18.08.2013 Views

gambling in alberta - Research Services - University of Lethbridge

gambling in alberta - Research Services - University of Lethbridge

gambling in alberta - Research Services - University of Lethbridge

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Counts<br />

Data from the Statistics Canada Canadian Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Patterns was used to exam<strong>in</strong>e changes <strong>in</strong><br />

overall number <strong>of</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess <strong>in</strong> Alberta census divisions (Appendix D) as a function <strong>of</strong> cas<strong>in</strong>o<br />

<strong>in</strong>troduction to that census division. A limit<strong>in</strong>g factor <strong>in</strong> this analysis is that data from the<br />

Canadian Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Patterns only goes back to 1998 for census level data (city-level data is not<br />

available). Nonetheless, there were 8 cas<strong>in</strong>os that were <strong>in</strong>troduced to these census divisions<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g this time period. The data is presented <strong>in</strong> Table 57, with shaded cells represent<strong>in</strong>g<br />

cas<strong>in</strong>o <strong>in</strong>troduction. The same methodological approach used to evaluate whether there were<br />

any changes <strong>in</strong> employment levels was used to establish whether there were significant<br />

<strong>in</strong>creases <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess counts subsequent to cas<strong>in</strong>o <strong>in</strong>troduction compared to control periods.<br />

Here aga<strong>in</strong>, there was a slight, but nonsignificant tendency for bus<strong>in</strong>ess counts to be higher<br />

subsequent to cas<strong>in</strong>o <strong>in</strong>troduction compared to control periods. In Census Division 19 (Grande<br />

Prairie) there was an 18.2% <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess counts subsequent to cas<strong>in</strong>o <strong>in</strong>troduction<br />

compared to 11.8% <strong>in</strong> the control period. In Census Division 11 (Edmonton) there was a 9.7%<br />

<strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess counts compared to a 0% <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the control period. In Census Division<br />

15 (Banff) there was a 9.1% <strong>in</strong>crease compared to a 3% decrease <strong>in</strong> the control period. In<br />

Census Division 13 (Athabasca) there was a 3.6% <strong>in</strong>crease compared to a 4.5% decrease <strong>in</strong> the<br />

control period. In Census Division 12 there was a 2.8% <strong>in</strong>crease compared to 0.4% <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong><br />

the control period. In Census Division 10 (Camrose) there was a 3.7% decrease <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />

counts subsequent to cas<strong>in</strong>o <strong>in</strong>troduction compared to a 0.2% <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the control period. In<br />

Census Division 6 (Calgary) there was a 3.0% <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess counts subsequent to cas<strong>in</strong>o<br />

<strong>in</strong>troduction compared to 11.2% <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the control period.<br />

The average percentage <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess counts subsequent to cas<strong>in</strong>o <strong>in</strong>troduction was<br />

5.7% compared to 2.2% <strong>in</strong> the control periods. Nonetheless, these differences were not<br />

statistically different: t (12) = .55, p = .59.<br />

204

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!