Regulatory Perspectives for Gambling in Brazil: are there Lessons that can be Learned from the UK´s Experience?

Eduardo Rocha Dias & Steve Greenfield

Journal of Gambling Studies2026https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-026-10496-1article
ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Following recent enactment of online gambling regulations in Brazil, this commentary aims to compare the country´s policies with those of the UK, where the Gambling Act has been in force since 2005. Brazil followed a trend that falls within the recent global expansion of the gambling industry, although having an internal dynamic of its own The key question for those jurisdictions exploring deregulation or who have already ventured down that path is how a regulatory framework can reconcile the ‘harm’ that accompanies the increased freedom to gamble alongside the economic benefits that choice generates. This is a clear obstacle to framing policy in public health terms as opposed to one based on market freedom. The ongoing experience of Brazil demonstrates that, despite the wealth of evidence relating to gambling harms from the UK, the embracing of a neo-liberal approach still resonates. Regulators in Brazil and beyond need to be critically aware of the resistance to introducing new restrictions, from the gambling companies themselves, and respond accordingly.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-026-10496-1

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{eduardo2026,
  title        = {{Regulatory Perspectives for Gambling in Brazil: are there Lessons that can be Learned from the UK´s Experience?}},
  author       = {Eduardo Rocha Dias & Steve Greenfield},
  journal      = {Journal of Gambling Studies},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-026-10496-1},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Regulatory Perspectives for Gambling in Brazil: are there Lessons that can be Learned from the UK´s Experience?

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.