Study suggests Nordic gambling regulators still in the dark over online gambling black market

A peer-reviewed study has warned of patchy data on the scale of the online gambling black market.

UK.- A new academic review has warned that Nordic regulators need stronger capacity and closer cooperation to understand the scale of the online gambling black market. Published in the peer-reviewed mega journal PLOS One, the scoping review found that current attempts to measure offshore gambling activity in Nordic countries are undermined by patchy data and inconsistent methodologies.

Researchers from institutions in Finland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway examined 32 studies conducted between 2010 and 2024. Their conclusion was that there is “no gold standard or one reliable method to conclusively measure offshore gambling.”

The authors – Virve Marionneau from the University of Helsinki, Søren Kristiansen from Aalborg University, Tomi Roukka from the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare and Håkan Wall from the Karolinska Institute – describe offshore gambling as “a politically sensitive topic wrought with uncertainties.”

The review highlighted that most estimates, whether produced by governments, regulators, or industry bodies tend to draw heavily from one provider: H2 Gambling Capital. While it’s widely cited, the academics argue that the provider’s methods lack transparency, concluding that “even regulators are not fully aware of metrics and assumptions based on which these estimates are made.”

“Despite the political importance of channeling, it is surprisingly unclear how and if we can measure developments in the unregulated market,” they say, concluding that until better methodology is developed, regulators risk making major policy decisions based on data that is incomplete, outdated, or entirely speculative.

Gambling black market estimates as political tools

The review argues that offshore figures are often used strategically as political tools, and that the gambling industry has “attempted to control the narrative over channelling rates within the Nordic countries.”

“Methodological choices, data resources that have been used, and political interests can have an effect on the kinds of estimates that are produced,” the authors warn.

One Swedish study cited claimed that users of unlicensed sites spend 10–20 times more than those on regulated platforms, but the researchers found that this figure had “no empirical basis nor conclusive descriptions” on how it was reached. They argue that questionable figures can distort perceptions of the black market and exaggerate its threat, a charge often levelled at industry lobby groups in other regions in Europe.

The researchers also suggest that offshore gambling is “not a separate market segment from onshore gambling.” For example, they found that in Finland, “98 per cent of individuals reporting offshore gambling also gamble within the regulated market”, but that more than a third of their spending occurred onshore. The add that offshore play tends to involve the riskiest products such as fast-paced online casino games and betting, including live betting.

The review concludes with recommendations that regulators adopt “transparent and scientifically validated” measurement tools to strengthen their evidence bases. This should take the form of a multi-method approach that combines surveys, transaction data and help-seeking statistics, the authors suggest. Bank data, though sensitive, could also provide valuable insights given its role in payment blocking systems.