Edinburgh City Council is considering proposals to establish restricted zones around schools where gambling advertising would be prohibited on outdoor media including billboards, bus stops, and other public advertising structures. The motion, tabled by SNP councillor Sarah Jenkinson, draws on research linking exposure to gambling advertising with increased risk of gambling problems, particularly among young people.
The proposal follows similar restrictions implemented in other jurisdictions. Victoria, Australia, for example, bans gambling advertising within 150 metres of schools, roads, and public transport. These international precedents suggest that distance-based restrictions are a viable policy mechanism, though implementation requires careful attention to enforceability and definition of scope.
I’ve reviewed research on gambling advertising and youth exposure, and the evidence is fairly clear that advertising exposure correlates with increased problem gambling risk. Young people’s developing brains are particularly vulnerable to persuasive messaging, and the pervasiveness of gambling advertising in modern media means that restrictions on specific high-traffic contexts like school zones may meaningfully reduce youth exposure.
The specific distance threshold proposed (400 metres in the Edinburgh proposal) reflects an attempt to create a meaningful buffer zone whilst remaining administratively practical. Smaller distances risk being ineffective, whilst larger distances become difficult to enforce and may capture advertising in areas without genuine youth traffic.
Advertising industry bodies have expressed concerns about proposed restrictions, arguing that well-placed restrictions create enforceable obligations without necessarily achieving meaningful harm reduction. They contend that responsible advertising practices and age-verification systems on digital platforms are more effective than physical restrictions on traditional media.
If approved, Edinburgh’s proposal would make the city a leader in gambling advertising regulation at the local government level. The Scottish Government has not implemented a unified national policy, meaning local authorities are testing whether place-based restrictions are a viable model.
Implementation challenges are substantial. Local authorities must determine how to enforce restrictions, monitor compliance, and handle disputes from advertising contractors. The cost of enforcement may exceed the potential public health benefits, depending on the effectiveness of the restrictions.
The debate reflects broader questions about where responsibility for problem gambling prevention lies. Should it fall on individual gamblers to resist advertising messages, on advertisers to avoid harmful promotion, or on government to restrict the marketplace for advertising itself? Edinburgh’s proposal represents a genuine attempt to shift responsibility toward government and away from individual consumer discipline.