“Fortress stores” are becoming a reality in parts of the United Kingdom and the United States, with security-tagged items like chicken and steaks locked in wire cages and GPS-tracked jars of instant coffee. Everything from toothpaste to face creams is now often secured inside display cases, requiring staff assistance for access. While these measures might seem extreme, they are a growing trend in response to rising retail theft.
In Australia, similar security measures are emerging. Recently, the owner of Dan Murphy’s and BWS announced that their bottle shops have moved expensive spirits and wine to locked displays, implemented auto-lock doors, and enhanced staff training to combat theft. Major retailers such as Woolworths, Coles, IGA, Bunnings, and Kmart report facing a “full-scale retail crime crisis.” According to recent data, there were 268,666 cases of retail theft last year, accounting for almost half of all thefts nationwide, even as residential thefts declined.
Tightening In-Store Controls
Retailers are increasingly implementing in-store security measures. Back in 2008, when Woolworths introduced self-serve checkouts, the retail operations manager assured that manned checkouts would not disappear. However, the prevalence of self-checkouts has grown, leading to a need for heightened security. Public-view monitors, which display customers’ images on screens during self-checkout, serve as a deterrent by reminding shoppers they are being watched.
To combat unpaid “push-outs” of shopping trolleys, Coles is trialing wheel-locking technology that immobilizes trolleys if customers attempt to leave without paying. Additionally, “smart gate” exits in some supermarkets remain closed until cameras and computer vision systems confirm payment. Woolworths has expanded its use of camera-based AI across over 250 stores, using the technology to flag mis-scans and prompt rescanning of unscanned items.
These computer-vision systems also recognize loose produce, automatically identifying items like bananas or Roma tomatoes, reducing the need for manual input and speeding up transactions. Such upgrades aim to streamline honest transactions while intercepting theft attempts.
More Obvious Security, More Aggressive Thefts
Beyond digital measures, retailers have increased visible security, including uniformed guards and body-worn cameras on staff in high-risk locations. This approach targets “risky facilities,” where a minority of outlets generate the majority of incidents. For instance, a US-based retailer found that 85% of their shoplifting incidents occurred in just 20% of their stores.
The rise in retail theft and aggression is driven by several factors. While technology has made theft easier to detect, it has also led to more confrontations between staff and suspected offenders. According to researchers at QUT, “customer aggression is growing,” with frontline staff bearing the brunt. Thieves have learned that aggression can deter staff, making retail theft a relatively low-risk crime.
Organized crime also poses a significant threat. Wesfarmers’ CEO Rob Scott highlighted organized crime as a major concern, particularly in Victoria, while sports retailer Rebel reported that raids are “out of control.” The CEO of independent supermarket chain Ritchies IGA recently stated that violence in Victorian stores has reached a “crisis point,” prompting considerations of store closures.
Earlier this year, Victoria Police’s Operation Supernova dismantled a syndicate accused of stealing $10 million in merchandise from Melbourne supermarkets over five months.
Is This How We Want to Shop?
Despite the rise in retail theft, widespread implementation of “fortress”-style security measures may not be necessary for all retailers. However, for the most affected stores, more targeted measures such as controlled entries and exits for high-risk items may become commonplace. Trained greeters, clear sightlines, and well-presented aisles can also help deter theft.
While self-checkout was initially marketed as a convenience, the resulting increase in tension and hostility, coupled with a decrease in human interaction, raises questions about its effectiveness. Shoppers do not want confrontations at checkouts, and staff should not have to manage them. Unless retailers can strike the right balance, the question may become why anyone would choose to shop in person.
