Surveillance against shoplifting: Retail calls for digital upgrade

Contents

German retail is facing a growing wave of crime and is sounding the alarm. According to the study “Kameraeinsatz im Einzelhandel” (Camera Use in Retail), conducted by Ibi Research at the University of Regensburg with support from the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (DIHK) focusing on prevention options, shoplifting is no longer a trivial matter: In 2025, more than half of retail companies in Germany were demonstrably targeted by thieves. The number of unreported cases is considered high.

According to the study, those affected report not only an increasing professionalization of perpetrators but also a rise in aggression. Many retailers feel abandoned by politics and security authorities in this situation, while economic damages from inventory discrepancies reach billions.

Modern video technology is a central component of companies' defense strategies. The researchers emphasize that cameras today are more than passive recording devices. They serve for early risk detection, deterrence, and as psychological support for staff. In tense situations, employees can act more calmly when they know they are backed by video footage.

AI Cameras Against Organized Gangs

Retailers see the use of artificial intelligence as a beacon of hope. AI-powered systems could analyze behavioral patterns, identify staff shortages at checkouts, or contribute to optimizing energy management by linking lighting and cooling systems to customer frequency. In times of acute staff shortages, the technology is seen as a compensatory tool to focus attention on critical situations that sales staff cannot always monitor.

Here, the digital defense wall encounters legal hurdles. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is perceived by the retail sector as the biggest obstacle to effective camera use. A point of contention is the permissible storage duration of recordings.

Currently, 48 to 72 hours are considered a data protection-compliant guideline. For many retailers, this period is too short, as professional thefts are often noticed only later, for example, during the next inventory or restocking. By then, the crucial footage has often been automatically overwritten, preventing the later identification of perpetrators and successful prosecution.

Legal Uncertainty Slows Progress

The industry therefore calls for more practical and uniform rules. There is uncertainty about what is legally permissible. While simple surveillance measures for property protection may fall under “legitimate interest,” more complex applications like biometric facial recognition for identifying known shoplifters are legally problematic and generally not permitted in stationary retail.

According to the analysis, this situation leads to pilot projects for AI-based surveillance often being abandoned or not even started in Germany. In contrast, according to the authors, tests are already underway in other European countries due to a less restrictive interpretation of the GDPR.

Furthermore, the overload of the judiciary and police causes frustration among store operators. When minor offenses are dismissed or repeat offenders face no significant consequences despite being banned from the premises and having video evidence, the motivation to report offenses decreases. The retail sector therefore also desires more consistent prosecution and closer cooperation with authorities.

Concerns from Supervisory Authorities

To bridge the gap between security needs and data protection, the authors focus on education and offer practical guidelines for retailers. However, without an adjustment of the framework conditions, the gap between technical potential and actual protection in German retail will widen further.

Data protectionists emphasize the need for proportionality and the protection of fundamental rights. From their perspective, video surveillance must remain the last resort (“Ultima Ratio”) after milder measures such as product tagging or increased staff presence have proven insufficient. Supervisory authorities have concerns about the danger of comprehensive surveillance of public spaces and the impermissible identification of uninvolved individuals through biometric methods. They fear a potential for data retention without concrete suspicion. Experts warn, especially with AI systems, about a black box problem, where automated decision-making processes are not transparent and can lead to discrimination.

(nie)