The NSW Government has released the NSW Gambling Survey 2019 - a major new study funded by the NSW Responsible Gambling Fund.
We commissioned the NSW Gambling Survey 2019 to understand gambling in NSW - who gambles, how gambling is changing, the extent of gambling harm in the community, and how different regions are affected.
The survey builds on the last survey published in 2012 and provides a reliable and up-to-date snapshot of gambling participation and behaviours across NSW.
Key findings from the NSW Gambling Survey 2019:
- Just over half (53%) of 10,000 people surveyed had gambled in the past 12 months compared to 65% in 2011
- Lotteries were the most common form of gambling (37%) followed by gaming machines (16%), instant scratchies (13%) and race betting (13%)
- Participation in all forms of gambling has significantly declined since 2011, with the exception of Bingo (2%) and betting on non-sporting events (1%) which remained the same, and informal private betting which has increased from 3% in 2011 to 5% in 2019.
- One percent of the population are problem gamblers, a slight but not statistically significant increase from 0.8% in 2011, and 2.8% are moderate-risk gamblers (2.9% in 2011)
- Gamblers aged 18-24 were most likely to be moderate-risk and problem gamblers (14.9%) compared with 7.2% of gamblers overall
- Just under one in ten adults (8%) had gambled online in the past year with race betting being the most common form of online gambling
- People who speak languages other than English at home had lower participation across the more common forms of gambling, with an overall gambling participation rate of 36%.
The NSW Government is committed to preventing and minimising gambling harm.
In 2019/20, $35 million has been allocated to responsible gambling programs and initiatives to prevent and minimise gambling harm, promote a safe gambling environment and support those impacted by problem gambling.
The NSW Gambling Survey 2019 report was revised in March 2020. In the original report, some of the data relating to respondent demographics was affected by the incorrect application of population weights. This data has been corrected in the revised report, and text referring to the affected tables has been changed accordingly. The majority of the reported data, tables and findings are unchanged. The full details of all corrections and revisions is provided in Appendix D of the revised report.