The new National Gambling Bill introduces a system of voluntary and court-ordered exclusion of problem gamblers from casinos. A wide range of exclusion techniques for access control could be applied to South African casinos. However, there are no clear criteria on which to base the decision of which system is to be implemented. Various role players need to be considered to determine what can be deployable in casino applications. A framework, from a business perspective, is proposed which allows multiple role players and varied criteria to effectively evaluate a range of possible solutions. The framework is applied to the role players affected by the proposed exclusion of problem gamblers from gambling. The main role players evaluated a number of possible exclusion techniques according to a range of important criteria. The current solution of a security guard at the entrance is superior according to the casino operations department. The casino marketing division places a high emphasis on ease of use for the pUblic. Of the alternative solutions, comparison-based solutions (using an identity book) were preferred by Gambling Anonymous while card-based solutions (proximity card) was found to be preferable by the public. The casino surveillance department preferred non-contact, overt, biometric acquisition (such as iris recognition). Covert biometric acquisition (face recognition) is found to be the most acceptable to all the role players, with fingerprint recognition being the least acceptable. The application of the framework allowed multimodal exclusion techniques (face recognition linked to casino loyalty cards) to emerge as a promising way forward. / Thesis (MBA)-University of Natal, Durban, 2003.

對於我國是否應開放合法賭場？在台灣已爭論十年以上。2009年1月23日修正公布《離島建設條例》增訂第10條之2，正式開啟我國於離島設置合法賭場之可能。 從中國澳門及美國開放合法賭場帶來經濟效益的經驗，加以新加坡2005年4月18日宣布，將開放成立兩處賭場度假村(Integrated Resort)以掌握賭場帶來的巨大觀光收益與稅收，似提供贊成我國引進合法賭場經營的有利論證。然對我國政府或官員而言，甚至學術研究領域，仍屬於相當陌生的新興產業；尚缺乏全盤性理解，尤其是外國法制的規範架構及內容的了解。 本論文以新加坡及澳門賭場管理法制為研究中心，採比較法學的方法，分析此二政府對賭場管理法制架構之異同，以作為我國未來建構賭場管理法制架構及內容之參考。另歸納賭場管理法的法律性質，及引進經濟學分析闡述其與賭場管理法制設計之關聯，是本論文另一重點所在。透過經濟學比較靜態的分析，提供新的法制設計思維。 本論文不辦證「開放合法賭場之利弊得失？」，而直接進入「政策已決定我國將開放合法賭場經營」之假設。就賭場管理法之法律性質，本研究歸納五項：一、是引進新興產業及增加投資的法律；二、是特許經營的法律；三、是具嚴格監控的法律；四、是慎選國家代理人的法律；五、是重視社會成本最小化的法律。此於第二章有詳細說明，並定位本論文之總論。 本論文第三章以下為各論之法制研究。分別以賭場特許執照之核發與撤銷、賭場營運之治理、賭場內部控制制度、賭場專責機關之設立等4章，作為分析新加坡及澳門賭場管理法制之架構。 最後，提出本研究之結論與建議：一、開放賭場合法化，應同時考量經濟利益與社會成本的效益；二、應建立嚴格治理的監理法制；三、設計降低社會影響衝擊的機制；四、強化股權控制與關係人之規範；五、賭場內部控制內容應提升至法律位階；六、賦予賭場專責機關較大的監理權限。