Comparative policy review examining self-exclusion systems in 30 European countries, indicating the need for EU-wide collaboration.
Aims: To support more effective harm reduction policies, this study examines the regulation and implementation of gambling self-exclusion systems in 30 European countries. We map and compare existing self-exclusion policies in terms of scope, provisions and administration. Methods: We conducted a comparative policy review of legal texts, regulatory documents, and official websites, using web scraping and the Vixio Gambling Compliance database. Data were collected between June and September 2025. Results: Of the 30 countries, 24 (80 %) had self-exclusion registers, administrated by public authorities (19), licensed industry actors (2), or monopoly operators (3). Among these 24 countries, 20 (83 %) offered temporary self-exclusion with minimum durations ranging from 24 hours to 3 years. Permanent or indefinite self-exclusion was available in 18 countries (75 %), with revocation allowed after 3 months to 4.5 years. Half of countries with registers mandated marketing bans during self-exclusion. Conclusions: The results indicate that public sector administered self-exclusion registers are a popular policy solution, although their implementation details and provisions vary. The study therefore recommends increased collaboration towards establishing an EU-wide self-exclusion register. This measure should be supported by further research on what optimal self-exclusion durations are and how more uniform regulations can be effectively enforced.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kankainen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: