U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 
DOJ Seal
COPS logo
Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 
Problem-Specific Guides Series
No. 11 
Shoplifting
by 
Ronald V. Clarke 
www.cops.usdoj.gov

www.PopCenter.org
Center for Problem-Oriented Policing 
Got a Problem? Weve got answers! 
Log onto the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing website 
at www.popcenter.org for a wealth of information to help 
you deal more effectively with crime and disorder in your 
community, including: 
 Web-enhanced versions of all currently available Guides 
 Interactive training exercises 
 On-line access to research and police practices 
Designed for police and those who work with them to 
address community problems, www.popcenter.org is a great 
resource in problem-oriented policing. 
Supported by the Office of Community Oriented Policing 
Services, U.S. Department of Justice. 

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 
Problem-Specific Guides Series 
Guide No. 11 
Shoplifting 
Ronald V. Clarke 
This project was supported by cooperative agreement 
#99-CK-WX-K004 by the Office of Community Oriented 
Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions 
contained herein are those of the author(s) and do not 
necessarily represent the official position of the 
U.S. Department of Justice. 
www.cops.usdoj.gov 
ISBN: 1-932582-10-X 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series 
The Problem-Specific Guides summarize knowledge about 
how police can reduce the harm caused by specific crime 
and disorder problems. They are guides to prevention and 
to improving the overall response to incidents, not to 
investigating offenses or handling specific incidents. The 
guides are written for policeof whatever rank or 
assignmentwho must address the specific problem the 
guides cover. The guides will be most useful to officers 
who 
 
Understand basic problem-oriented policing 
principles and methods. The guides are not primers in 
problem-oriented policing. They deal only briefly with 
the initial decision to focus on a particular problem, 
methods to analyze the problem, and means to assess 
the results of a problem-oriented policing project. They 
are designed to help police decide how best to analyze 
and address a problem they have already identified. (An 
assessment guide has been produced as a companion to 
this series and the COPS Office has also published an 
introductory guide to problem analysis. For those who 
want to learn more about the principles and methods of 
problem-oriented policing, the assessment and analysis 
guides, along with other recommended readings, are 
listed at the back of this guide.) 
 
Can look at a problem in depth. Depending on the 
complexity of the problem, you should be prepared to 
spend perhaps weeks, or even months, analyzing and 
responding to it. Carefully studying a problem before 
responding helps you design the right strategy, one that 
is most likely to work in your community. You should 
not blindly adopt the responses others have used; you 
must decide whether they are appropriate to your local 

situation. What is true in one place may not be true 
elsewhere; what works in one place may not work 
everywhere. 
 
Are willing to consider new ways of doing police 
business. The guides describe responses that other 
police departments have used or that researchers have 
tested. While not all of these responses will be 
appropriate to your particular problem, they should help 
give a broader view of the kinds of things you could do. 
You may think you cannot implement some of these 
responses in your jurisdiction, but perhaps you can. In 
many places, when police have discovered a more 
effective response, they have succeeded in having laws 
and policies changed, improving the response to the 
problem. 
 
Understand the value and the limits of research 
knowledge. For some types of problems, a lot of useful 
research is available to the police; for other problems, little 
is available. Accordingly, some guides in this series 
summarize existing research whereas other guides illustrate 
the need for more research on that particular problem. 
Regardless, research has not provided definitive answers to 
all the questions you might have about the problem. The 
research may help get you started in designing your own 
responses, but it cannot tell you exactly what to do. This 
will depend greatly on the particular nature of your local 
problem. In the interest of keeping the guides readable, not 
every piece of relevant research has been cited, nor has 
every point been attributed to its sources. To have done so 
would have overwhelmed and distracted the reader. The 
references listed at the end of each guide are those drawn 
on most heavily; they are not a complete bibliography of 
research on the subject. 

 
Are willing to work with other community agencies 
to find effective solutions to the problem. The police 
alone cannot implement many of the responses 
discussed in the guides. They must frequently implement 
them in partnership with other responsible private and 
public entities. An effective problem-solver must know 
how to forge genuine partnerships with others and be 
prepared to invest considerable effort in making these 
partnerships work. 
These guides have drawn on research findings and police 
practices in the United States, the United Kingdom, 
Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and 
Scandinavia. Even though laws, customs and police 
practices vary from country to country, it is apparent that 
the police everywhere experience common problems. In a 
world that is becoming increasingly interconnected, it is 
important that police be aware of research and successful 
practices beyond the borders of their own countries. 
The COPS Office and the authors encourage you to 
provide feedback on this guide and to report on your own 
agency's experiences dealing with a similar problem. Your 
agency may have effectively addressed a problem using 
responses not considered in these guides and your 
experiences and knowledge could benefit others. This 
information will be used to update the guides. If you wish 
to provide feedback and share your experiences it should 
be sent via e-mail to cops_pubs@usdoj.gov. 

For more information about problem-oriented policing, 
visit the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing online at 
www.popcenter.org or via the COPS website at 
www.cops.usdoj.gov. This website offers free online access to: 
 the Problem-Specific Guides series, 
 the companion Response Guides and Problem-Solving Tools 
series, 
 instructional information about problem-oriented policing 
and related topics, 
 an interactive training exercise, and
 online access to important police research and practices.

Acknowledgments 
The Problem-Oriented Guides for Police are very much a 
collaborative effort. While each guide has a primary author, 
other project team members, COPS Office staff and 
anonymous peer reviewers contributed to each guide by 
proposing text, recommending research and offering 
suggestions on matters of format and style. 
The principal project team developing the guide series 
comprised Herman Goldstein, professor emeritus, University 
of Wisconsin Law School; Ronald V. Clarke, professor of 
criminal justice, Rutgers University; John E. Eck, associate 
professor of criminal justice, University of Cincinnati; 
Michael S. Scott, assistant clinical professor, University of 
Wisconsin Law School; Rana Sampson, police consultant, 
San Diego; and Deborah Lamm Weisel, director of police 
research, North Carolina State University. 
Karin Schmerler, Rita Varano and Nancy Leach oversaw the 
project for the COPS Office. Megan Tate Murphy 
coordinated the peer reviews for the COPS Office. Suzanne 
Fregly edited the guides. Research for the guides was 
conducted at the Criminal Justice Library at Rutgers 
University under the direction of Phyllis Schultze by Gisela 
Bichler-Robertson, Rob Guerette and Laura Wyckoff. 
The project team also wishes to acknowledge the members of 
the San Diego, National City and Savannah police 
departments who provided feedback on the guides' format 
and style in the early stages of the project, as well as the line 
police officers, police executives and researchers who peer 
reviewed each guide. 

Contents 
About the Problem-Specific Guides Series. . . . . . . . . . . . . . i 
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v 
The Problem of Shoplifting .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 
Related Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 
Factors Contributing to Shoplifting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 
Goods Sold  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 
Customers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 
Seasonal and Temporal Patterns  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 
Location. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 
Retail Policies, Staffing and Stock Control . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 
Store Layout and Displays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 
Understanding Your Local Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 
Asking the Right Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 
Incidents  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 
Offenders  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 
Locations/Times  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 
Conditions Facilitating Shoplifting  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 
Current Responses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 
Measuring Your Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 
Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 
General Considerations for an Effective Response Strategy  . . . . 18 
Specific Responses to Reduce Shoplifting . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 
Retailing Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 
Staffing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 
Shoplifting Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 
Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 

Appendix: Summary of Responses to Shoplifting  . . . . . . . . . . 31 
Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 
About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 
Recommended Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 

The Problem of Shoplifting 
 Sometimes known as retail theft. 
This guide discusses measures to reduce shoplifting (theft of 
store merchandise during business hours). It focuses mainly 
on the usual shoplifting method of concealing items in 
clothing or bags. It does not cover unusual forms of theft 
involving trickery, as occasionally practiced in jewelers' shops. 
In many cases, the preventive techniques discussed will also 
apply to "price switching" (switching price tags from less 
expensive to more expensive items) and refund fraud 
(returning stolen or fraudulently acquired items for cash 
refunds). Due to the lack of available research, the guide 
makes few distinctions between (1) casual, opportunistic 
shoplifting and (2) shoplifting committed by "professionals," 
or gangs of thieves who sometimes descend on a particular 
mall or shopping center to take advantage of lax security or 
unsuspecting shop owners. 
The guide begins by reviewing factors that increase the risks 
of shoplifting. It then lists a series of questions that might 
help you analyze your local shoplifting problem. Finally, it 
reviews responses to the problem, and what is known about 
them from evaluative research. It will be apparent that there 
are many gaps in knowledge, and that particularly lacking is 
information about the market for goods stolen by shoplifters. 
Police data seriously under-represent the extent of shoplifting 
one of the most common but least detected and reported 
crimes. This is shown by studies in which researchers have (1) 
asked people to report whether they have shoplifted, (2) 
followed people into shops to see if they steal anything, and 
(3) compared counts of marked items with sales of those 
items. All three methods have revealed very high rates of 
undetected and unreported thefts. For example, one careful 

review of the evidence suggested that only about one in 150 
shoplifting incidents leads to the offender's apprehension and 
subsequent police action.1 
It is perhaps not surprising that shoplifting is so widespread. 
Shops contain new goods, temptingly displayed. Self-service 
sales methods, now so common, provide ample opportunity 
for shoppers to handle goods (many of which are 
prepackaged) and conceal them in clothing or bags. People 
seem to have fewer inhibitions about stealing from shops than 
from private individuals. They know they have little chance of 
getting caught, and, if caught, they can often produce 
plausible excuses such as forgetting to pay. 
The stock control in shops is so deficient that few retailers 
know how many goods they lose to shoplifters, or even to 
their own staff. So long as theft and damage of goods, known 
in the retail industry as shrinkage, does not rise above 2 to 3 
percent of goods sold, retailers may pay little attention to 
shoplifting. Indeed, they have certain incentives to do so: 
Stolen goods may be taken as tax write-offs; detection and 
prosecution of shoplifters takes time and energy; mistaken 
apprehensions can result in lawsuits; and the store could 
acquire a reputation for crime if it continually reports 
shoplifting. This means retailers may be unwilling to take 
official action against shoplifters, especially those who claim it 
is their first offense, show fear or remorse, and/or agree to 
pay for the items stolen. 
 In some cases, especially for small 
shops in transitional neighborhoods, 
fear of retaliation by the thief might 
also prevent retailers from reporting 
offenses to the police. 
In addition, some retailers believe that the police can do little 
about the problem and may be unwilling to get involved.2 
Others see the role of the police as simply to take charge of 
thieves whom store detectives or security staff have caught, 
and to decide on their subsequent handling. When particularly 
blatant shoplifting occurs, or when "professional" shoplifters 
are thought to be operating, merchants may call upon the 

police to take some kind of preventive action, usually in the 
form of increased presence or patrols. This may be of little 
deterrent value, since shoplifting takes place inside the store, 
away from police view. Consequently, this guide focuses on 
other preventive actions police might take. In many cases, 
their most important task is to persuade store owners and 
managers to improve their security. This is difficult, because 
many retailers believe that the police should protect them 
from dishonest people, people who should be caught and 
punished. As mentioned, others are content to ignore the 
problem until it seriously affects profits.3 Whatever the 
reasons, the police may have an uphill task convincing retailers 
that their sales practices and lack of security may be 
contributing to the problem. 
Faced with these attitudes, it is tempting for police to wash 
their hands of shoplifting and let the shops bear the 
consequences. But there are many reasons why this may be 
shortsighted, including the following: 
 Shoplifting is often regarded as an entry crime, from which 
juveniles graduate to more serious offenses. 
 Shoplifting can be said to fuel the drug trade, because it 
provides the income some addicts need to buy drugs. 
 For stores in deprived neighborhoods, shoplifting can 
seriously erode profits and result in store closures. This can 
depress employment prospects and further erode the 
amenities in such neighborhoods. 
 Shoplifting can consume a large proportion of police 
resources in processing offenders whom store security staff 
have detained. Indeed, the main police role in regard to this 
offense is to channel shoplifters caught by private security 
into the criminal justice system. In this regard, the police are 
at the mercy of merchants who may avoid changing their 
business practices in favor of simply relying on security 
staff and police to handle shoplifters. Unfortunately, there 
is little hard evidence that this results in reduced shoplifting 
by those arrested or by others who learn about the arrests. 
 British retailers, in particular, have 
sought to avoid the term 
"shoplifting" on grounds that it 
suggests a less serious form of theft. 
They prefer "shop theft." However, 
"shoplifting" has been in use since 
the 17th century (Walsh 1978). 
 Studies of criminal sanctioning 
have consistently failed to show any 
clear deterrent effects. In regard to 
shoplifting, the chances of getting 
caught are so low, and the risks of 
severe punishment so small, that 
most researchers believe offenders 
pay little attention to the possible 
costs (Bamfield 1997; Burrows 1988). 

For all these reasons, police cannot ignore shoplifting. The 
challenge facing them is to conduct a thorough analysis of the 
local problem, guided by the information presented here, to 
put together a combination of preventive responses. 
Related Problems 
Shoplifting is only one of the crimes that occur in the retail 
environment. Other problems requiring their own analyses 
and responses include: 
 employee thefts (usually thought to account for more 
shrinkage than shoplifting); 
 credit card and check frauds; 
 burglaries (see related guide in this series); 
 smash-and-grabs; 
 thefts from open-air or covered market stalls; 
 thefts and frauds by delivery personnel; 
 vendor frauds, shortchanging and other offenses; and 
 harassment of immigrant shopkeepers. 
Factors Contributing to Shoplifting 
Understanding the factors that contribute to your problem 
will help you frame your own local analysis questions, 
determine good measures of effectiveness, recognize key 
points of intervention, and select an appropriate set of 
responses. Many of the factors contributing to a heightened 
risk of shoplifting are under management control, while 
others, such as seasonal and temporal patterns, are not; even 
in the latter case, however, knowledge of those patterns can 
assist in framing a preventive response. 

Goods Sold 
Perhaps the principal factor determining a store's shoplifting 
rate is the type of goods sold.4 For obvious reasons, furniture 
stores have much lower shoplifting rates than, say, 
convenience or drug stores. The following table shows the 
most common items stolen in the United States. These 
include tobacco products (particularly cigarettes), health and 
beauty products (such as over-the-counter analgesics, 
decongestants, popular remedies, and birth control products), 
recorded music and videos, and apparel ranging from athletic 
shoes to children's clothing, with an emphasis on designer 
labels. 
High-Risk Merchandise, by Store Type 
(based on items recovered from shoplifters) 
Store Type                             Merchandise 
Auto parts                             Small accessories: dash covers, 
                                       compact disc players, driving 
                                       gloves 
Book                                   Cassette tapes, magazines 
Consumer electronics/ Computer         CDs 
Department                             Clothing: shirts, particularly 
                                       Hilfiger and Polo 
Discount                               Clothing, undergarments, CDs 
Drug/pharmacy                          Cigarettes, batteries, over-the-counter 
                                       remedies 
General merchandise                    Earrings 
Grocery/supermarket                    Over-the-counter remedies, 
                                       health and beauty aids, 
                                       cigarettes 
Home center/hardware                   Hand tools 
Music                                  CDs 
Shoe                                   Sneakers 
Specialty                              Bed sheets 
 Clarke (1999) has noted that 
certain analgesics contain ingredients 
that can be used in making other 
drugs, and that decongestants help to 
produce a high when taken together 
with some illegal drugs. He has also 
noted that some frequently stolen 
products, such as hemorrhoid 
remedies and condoms, can be 
embarrassing to buy, and has 
suggested that stores find 
embarrassment-reducing ways to sell 
these products. The self-checkout 
system recently introduced by some 
supermarkets might provide a 
solution. It allows customers to scan 
and bag their own goods. A 
conspicuous camera is mounted to 
monitor the transactions, and a 
software system detects irregularities. 
 These are national data and are 
subject to local variations. Some 
jurisdictions may experience local 
fads for stealing particular items. 
 These items seem to have 
displaced meat, which many police 
still believe is the most common item 
stolen from grocery stores and 
supermarkets. 

Store Type                              Merchandise 
Specialty apparel                       Assorted clothes with designer 
                                        labels 
Sporting goods                          Nike shoes 
Theme park                              Key chains, jewelry 
Toy                                     Action figures 
Video                                   Video games 
Warehouse                               Pens, movie videos 
Source: Adapted from Hayes (1997), pp. 236, 242-245. 
The acronym CRAVED captures the essential attributes of 
these "hot products": they are concealable, removable, 
available, valuable, enjoyable, and disposable. The last of these 
attributes, disposability, may be the most important in 
determining the volume of goods shoplifted. Those 
shoplifting for a living or to support a drug habitwho 
account for a disproportionate share of items stolenmust be 
able to sell or barter what they steal. Unfortunately, little is 
known about the market for shoplifted goods.5 
Ronald Clarke 
Image of self checkout station
Image of grocery store checkout
Self-checkout systems such as the one shown on the left are a new alternative to the 
standard clerk checkout seen on the right and might reduce theft of products that 
some shoppers find embarrassing to buy. 
Store sections carrying hot products are the most vulnerable 
to shoplifting. One study of shoplifting in a large London 
music store found that the highest theft rates were in the 

sections carrying rock and pop recordings (nowadays, it would 
probably be rap or hip-hop). Equally expensive recordings in 
the classical music department were rarely stolen.6 
Customers 
Much shoplifting is opportunistic, which means that 
shoplifters are often little different from a store's regular 
customers. Stores that attract younger people in general, and 
males in particular, are more likely to experience shoplifting: 
research has consistently shown these groups are more often 
involved in theft. It is beyond the scope of this guide to 
discuss all the social and psychological reasons for theft, 
though it should be noted that some thieves believe 
shoplifting harms no one except an anonymous business that 
can take the losses as a tax write-off. 
Apart from these factors, researchers have identified some 
personal characteristics related to shoplifting, and they have 
also developed typologies of shoplifters.7 Most of this work 
has little relevance for policing strategies, beyond the fact that 
in many communities, the groups most involved appear to be 
juveniles and substance abusers.8 
Seasonal and Temporal Patterns 
Most shoplifting occurs when stores are busiest, with the 
majority of incidents occurring late in the week, between 
Wednesday and Saturday.9 Seasonal shoplifting corresponds 
with the demand for goods, which means that much 
shoplifting occurs during pre-Easter, pre-summer and pre-
Christmas periods. As mentioned, juveniles commit much 
shoplifting, and consequently, high-risk times include non-
school days, late mornings and afternoons into the evening.10 
 See Klemke (1993) for a
comprehensive review.

Location 
Research does not provide a clear indication of the risk 
factors related to a store's location, but shoplifting rates tend 
to be higher for stores located: 
 
in city centers and other busy places, with a large number of 
casual customers; 
 
near schools, with many juvenile customers; and 
 
in deprived areas, with large concentrations of impoverished 
or addicted residents. 
Research also provides evidence that stores that "front onto 
the open-street appear more likely to attract shoplifting than 
those in enclosed malls due to greater 'opportunity' to escape 
from the former."11 
Retail Policies, Staffing and Stock Control 
To some degree, retail policies, staffing and stock control are 
management's responsibility, but they are heavily influenced 
by the broader retail environment: competitive, profit-driven 
and technology-dependent. For example, stock control has 
been deficient in the past because the time and effort required 
to keep proper track of stock have barely been justified by 
any resulting improvements in profit due to reduced theft. 
However, increased competition is continually eroding retail 
profit margins, and thus the incentive to reduce shrinkage is 
increasing. The more widespread use of merchandise bar 
coding and point-of-sales technology at checkout is resulting 
in big improvements in stock control. These improvements 
can be expected to increase with further technological 
developments.12 
Similarly, sales policies and staffing are partly determined by 
the broader retail environment. It would be impossibly 
expensive for most stores to abandon self-service and rely 

instead on armies of helpful, attentive sales clerks, even 
though this would substantially reduce shoplifting. The 
savings in reduced theft would be greatly outweighed by 
increased staff wages and, possibly, by sales lost as a result of 
shoppers' being unable to inspect goods at their leisure. 
Marketing considerations might also limit the scope for 
tightening up return policies, which, if too liberal, can 
encourage theft of goods to be returned for cash refunds. For 
example, some clothing stores do not have changing rooms 
because the staff costs of monitoring them to prevent 
shoplifting may be too great, or because there is no room for 
them. Such stores must allow the return of clothes that do 
not fit or are otherwise unsuitable. 
Store Layout and Displays 
Research provides little guidance, but common sense suggests 
certain store layout and display features contribute to 
shoplifting.13 Most of these relate to the staff's ability to 
supervise shoppers, and stores at greater risk include those 
with: 
 many exits, particularly where they are accessible without 
passing through the checkout; 
 passageways, blind corners and hidden alcoves; 
 restrooms or changing rooms; 
 high displays that conceal shoppers (and shoplifters) from 
view; 
 crowded areas around displays of high-risk items; and 
 aisles that staff cannot easily survey from one end. 
Store areas at greater risk of shoplifting include, as 
mentioned, those with the most desirable goods. In addition, 
goods on the ground floor and near entrances are at greater 
risk of theft, because the shoplifter is in the store for less 
time and is thus at less risk of getting caught. 

Understanding Your Local Problem 
The information provided above is only a generalized 
description of shoplifting. You must combine the basic facts 
with a more specific understanding of your local problem if 
you are to develop an effective response. In most cases, your 
problem is likely to involve a group of stores, such as those in 
a town center, mall or shopping precinct. If it involves a 
single store (unless the store is very large), it is more 
appropriate to offer routine crime prevention advice than to 
undertake a full-scale problem-oriented policing project. 
Accordingly, your analysis is likely to focus on differential 
risks of shoplifting among the stores in your group, and the 
reasons for those differences. In any case, the measures 
appropriate to deal with the problem will vary with the nature 
of the stores at risk. 
Knowing who is committing the offenses, and why, will help 
you decide how difficult they will be to stop. You will also 
need to understand how the offenses are committed. This will 
require a careful study of shop security practices. 
Comparisons between shops can greatly assist in 
understanding the conditions that facilitate theft. 
Analysis of shoplifting is made difficult by low rates of 
reporting, and by the fact that police records rarely permit 
shoplifting offenses to be readily identified among reported 
thefts. There are other ways to gather information about your 
local problem, but these, too, have their difficulties: 
 Store apprehensions may provide some useful information, 
but the data tend to say more about surveillance and 
apprehension practices than about the "typical" offender, or 
even the most targeted goods. 

 McNees et al. (1976) pioneered an 
effective method of conducting 
routine shrinkage assessments that 
can be used on a large scale to 
evaluate the success of measures 
designed to reduce shoplifting 
(Buckle et al. 1992). Small tags, color-
coded by type of item, were attached 
to the price tag of each high-risk 
item in a store. An inventory of all 
items was taken before opening the 
store for business. When items were 
sold, the clerks removed the tags, and 
they were counted at the end of the 
day. The store manager then added 
the number of tagged items sold to 
the number of items left on the 
floor. If the total did not match the 
initial inventory, then the residual 
number of items were presumed 
stolen. See also Farrington et al. 
(1993) and Farrington (1999) for a 
description of this process. 
 
Observational studiesin which randomly selected shoppers 
are followed around the storecan produce some useful 
results, but they are labor-intensive and ethically 
problematic. If followed by police or security, those 
observed stealing would have to be apprehended; if 
followed by researchers, the police or the store might be 
criticized for permitting this approach.14 
 
Identifying "hot" items among paying customers may also 
reveal those likely to be targeted by thieves. However, such 
items may already be well protected by the store's security, 
and theft might be concentrated on less popular but still 
desirable goods. 
 
The most accurate way to assess retail theft is repeated 
systematic counting of items on display, but this, again, is 
labor-intensive. It is also difficult to determine whether 
losses are due to theft by customers or by staff, or whether 
they are the result of innocent clerical error. 
In some cases, store stock-control records or staff may be 
able to provide information about items particularly 
vulnerable to theft. However, whenever possible, you should 
check such information by gathering additional data, as 
discussed above. The effort required to obtain accurate 
information about problems is almost always justified by the 
improved responses that result. 
Asking the Right Questions 
The following are some critical questions you should ask in 
analyzing your particular problem of shoplifting, even if the 
answers are not always readily available. Your answers to these 
and other questions will help you choose the most 
appropriate set of responses later on. 

Incidents 
 
How many incidents are detected? 
 
How much is typically lost (dollar value of goods, lost 
profit)? 
 
What proportion of shrinkage does shoplifting account for? 
Compared with employee theft or delivery fraud? 
 
How do targeted stores' shrinkage rates compare with those 
of similar-size stores of the same type? 
 
Which items do shoplifters target most frequently? 
 
Do the goods stolen fit the CRAVED model? (See the 
"Factors Contributing to Shoplifting/Goods Sold" section 
above.) 
 
Are they sold or kept for personal use? 
 
If sold, how so? 
Offenders 
 
What is known about offenders? Do they tend to belong to 
any particular demographic group? What proportion are 
juveniles? 
 
What proportions of offenders are casual/opportunistic, 
professionals or addicts? Are organized rings involved? 
 
Do some types of offenders use particular shoplifting 
methods or target particular goods? 
 
Are there repeat offenders? 
Locations/Times 
 
What is the nature of the surrounding neighborhood? 
 
When do thefts mainly occur (time of day, day of week, 
month, season)? Are certain items more commonly stolen 
during certain seasons (e.g., batteries for toys at 
Christmastime)? 
 
Is the problem concentrated at particular stores, or does it 
affect a cluster of stores? If concentrated at particular 
stores, what do they have in common? 

Conditions Facilitating Shoplifting 
 
How large is the store? What type of store is it? What 
market segment does it target? 
 
What are the store's hours? Is it open at night? Are nearby 
businesses open at night and on weekends? 
 
Does the store have a security department or set of policies 
on apprehending shoplifters? 
 
Does it treat shoplifting as a business cost? Or does it invest 
resources in prevention? 
 
Does it report shoplifting incidents to the police? 
 
How adequate is stock control? 
 
Where are targeted goods located in the store? 
 
Is lack of natural surveillance a contributory factor? Can 
thieves conceal goods without being seen? 
 
After stealing, can thieves evade store employees? 
 
Is there more than one escape route? 
 
What security hardware does the store have? Mirrors? 
Electronic tagging? Closed-circuit television (CCTV) 
cameras? 
 
What other prevention measures are in place? 
Current Responses 
 
How do police currently handle shoplifting incidents? 
 
Do police train or regulate private security forces? 
 
How do prosecutors handle shoplifting charges? 
 
