(AsiaGameHub) –   The advancement of technology and iGaming features has underscored the critical need for strong gambling industry oversight.

This emerged as a central theme at this week’s SBC Summit Canada, where iGaming leaders explored how technological progress could fuel the sector’s expansion, while also recognizing its capacity to create regulatory challenges.

Addressing the event, Mike Randall, RG Expert at Gaming Lab, cautioned: “Technology can be a powerful force for good when used by responsible parties. The same technology, however, can become a serious problem in the hands of malicious actors.”

Referring to the swift rise of artificial intelligence within iGaming, he observed that personalisation offers advantages but also carries the risk of considerable harm if misused.

“If I am a problem gambler dealing with an unregulated operator, they won’t use that technology to advise me to slow down or pause. Instead, they might ask, ‘can we send you a jet to come and gamble more?’”

He explained that technology will compel the industry to alter its perspective on regulation, and legal frameworks will have to adapt alongside technological change.

Karl Rempel, Senior Manager for Technology Regulation and Compliance at the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO), offered a slightly different view, stating that “personalisation itself is not inherently harmful”; the potential for harm lies in the intent and method of its application to shape player experiences.

For Lorelle Muller Lumsden, Vice-President PlaySmart Centres at Responsible Gambling Council, however, the player is invariably the first to feel the effects of personalisation, irrespective of existing rules and systems.

She advocated that improving the player’s perspective must be the top priority – urging for greater ‘opportunity for awareness, education, transparency and visibility’ to strengthen player understanding of the iGaming products they can access.

Rempel added that this has essentially been Ontario’s strategy since iGaming regulation began, seeking to incorporate a broad range of features into the legal market while making sure players are not misled about the games they play.

Highlighting the “perceived persistence” feature, Rempel noted that after discussions with operators, they consented to place “a disclaimer on the screen, not hidden in terms and conditions that 90% of players never read or know exist.”

Fostering industry growth is widely viewed as a strategy to combat the black market and optimize the rate of channelization in Canada.

Randall cautioned that people will not cease gambling; they will simply move to platforms where technology is misused, stressing that “the primary concern for problem gamblers today is the unregulated market.”

He described a pivotal juncture for Canadian iGaming: “We face a choice. We can back a regulated system that grows and protects Canadians through oversight, or we can condemn gambling entirely and attempt to suppress it as much as possible.”

On player safety, Randall agreed that operators bear substantial responsibility, but noted that accountability extends further to include regulators and financial institutions.

A major difficulty lies in keeping players within the regulated market and preventing their migration to unlicensed sites, yet Canadian regulation supports this objective, in contrast to many established markets in Europe and Latin America.

Dr Alyssa Wilson, Associate Professor, California State University, emphasized that operators must determine “How can they then incentivise their players to stay and not go to the unregulated markets?”, a task she is confident they have the means to accomplish.

Additionally, Randall warned that younger people are most vulnerable to black market exploitation, also stressing the role of parents in improving education on gambling risks, noting it is “where young men, in particular, are going.”

Randall called for regulations to be flexible and keep pace with technological and supervisory developments.

He declared: “If we have no regulation, no safety net, and no oversight to identify when things go off course, then we are in serious trouble.”