Justifications of national gambling policies in France and Finland

AIMS - The principles of free trade and free circulation of services within the European Union have created pressures to make the strictly controlled European gambling markets more open. According to the Court of Justice of the European Union, restrictions on gambling are only allowed if they are justified in admissible terms of consumer protection, prevention of criminal activity and protection of public order. This study compares the gambling laws of two European societies, France and Finland, to analyse how their legal frames of gambling have been adjusted to these principles. DESIGN - The data consists of up-to-date legislation on gambling in Finland and France. A qualitative analysis was conducted to study whether new ways of justifying have been included in legislative texts and if these are substantiated by measures related to consumer protection or crime prevention. RESULTS - France has mainly justified its restrictive policies on gambling in terms of preventing criminal activities while the Finnish legislation highlights the charitable causes funded by gambling proceeds, a claim not accepted by the Court of Justice of the European Union. Consumer protection is increasingly stressed in both countries, and the range of rationales has also grown notably since 2007. CONCLUSION - While the vocabularies of justification accepted by the CJEU have expanded since 2007, these have not been substantiated by many new legislative measures. This is not attributed to political ill will but rather to the difficulty of changing existing legislative traditions.Peer reviewe

Prehending Addiction: Alcohol and Other Drug Professionals’ Encounters With “New� Addictions

© 2017, © The Author(s) 2017. This article investigates the ways new forms of addiction are encountered by professionals working in the area of alcohol and other drugs. Combining interviews with policymakers, service providers, and peer advocates in three countries (Australia, Canada, and Sweden), and Mike Michael’s utilization of the notion of prehension for science communication, we track the notions of addiction, drugs, and subjectivity that emerge when alcohol and other drug professionals encounter what Fraser, Moore and Keane call the addicting of nonsubstance-related practices. The analysis has three parts: constituting addiction unity, questioning addiction unity, and conflicting logics of addicting processes. We argue that specific articulations of drugs and health and specific health professional and addiction subjects are made anew in these encounters. These notions of drugs, health, and subjectivity shape how alcohol and other drug professionals engage with substance-related addictions. In concluding, we consider the implications of new addictions for professional practice

Time-varying correlations and interrelations:Firm-level-based sector evidence

Using firm-level data, we examine stock market correlations and interrelations for the G7 over the period 2000–2013. An examination using aggregate market data supports the view that correlations have risen and particularly so during crisis periods. Using firm-level data, which is tradeable, we establish sector portfolios. We consider three regression approaches. The results support, first, that correlations using firm data are lower than those observed using aggregate market index data. Second, the most important driver for home sector returns is the home market followed by the corresponding US sector. Third, correlations rose during the crisis but have stabilised and even fallen since. This supports the view that markets fall together but rise apart. Fourth, there is evidence that most sector correlations follow a market-wide component, but some sector correlations follow their own component. Subsequently, we examine the key drivers of time-varying correlations. We find that the market-wide component of correlations increases in a US bear market as well as with higher US market volatility and lower US interest rates. However, on a sector basis, there are notable exceptions with some correlations falling in a bear market. Together, these results support the view that diversification benefits remain across market sectors