What sentences do courts typically hand down for convicted 
offenders? Do offenders comply with the sentences? 
Measuring Your Effectiveness 
You should take measures of your problem before you 
implement responses, to determine how serious the problem 
is, and after you implement them, to determine whether they 
have been effective. Measurement allows you to determine to 
what degree your efforts have succeeded, and suggests how 
you might modify your responses if they are not producing 

the intended results. For more detailed guidance on measuring 
effectiveness, see the companion guide to this series, Assessing 
Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police Problem-
Solvers. 
Potential indicators of an effective response to shoplifting 
include: 
 fewer repeat offenders, 
 decreased shrinkage, 
 increased sales, and 
 increased profits. 
If you suspect that shoplifting is currently underreported to 
police, increased reporting might be a positive indicator of 
your efforts, at least temporarily. If you suspect too few 
shoplifters are getting caught, a temporary increase in 
apprehensions might also be a positive indicator. Ultimately, 
though, the number of reported thefts and apprehensions 
should decline as the number of actual shoplifting incidents 
declines. 

Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting 
Your analysis of your local problem should give you a better 
understanding of the factors contributing to it. Once you 
have analyzed your local problem and established a baseline 
for measuring effectiveness, you should consider possible 
responses to address the problem. 
The following response strategies provide a foundation of 
ideas for addressing your particular problem. These strategies 
are drawn from a variety of research studies and police 
reports. Several of them may apply to your community's 
problem. It is critical that you tailor responses to local 
circumstances, and that you can justify each response based 
on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective strategy will 
involve implementing several different responses. Law 
enforcement responses alone are seldom effective in reducing 
or solving the problem. Do not limit yourself to considering 
what police can do: give careful consideration to who else in 
your community shares responsibility for the problem and can 
help police better respond to it. 
This section reviews what is known about the effectiveness of 
various practices in dealing with shoplifting. Unfortunately, 
the information is severely limited because few of the 
common preventive practices have been evaluated. Retailers 
have been reluctant to undertake the necessary studies, and to 
share the results of any studies they do complete. 
Government has funded little research in this field, generally 
regarding it as the private sector's domain. 
In the absence of research, you cannot assume that retailers 
have learned through long experience what does and does not 

work. For example, hiring store detectives is a staple response 
to shoplifting, but as will be seen below, their effectiveness is 
questionable. Hiring them usually seems to be an economic 
choice dictated by the need to do something about 
shoplifting. 
General Considerations for an Effective Response 
Strategy 
Police can do little on their own to prevent shoplifting, and 
you will have to persuade the retailers themselves to act. You 
may have to explain why police can achieve little through 
more patrols, and why heavier court sentences are of limited 
value. You may want to explain how the store's goods and 
sales practices may be contributing to the problem. You may 
have to convince retailers that they cannot ignore the 
problem, due to the costs to the community and, in the long 
run, the stores themselves. Finally, you will have to offer them 
guidance on preventive measures they can take to reduce the 
problem. 
It is important that shoplifting responses be selective and 
based on a thorough understanding of the risks. For example, 
the highest-risk goods should be given the greatest 
protection.15 Trying to provide equal protection to all goods is 
inefficient and could lead to a loss of focus. In addition, it 
might be better to concentrate on preventing shoplifting by 
young or casual shoplifters, who are easier to deter and who 
may account for many thefts, than to focus on the much 
smaller number of "professionals," who are harder to defeat. 
As explained, in framing advice, you must think carefully 
about the nature of the risk, which varies greatly with the 
kind of store and the goods offered. These factors also 

determine the nature of the remedies. The security approach 
required for a self-service supermarket is quite different from 
that required for a jewelry store. Department stores with huge 
turnovers of expensive goods can afford to spend much more 
on security than small retailers can. In all cases, you must 
appreciate stores' need to make a profit. This determines 
selling practices and how much money is available for 
preventing shoplifting. 
Even when shops can afford more for security, they are likely 
to resist this expenditure. In making your case, you may need 
to: 
 
calculate the likely cost of measures such as installing CCTV 
or hiring security guards; 
 
convince owners that they can recoup the cost of increased 
security through reduced losses associated with 
shopliftingitem replacement, profit and lawsuit losses; 
 
enlist the support of the chamber of commerce or other 
business organizations in persuading owners to improve 
security; and 
 
brief the local media on the problem and the proposed 
solutions. 
Effective prevention often depends on well-rounded strategies 
encompassing good retailing practices, appropriate staffing, 
carefully articulated shoplifting policies, and selective 
technology use.16 These components are reviewed below and 
are summarized in the appendix. Many depend on retailers' 
actions, but police may also have to collaborate with others in 
the community, including loss prevention specialists, business 
associations and court officials. 

Specific Responses To Reduce Shoplifting 
Retailing Practice 
Good management is the first line of defense against 
shoplifting. Managers must ensure that stores are properly laid 
out, have adequate inventory controls and follow standard 
security practices. 
1. Improving store layout and displays. Store layout and 
displays must make it easier for staff to exercise effective 
surveillance. This includes: 
 
reducing the number of exits, blind corners and recesses; 
 
carefully placing mirrors; 
 
providing good, even lighting; 
 
eliminating clutter and obstructions; 
 
placing goods away from entrances and exits; 
 
creating clear sight lines in aisles and reducing the height of 
displays; 
 
reducing crowding near displays of high-risk items; 
 
moving hot products into higher-security zones with more 
staff surveillance; and 
 
speeding up checkout to reduce congestion and waiting, 
which provide the opportunity for concealment. 

Kip Kellogg 
Image of "fish-eye" mirror
Iamge of "fish-eye" mirror in store
Properly placed mirrors like this "fish-eye" mirror, allow staff to keep 
watch over customers and goods that might otherwise be hidden from view. 
2. 
Tightening stock controls. Inventory control procedures 
must permit shoplifting trends to be detected, and shoplifting to 
be distinguished from employee theft. 
3. 
Upgrading retail security. Standard security must make 
shoplifting more difficult. This may include: 
 
restricting the number of unaccompanied children allowed in 
small neighborhood stores; 
 
establishing clear rules for use of changing rooms in clothing 
stores; 
 
displaying only the cassette, CD and video cases in music and 
video stores (and only one shoe per pair in shoe shops); 
 
keeping high-value items in locked displays, or securing them 
through cable locks and security hangers; 
 
encouraging shoppers to use supermarket-type baskets for 
purchases (which removes the excuse for putting things in 
their own bags or pockets); 

 
sealing bags of legitimate purchases to reduce impulse 
stealing; 
 
giving receipts and, where there is a high risk of shoplifting, 
checking them against goods on exit; and 
 
requiring proof of purchase for refunds. 
Kip Kellogg 
Image of convenience store counter
Cluttered merchandise displays make it harder for staff to monitor 
shoplifting. 
4. Posting warning notices on high-risk merchandise. 
Many stores display signs reminding customers that 
shoplifting is a crime, and warning that shoplifters will be 
prosecuted. Some stores display these signs alongside a life-
size cardboard cutout of a police officer. Nothing is known 
about the effectiveness of these generalized warnings, and 
since most shoplifters know they might get caught and 
punished, it is doubtful that such warnings have more than a 
marginal deterrent effect on a few susceptible people. 
However, one well-known study showed that when specific 
merchandise was prominently marked with large red stars as 
being frequently taken by shoplifters, shoplifting was virtually 
eliminated. The researchers explained that publicly identifying 
specific items made the threat of detection and apprehension 
tangible.17 

