Who are you?
Pekka Sulkunen, professor emeritus of Sociology at the University of Helsinki.
How did you end up at CEACG? Or rather, how did CEACG came into being?
I have run a doctoral seminar since the early 1990s until my retirement in 2016. Many of the participants became postdocs and professional sociologists, and some participated in projects that I have led. One of them was on addiction; others were on control and some others on governance issues in general. We received a small funding as a center, which helped us to gain a more stable status in the Faculty and a stronger candidate for competitive funding.
After a long career in alcohol research, I turned my attention to gambling, as the industry began to grow rapidly worldwide from the late 20th century onward—just as the rise in alcohol consumption began to level off. The digitalization of games and their migration online accelerated this growth, and the COVID-19 pandemic pushed even reluctant players onto digital platforms. Similar questions emerged: Who plays? What kinds of harms occur and to whom? How concentrated is the consumption? And why is the supply of games so profitable? Can the harms be prevented—and how?
After a long career in alcohol research, I turned my attention to gambling.
What is your current research about?
We examined the income and cost structures of 30 European gambling companies. All of them generated a surplus, which, after costs and profits, remains with the companies and is used for good causes, such as sports, youth work, social work, culture, and other charitable activities. The surplus as a percentage of turnover was similar to all other costs combined and fairly consistent regardless of whether the companies were privately owned, owned by associations, or state monopolies, as in Finland. The surplus is a significant factor in the regulation of the gambling industry. The harm caused by gambling to citizens and society is obvious and well researched; yet gambling cannot be reduced because the beneficiaries, i.e., the service providers, are unwilling and unable to give up their income. We are currently investigating whether companies that mainly offer online games generate a surplus, what causes it, and where it is used: for private profits or for good causes.
Why do you think it's important to examine this topic?
I have explained economic surplus through the theory of asymmetric markets. In such markets, players do not know the true price of their enjoyment, as it is determined by numerous factors that are difficult to observe. While winnings paid to players are calculable costs for companies, the money lost by players is permanently removed from their income and consumption. These losses are often substantial and their consequences severe.
While winnings paid to players are calculable costs for companies, the money lost by players is permanently removed from their income and consumption.
The theory of asymmetric markets is particularly applicable to the digital gambling industry and forms part of the broader research into the commercial determinants of health, conducted globally in collaboration with the World Health Organization. Asymmetric markets are a feature of global capitalism, where capital accumulation is increasingly focused on the circulation of goods and services rather than production, as was the case in industrial capitalism. This shift explains the growing emphasis on marketing and the expansion of harmful industries.
On the side I have authored a Finnish language book on ”freedom to choose and the pressure for conformity” (allusion to Friedman and Allardt), to be published by Vastapaino in the next few months. The book discusses the fundamental issue of co-operation in human societies in the light of sociological modernisaton theory, its rise and its current turning point.
If you could switch places with your CEACG colleague for one day, who would you choose and why?
This question does not apply to me as I am only able to work part-time. If I were younger I would swap a day with any of them.