but also on the general public, where
students are an important target group, and also on
senior citizens as an endangered group. Another set
of measures should be focussed on the solution to
problem gambling. The possibilities how to solve
this include obligatory registration of gamblers and
creation of a blacklist, which would prevent the
problem and pathological gamblers from entering
the gambling rooms in the entire area of the country
(either on the basis of the gambler’s own request, or
on the basis of a decision made by the gambling
providers or the state authorities). Furthermore, the
gambling providers should also create and sponsor
help lines and problem gambling treatment centres.
In this context, it is also possible to consider
education of the gambling providers’ employees
focussing on the relations to all the relevant
stakeholders as crucial [17, 26]. An important role
within all the above activities should be played by
the associations of gambling providers.
References:
[1] Act No. 202/1990, on lotteries and other
similar games.
[2] Alkhafaji, A. F., A Stakeholder Approach to
Corporate Governance, Quorum Books,
1989.
[3] APKURS, 10 Arguments, 2010, retrieved
April 15th 2011 from http://web-
nlb.sazka.cz/LoterieAHry/docDetail.aspx?nid
=12858&docid=19076321&doctype=ART&d
id=12858.
[4] Blažek, L., Doležalová, K., & Klapalová, A.,
Corporate Social Responsibility, Research
Centre for Competitiveness of Czech
Economy, 2005.
[5] Blowfield, M., & Murray, A., Corporate
Responsibility, Oxford University Press, 2011.
[6] Brilius, P., Dynamic Model of Dependencies
between Economic Crisis and Corporate
Social Responsibility Contribution to
Sustainable Development, Economics and
Management, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2010, pp. 422-
429.
[7] Bunčák, M., & Bussard, A. et al., Corporate
Social Responsibility, Nadácia Integra, 2005.
[8] Carroll, A. B., Corporate Social
Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional
Construct, Business and Society, Vol. 38, No.
3, 1999, pp. 268-295.
[9] Carroll, A. B., Business and Society: Ethics
and Stakeholder Management, South-Western
College Publishing, 1996.
[10] Carroll, A. B., A Three-Dimensional
Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance,
The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4,
No. 4, 1979, pp. 497-505.
[11] Déjean, F., & Oxibar, B., An Alternative
Approach of Corporate Social Disclosure
Analysis, 2003, retrieved April 15th 2011
from http://halshs.archives-
ouvertes.fr/docs/00/15/05/81/PDF/EAA_2003
-DejeanOxibar.pdf.
[12] European Commission, Promoting a
European Framework for Corporate Social
Responsibility, Office for Official
Publications of the European Communities,
2001.
[13] Franc, P., Nezhyba, J., & Heydenreich, C.,
Take into Account Social Responsibility,
Ekologický právní servis, 2006.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
124
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
[14] Freeman, R. E., Strategic Management: A
Stakeholder Approach, Pitman Publishing,
1984.
[15] Hancock, L., Schellinck, T., & Schrans, T.,
Gambling and Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR): Re-defining Industry
and State Roles on Duty of Care, Host
Responsibility and Risk Management, Policy
and Society, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2008, pp. 55-68.
[16] Igalens, J., & Gond, J. P., Measuring
Corporate Social Performance in France: A
Critical and Empirical Analysis of ARESE
data, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 56, No.
2, 2005, pp. 131-148.
[17] Lee, Y. T., A Hybrid Approach for Exploring
Training Needs and Methods for Human
Resources Development Staff, WSEAS
Transaction on Business and Economics, Vol.
5, No. 5, 2008, pp. 291-297.
[18] Ministry of Finance, Gambling Providers,
2011, retrieved April 12th 2011 from
http://www.mfcr.cz/cps/rde/xchg/mfcr/xsl/sez
nam_provozovatelu.html.
[19] Ministry of Finance, Overview of the Results
of the Lottery and Other Similar Games
Operators in the Czech Republic in 2009,
2010, retrieved February 18th 2011 from
http://www.mfcr.cz/cps/rde/xchg/mfcr/xsl/lote
rie_statistika_56219.html.
[20] Ministry of Finance, Statistics, 2010, retrieved
February 18th 2011 from
http://www.mfcr.cz/cps/rde/xchg/mfcr/xsl/lote
rie_statistika.html.
[21] Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor
General, Responsible Gambling Program
Prevention Strategy, 2008, retrieved April 9th
2011 from
http://www.bcresponsiblegambling.ca/respons
ible/docs/rg_prevention_strategy.pdf.
[22] Mitchell, C. et al., Measuring Sustainability,
University of North Carolina, 2004.
[23] Muijen, H. S. C. A., Corporate Social
Responsibility Starts at University, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 53, No. 1-2, 2004, pp.
235-246.
[24] Pavlík, M., & Bělčík, M. et al., Corporate
Social Responsibility, Grada Publishing, 2010.
[25] Pratten, J. D., & Walton, S., Policy and
Reality: Corporate Social Responsibility in
the UK Gambling Industry, 2009, retrieved
June 28th 2011 from
http://www.qub.ac.uk/mgt/sustainability/down
loads/062009prattenwalton.pdf.
[26] Skrlec, K., & Vlahovic, N., Impact of Change
Management Implementation in a production
system – A Croatian experience, WSEAS
Transaction on Business and Economics, Vol.
7, No. 2, 2010, pp. 83-93.
[27] Steinerová, M., & Makovski, D., CSR
Concept, 2008, retrieved March 28th 2011
from http://www.csr-
online.cz/NewsDetail.aspx?p=3&id=581.
[28] Tetřevová, L., Corporate Social
Responsibility in the Czech Gambling
Industry, Economics and Management, Vol.
16, No. 1, 2011, pp. 612-620.
[29] Tetřevová, L., & Svědík, J., Corporate Social
Responsibility in Gambling, 3rd World
Multiconference on Applied Economics,
Business and Development, Iasi, Romania,
2011, pp. 54-59.
[30] Tetřevová, L., & Sabolová, V., University
Stakeholder Management, 7th WSEAS
International Conference “Engineering
Education”, Corfu Island, Greece, 2010, pp.
141-145.
[31] Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L., The
Evolution of the Corporate Social
Performance Model, The Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1985,
pp. 758-769.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
Liběna Tetřevová, Jan Svědík
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
125
Issue 2, Volume 9, April 2012