ATTENTION:
SHOPPERS AND SHOPLIFTERS
The items marked with a red star 
are frequently stolen by shoplifters. 
Staffing 
5. 
Hiring more and better-trained sales staff. Stores 
should hire sufficient numbers of staff to properly oversee 
goods and customers, especially at high-risk periods for 
shoplifting. Stores must train staff to be attentive to 
customers and alert for thieves. They also need to train staff 
in procedures for dealing with shoplifting incidents. 
6. 
Hiring store detectives. Though certain kinds of stores 
widely employ store detectives, research suggests detectives 
may have only a limited impact on shoplifting. When 
researchers have followed random samples of people entering 
stores, few of those they have observed shoplifting have also 
been seen by the store detectives.18 A study in a large London 
music store, with four store detectives on duty at any one 
time, suggested that the store would need to hire 17 times this 
number to be able to catch all the shoplifters likely to enter 
the storeclearly not an economic proposition.19 Most stores 
do not advertise store detectives' presence, but some do. 
Advertising their presence may provide a greater deterrent, 
but it may also mean that shoplifters exercise greater caution. 
No research has evaluated these possibilities. 
While it must be assumed that store detectives have some 
deterrent value, it is possible that they lower other staff's 
vigilance. It is also important that store detectives spend as 
much time as possible on the shop floor, and not have their 
time consumed in court attendance or police liaison work. 
 Walsh (1978) quotes Fiber's 
(1972:250-251) essential advice: "To 
sustain a legal action against a 
customer for shoplifting, it is usually 
necessary to prove that the goods 
were taken away, that no payment 
was offered and that there was intent 
to avoid payment. It is therefore 
always advisable to wait until the 
suspect has left the shop before 
making the accusation; otherwise, 
they may claim they intended to pay 
before leaving." 

7. Hiring security guards. Little is known from research 
about the effectiveness of uniformed security guards in any 
environmentand retail is no exception. Only one small study 
has been published, and it suggested that security guards had 
less value than electronic article surveillance (EAS) or store 
redesign in decreasing the risk of theft. However, only two 
stores with guards were studied, and "[o]ne [guard] had never 
been a guard before and asked the staff what he should do, 
while the other was aged over 60 and relatively small, so it was 
thought that he was unlikely to deter shoplifters."20 
In general, guards who continually move around, creating an 
active, visible presence, are likely to be more effective. To 
maximize guards' surveillance, it may be necessary to pay 
attention to layout and design, including mirror placement. 
Kip Kellogg 
Image of security guard warning sign
Image of security guard
Security guards who move around, creating an active, visible presence, are likely 
to be more effective at preventing shoplifting. 

Shoplifting Policies 
It is important that stores develop clear shoplifting policies, 
and that staff understand those policies. Most stores routinely 
refer apprehended shoplifters to the police. For persistent and 
blatant offenders, this is clearly necessary. In the case of more 
opportunistic shoplifters, many of whom show shock at 
getting caught, it is doubtful that police arrest has any 
additional deterrent value. It is also possible that an inflexible 
policy of referring shoplifters to the police could result in 
reduced staff enthusiasm for apprehending them.21 Stores are 
probably best served by a flexible shoplifting policy that 
includes formal and informal avenues and, perhaps, civil 
recovery. 
As mentioned earlier, there is little evidence that prosecuting 
ordinary shoplifters is an effective preventive measure. Even 
so, belief in the efficacy (and desirability) of prosecution is so 
strong among storekeepers and the general public alike that 
there is little chance the police will be relieved of this 
burden. Consequently, there is considerable value in making 
the arrest process more efficient. Ways of doing so fall 
outside the scope of this guide, but some police forces have 
developed systems whereby private security officers are 
authorized and trained to write criminal summonses 
themselves (after first checking with the police by phone for 
outstanding warrants and arrest histories). This obviates the 
need for patrol officers to process arrests, but gets the cases 
into the formal criminal process, nonetheless. 
 Sherman and Gartin (1986), in a 
randomized experiment, found that 
recidivism rates did not differ for two 
large groups of apprehended 
shoplifters: those released and those 
arrested. 
 Not only is shoplifter prosecution 
of doubtful preventive value, but 
also, practice in this area is fraught 
with difficulties: Merchants may see 
the police as being at their beck and 
call; private security staff may expect 
the police to take cases that are not 
"good," or that reflect a lack of 
discretion (e.g., a 12-year-old stealing 
a candy bar) off their hands; and 
there are issues regarding obtaining 
proper evidence, identifying alleged 
offenders, using force, targeting 
minorities, imposing burdens on the 
criminal justice system, using statutes 
or ordinances/summonses or 
physical arrests, etc. 
8. Using civil recovery. In nearly every state, retailers can use 
civil law to collect restitution from shoplifters, and many 
retailers take advantage of this.22 Civil recovery is designed to 
operate quickly, with little recourse to the courts. The typical 
sums sought are $250 for adult shoplifters and $120 for 

juveniles, and in nearly half the cases, these sums are paid. 
Civil recovery is not meant to be a substitute for criminal 
proceedings. Rather, it is meant to provide an additional 
shoplifting deterrent (though of unknown effectiveness). Civil 
recovery also allows retailers to defray some of the costs of 
loss prevention. 
In some states, such as Florida, statutes permit police to help 
retailers obtain civil recovery on the spot. With proper 
procedural safeguards and reports, the offender can pay the 
set civil recovery amountaround $200directly to the retailer 
in the presence of the police, and thereby be spared arrest. 
This might cost offenders considerably more than the item 
stolen is worth, but it spares them an arrest record. 
9. Using informal police sanctions. In many jurisdictions, 
large proportions of shoplifters referred to police are dealt 
with informally and not brought before the courts. In the 
United States, this often entails "first offender" programs. 
Upon arrest, first offenders are given the option, as an 
alternative to prosecution, of participating in programs in 
which they are instructed about the harms of shoplifting. If 
the offender completes the program, which usually translates 
into attending the required meetings, the initial charge is 
dismissed and, sometimes, upon petition, can be erased from 
the records, so that the person does not have a "criminal" 
record. In Britain, similar police programs are called 
"cautioning." A recent program introduced by the Thames 
Valley Police combines counseling modules and a formal 
caution, and claims to have substantially reduced re-offending 
among juvenile shoplifters. The counseling modules are 
selected according to the offender's specific circumstances. 
Modules include meetings with store managers, informational 
sessions with youth workers about available leisure activities, 
and group work to learn about resisting peer pressure to 
offend.23 
 As an alternative to prosecution, 
police sometimes also refer first 
offenders to structured programs like 
the Stop Shoplifting Education 
Program, operated by the Better 
Business Bureau of WNY Inc., or the 
program offered by Shoplifters 
Alternative, a nonprofit organization 
based in New York. The Stop 
Shoplifting Education Program claims 
to reduce recidivism (Better Business 
Bureau of WNY Inc. 1993). In 
addition, stores themselves sometimes 
run first-offender warning programs, 
without extensive police involvement. 
Stores might check with police to 
determine whether the offender has 
been charged before and, if not, issue 
their own warning, without having an 
arrest made. 

