Fact check - Is there really more shoplifting in stores? New study clearly overestimates
## Contents
- Has the number of shoplifting incidents increased?
- How often is shoplifting not detected?
- The problem with the shadow economy
- Why do people shoplift?
- How has the damage caused by shoplifting developed?
- How reliable are the study's estimates?
- Conclusion: What can we conclude from the study?
The renowned trade institute EHI publishes an annual study on "inventory differences." Behind the cumbersome term lies the loss of goods that disappear every year in retail: through theft, damage, and spoilage. This year, the numbers caught our attention: "In 2023, the already high level has once again increased by 15 percent," the press release states about the loss due to shoplifting.
The study author Frank Horst is quoted as saying: "We have now reached a turning point at which the increase in shoplifting assumes a special dimension and requires special attention." What's behind the alarm call?
Has the number of shoplifting incidents increased?
Yes and no. First, let's look at the numbers we have for certain. That's the official criminal statistics. In the previous year, the number of reported shoplifting incidents rose to 426,000 cases, which is almost a third more than before Corona. A significant increase, indeed.
However, the number is significantly lower than what we used to see: A peak occurred in 1997 with 678,000 reported incidents, which is almost two-thirds more than today. Since then, the number has been gradually decreasing. In 2002, there were still 559,000 reported incidents, and in the year before Corona, there were 326,000 reported incidents. We have indeed seen more reported shoplifting incidents than before Corona. However, compared to the years before, the numbers are still within the range.
Reported shoplifting incidents only represent a small fraction of the problem. In fact, not all shoplifters are caught. Quite the contrary.
How often is shoplifting not detected?
We cannot know for sure. Researchers from EHI attempt to estimate it. They ask retailers how much merchandise is lost and why. Result for the previous year: Goods worth 4.8 billion Euro were missing. The estimated value of stolen goods: 4.1 billion Euro. Approximately two-thirds of the shoplifting incidents, according to the estimation of the surveyed companies, were attributed to customers: 2.8 billion Euro. The rest were attributed to employees or suppliers.
According to the study: "From the average damage of all reported shoplifting incidents and the damage detected through inventory in retail, it can be calculated that approximately 24 million shoplifting incidents ... go undetected each year."
In this statement, there are many assumptions. The value of all missing goods contains inaccuracies. It's quite challenging to accurately estimate the quantity and cause of shoplifting. The value of the stolen goods – and most importantly, from whom, i.e., customer, seller, or supplier – is roughly estimated. Some of the companies' estimates are based on "good data," as study author Frank Horst explained to stern upon request, while others rely on "gut feeling."
## The Problem with the Dark Figure
Let's assume the estimation is correct. Let's say there are 24 million shoplifting incidents. If only 426,000 are reported, the dark figure is enormously high: In 55 out of 56 cases, the theft does not show up. It is only during inventory that the merchant discovers something is missing.
This means that if store detectives worked just a little better, the number of reports would skyrocket. If they didn't overlook 55 out of 56 shoplifting incidents but only 54, there would be twice as many reports.
From criminal statistics, it is therefore difficult to determine if customers are stealing more or not. And certainly not whether this has anything to do with inflation. Rather, it has to do with how many or how few businesses are attempting to catch shoplifters. This has the most significant impact.
Frank Horst, the author of the study, responds to this objection: The expenses for store detectives have remained constant, so less is being monitored than before. Therefore, he assumes that there is indeed more shoplifting going on, even if more shoplifters are being caught.
However, there has been continuous investment in surveillance technology and shoplifting prevention for years. And during the Corona period, a lot was rebuilt. Perhaps the measures are simply working better.
Why do People Steal?
The news agency DPA quotes study author Frank Horst as saying, "Some people have gotten into financial difficulties and have stolen more frequently." This cannot be inferred from the study.
On inquiry from stern, he explains that this is based on the fact that meat, butter, and cheese are being stolen more frequently. However, this is not necessarily related to financial difficulties. It could also be due to the annoyance of customers that some products have become particularly expensive. Moreover, a new pattern of shoplifting is emerging due to the new trend towards self-checkout counters.
What has indeed increased are the "heavy shoplifting incidents," in which display cases or other protective devices are broken, and valuable items are stolen. Since 1997, the number of reported heavy shoplifting incidents has quadrupled – there are now over 27,000. Approximately one-third of these are attributed to organized gangs, who work in a division of labor and typically steal goods worth 1,000 to 2,000 euros according to the EHI study.
How Has the Damage Caused by Shoplifting Developed?
According to EHI statistics, the damage caused by shoplifting has been increasing continuously in recent years. In ten years, it rose from 2.1 billion Euros to 2.8 billion. However, these are absolute figures. We have had inflation, sometimes more, sometimes less.
If we account for this effect, the damage has only increased by 0.2 billion Euros. Compared to the total loss of goods (i.e., the total "inventory difference"), the inflation-adjusted loss has even decreased by 0.1 billion Euros in ten years. And as mentioned earlier: The share of shoplifting in the total loss is estimated.
Inflation-adjusted, the projected growth for 2023 in damages reported is significantly less impressive: Approximately 9 percentage points remain from the announced 15 percent. Is this – considering the uncertainties surrounding this figure – really a "turning point"?
Frank Horst remains firm in response to inquiries. His argument: The change in damages due to shoplifting is much higher than in previous studies. This can be clearly derived from the numbers.
How accurate are the study's estimates?
Surprisingly, the study itself is quite straightforward. "There are significant differences in evaluation depending on the industry," it states. "The deviations within an industry also show how subjective the assumptions about the frequency and extent of shoplifting are."
Author Frank Horst makes it clear in the study itself that everything is roughly estimated. As is often the case: In the end, the results in the press release are presented without these caveats.
Conclusion: What can we take away from the study?
Despite all uncertainties, the numbers from the EHI study are interesting. It is clear: There is a high dark figure in shoplifting. Therefore, the official criminal statistics only provide an inadequate representation of reality, and the EHI study is a valuable addition.
Since the end of the 90s, the police have registered fewer shoplifters. However, the persistent high loss for retailers speaks in favor of shoplifting being a relatively stable phenomenon. In recent times, fewer thieves have been caught or reported.
And for this, the retail study provides plausible reasons: The trade has extended opening hours without hiring corresponding numbers of loss prevention detectives. It has saved on personnel, which means that sales staff now have to cover more floor space. After Corona, it was also difficult to hire enough personnel.
Clearly, less personnel makes it easier for employees to steal. The question remains, why this is not reflected in the numbers. Companies have been underestimating the percentage for years.
Conclusion: Given the high dark figure, it is difficult to make general statements about shoplifting based on short-term changes in statistics. This applies to the official criminal statistics as well as to the EHI study.
- The study also emphasizes the importance of fact-checking when interpreting retail crime statistics. Many shoplifting incidents go unreported or undetected, leading to a vast 'dark figure' in shoplifting incidents.
- Retail trade is not solely affected by the increase in shoplifting. Inflation, changes in retail practices, and other economic factors also play significant roles in determining retail losses.