10. 
Establishing early warning systems. Merchants in 
some areas have found it useful to establish a same-day early 
warning system whereby they notify one another about the 
presence of mobile gangs of shoplifters, but there have been 
no formal evaluations of this practice.24 
11. 
Banning known shoplifters. A related but more 
controversial practice entails banning offenders from, and 
posting their pictures in, stores. Little is known about the 
effectiveness of this practice, but if it publicizes shoplifters' 
identity, it might have some limited value. Where courts have 
not convicted those identified, both the merchants and the 
police engaged in the practice are vulnerable to criticism and 
legal challenge. 
12. 
Launching public information campaigns. Some 
communities have launched media campaigns to inform the 
public about the harms of shoplifting, encourage people to 
report it, and increase knowledge about the consequences of 
apprehension. Posters, pamphlets, classes, and public service 
announcements have all been used to get the message across.25 
Evaluations of these programs have produced little evidence 
that they reduce shoplifting.26 
Technology 
13. Installing and monitoring CCTV. Improvements in 
quality and reductions in cost have resulted in the widespread 
use of CCTV to prevent shoplifting. Few evaluations have 
been published, though one careful study of 15 clothing 
stores in England found that the value of CCTV was directly 
related to the sophistication of the system used. Effectiveness 
was quite marked in the first few months after installation, but 
declined rapidly thereafter, which the researchers explained by 

arguing that "would-be offenders became progressively inured 
or desensitized to CCTV's deterrent potential."27 
Little is known about the value of CCTV in other kinds of 
stores, and there is "a raft of unanswered questions about its 
impact. These questions relate to: 
 
the detection of offenders; 
 
the deterrence of would-be offenders, and possible 
displacement of criminal activities elsewhere; 
 
the relative value of video recordings and real-time images; 
 
the ability of operators to monitor and make sense of 
multiple images; 
 
the impact on customers (who may be reassured, even when 
there are no measurable benefits); and 
 
the effect on shop staff (who may become less vigilant 
about crime following its installation)."28 
Kip Kellogg 
Image of closed circuit camera
Image of closed circuit camera monitor
Surveillance cameras and CCTV are increasingly used to prevent shoplifting, but more 
study is needed to determine their effects. 

14. Using electronic article surveillance. Electronic article 
surveillance (EAS) is often known as electronic tagging. A tag 
is either pinned onto a garment or fixed with adhesive to an 
item's packaging. Exit gates detect tags that have not been 
removed or deactivated, and sound an alarm. The tags have 
been made progressively smaller and more versatile, and the 
detectors have become more reliable. These systems are in 
widespread use, but only recently have any evaluations been 
published.29 The most comprehensive of these evaluations 
used comparisons between stores with and without EAS 
systems, and before-and-after studies, in a variety of retail 
settings. The authors concluded that EAS could reduce 
shoplifting and total inventory shortage from 35 to 75 
percent.30 The considerable costs of buying and running EAS 
systems must be set against these benefits. Moreover, 
knowledgeable offenders can sometimes defeat EAS systems. 
Ways of Trying To Beat EAS Systems 
 
Removing and discarding product packaging in the 
store, thereby removing the tag and giving the 
appearance that the item is "used." Thieves then may 
wear the item in plain view, or conceal it. 
 
Peeling off the tag, which can sometimes be done 
despite strong adhesiveslarge stores afford offenders 
plenty of cover for this. 
 
Holding the itemand the tagtightly against the 
body. 
 
Walking out in a group, or closely behind someone. 
 
Holding items outside the reach of the electronic 
surveillance, i.e., lower than a foot above ground 
(with shoes, for example), or above shoulder height. 
 
Using products to deactivate tags. 
 
Running through the electronic gates and trying to 
escape before staff can respond. 
 
Putting items in insulated bags; the insulation can 
prevent the tag from being activated. 
 Increasingly, tags are now being 
included in the packaging of goods at
manufacture (Hobson 2001). This "source 
tagging" helps to reduce the costs of using 
this method.  

15. Attaching ink tags to merchandise. Retailers may attach 
ink tags to clothing; such tags are quite different from 
electronic tags. Rather than sounding an alarm when removed 
from the store, and thus increasing the offender's risk of 
getting caught, ink tags remove the rewards of theft by 
ruining the garments to which they are affixed when the thief 
tries to detach them. To date, only one rigorous evaluation has 
been reported; it concluded that ink tags might be more 
effective than EAS when used in the same retail 
environments.31 Devices are now available that combine the 
advantages of both electronic and ink tags, but with the 
inevitable disadvantage of increased costs. Other devices not 
containing ink are also available, such as small clamps that 
cannot be removed from items such as jewelry or eyeglasses. 
Kip Kellogg 
Image of electronic exit gates
Image of merchandise security sensor
Electronic tags affixed to goods activate alarms when passed through exit gates. 
Electronic tagging has demonstrated effectiveness in preventing shoplifting, 
although knowledgeable offenders can sometimes defeat the systems. 

Appendix 
Appendix: Summary of Responses to 
Shoplifting 
The table below summarizes the responses to shoplifting, the 
mechanisms by which they are intended to work, the 
conditions under which they ought to work best, and some 
factors you should consider before implementing a particular 
response. It is critical that you tailor responses to local 
circumstances, and that you can justify each response based 
on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective strategy will 
involve implementing several different responses. Law 
enforcement responses alone are seldom effective in reducing 
or solving the problem. 
Response No. 
Page No. 
Response 
How It Works 
Works Best If 
Considerations 
Retailing Practice 
1. 20 
Improving store 
layout and 
displays 
Makes it easier 
for staff to 
exercise effective 
surveillance 
staff are 
trained and 
motivated to 
detect shoplifting 
May be a 
relatively 
inexpensive 
option, but some 
stores' basic 
design makes it 
hard to eliminate 
all opportunities 
for shoplifters to 
conceal their 
activity 
2. 21 
Tightening stock controls 
Helps managers 
to detect changes 
in amounts or 
patterns of 
shoplifting 
managers have 
incentives to 
reduce shoplifting 
Increases in 
source tagging 
and electronic 
point-of-sales 
systems will 
gradually lead to 
improvements in 
stock control 

Response No. 
Page No. 
Response How It Works 
Works Best If 
Considerations 
3. 21 
Upgrading retail security 
Makes it harder 
for shoplifters to 
operate 
staff and 
managers have 
incentives to 
reduce shoplifting 
Some security 
practices may be 
unpopular with staff 
and customers alike, 
and consequently 
have the effect of 
reducing sales; 
sometimes carries 
costs in terms of 
staff time 
4. 22 
Posting warning notices on
high-risk merchandise 
Alerts potential 
thieves that the 
identified 
merchandise may 
be subject to 
special 
surveillance 
notices identify 
the most 
frequently 
targeted items 
A low-cost measure; 
might alarm some 
innocent shoppers 
Staffing 
5. 23 
Hiring more and 
better-trained 
sales staff 
Makes it harder 
for shoplifters to 
operate 
staffing levels 
are increased at 
high-risk periods 
Can be a relatively 
expensive way to 
reduce shoplifting 
6. 23 
Hiring store 
detectives 
Provides a 
deterrent, 
stores are large, 
so that the 
detectives' identity 
does not become 
known, and the 
detectives spend 
considerable time
on the shop floor 
May not be an 
effective deterrent 
especially to 
casual shoplifters 
to "professional" 
shoplifters who can 
spot store detectives 
7. 24 
Hiring security 
guards 
Provides a 
deterrent to 
shoplifters who 
might otherwise 
believe they could 
escape if 
apprehended by 
sales staff 
guards are 
properly trained, 
are physically 
imposing and 
have an active, 
visible presence 
Guard 
characteristics and 
behavior are 
extremely 
important; poor 
guards have no 
effect on shoplifting 

Response No. 
Page No. 
Response 
How It Works 
Works Best If 
Considerations 
Shoplifting Policies 
8. 25 
Using civil 
recovery 
May not deter 
shoplifting, but 
provides retailers 
with a practical 
means of 
recovering some 
of the costs of it 
administrative 
procedures are 
clear and 
uncomplicated, 
and shoplifters 
are able to pay 
restitution 
May not be an 
option for small 
retailers who lack 
the time and 
resources to pursue 
it 
9. 26 
Using informal 
police sanctions 
Saves time for 
retailers, police 
and the criminal 
justice system, 
though its 
deterrent value is 
unknown 
combined with 
efforts to change 
offenders' 
attitudes about 
shoplifting 
Usually used only 
with first-time 
offenders; often 
limited to juveniles 
10. 27 
Establishing early 
warning systems 
Eliminates the 
element of 
surprise 
shoplifting gangs 
often rely on 
the systems are 
operated by stores 
whose 
merchandise is 
targeted by gangs 
of shoplifters 
A low-cost, sensible 
precaution for 
stores vulnerable to 
shoplifting gangs 
11. 27 
Banning known 
shoplifters 
Alerts staff to the 
presence of 
known 
shoplifters, whom 
they may then ask 
to leave the 
premises; deters 
known shoplifters 
from entering the 
store; deters 
shoplifting by 
others 
 the identities 
of those who 
have been 
convicted of 
shoplifting are 
publicized 
May have some 
limited value in 
deterring 
shoplifting, but 
where those 
identified have not 
been convicted by a 
court, both the 
merchants and the 
police engaged in 
the practice are 
vulnerable to legal 
challenge 

Response No. 
Page No. 
Response 
How It Works 
Works Best If 
Considerations 
12. 27 
Launching public 
information 
campaigns 
Informs the 
public about the 
harms of 
shoplifting; 
encourages people 
to report 
shoplifting; 
increases 
knowledge about 
the consequences 
of apprehension 
used to 
advertise new 
anti-shoplifting 
measures 
Little evidence 
exists that these 
campaigns reduce 
shoplifting, but they 
might change 
community attitudes 
Technology 
13. 27 
Installing and 
monitoring 
CCTV 
Increases 
surveillance of 
vulnerable 
merchandise and 
locations; can also 
be used to identify 
offenders after the 
act and/or 
provide evidence 
for charges 
CCTV cameras 
are located close 
to key areas (but 
retailers should 
guard against 
offenders' 
sneaking off to 
conceal goods 
elsewhere, such as 
around blind 
corners, in 
elevators and in 
stairwells) 
Employees must be 
properly trained to 
use the equipment; 
the equipment must 
be of good enough 
quality to enable 
close watch to be 
kept on suspicious 
individuals; those 
who watch the 
monitors quickly 
become fatigued 

Response No. 
Page No. 
Response 
How It Works
Works Best If 
Considerations 
14. 29 
Using electronic 
article 
surveillance 
Detects 
shoplifters trying 
to leave the store 
with concealed 
goods 
tags are 
difficult to 
remove without 
damaging goods 
Staff may become 
complacent about 
other antitheft 
policies and 
procedures; 
equipment may be 
compromised, so 
staff must maintain 
vigilance; not all 
merchandise can be 
easily tagged; an 
expensive option, 
though costs are 
being 
reducedsource 
tagging will reduce 
costs even more 
15. 30 
Attaching ink tags 
to merchandise 
Removes the 
rewards of 
shoplifting by 
rendering stolen 
goods unusable 
combined with 
EAS 
Not all merchandise 
can be easily tagged; 
it is important that 
the security of ink 
tags not be 
compromised by 
the theft of tag-
removal equipment 

Endnotes 
1 
Farrington (1999). 
2 
Nelson and Perrone (2000), citing Ocqueteau and Pottier (1996) and Williams et al. 
(1987). 
3 
Walsh (1978). 
4 
Nelson, Bromley and Thomas (1996); Hayes (1997); Clarke (1999). 
5 
Clarke (1999). 
6 
Ekblom (1986). 
7 
Krasnovsky and Lane (1998). 
8 
Klemke (1992). 
9 
Nelson, Bromley and Thomas (1996); Hayes (1997). 
10 
Nelson, Bromley and Thomas (1996); Hayes (1997); Lo (1994). 
11 
Nelson, Bromley and Thomas (1996). 
12 
Hope (1991). 
13 
Ekblom (1986). 
14 
Farrington (1999). 
15 
Ekblom (1986). 
16 
Hayes (1993). 
17 
McNees et al. (1976). 
18 
Burrows (1988). 
19 
Ekblom (1986). 
20 
Farrington (1999). 
21 
Bamfield (1998). 
22 
Bamfield (1998); Budden (1999). 
23 
McCulloch (1996). 
24 
Walsh (1978). 
25 
Klemke (1992). 
26 
Sacco (1985). 
27 
Beck and Willis (1999). 
28 
Beck and Willis (1999). 
29 
Farrington et al. (1993); Handford (1994); DiLonardo (1996). 
30 
DiLonardo (1996). 
31 
DiLonardo and Clarke (1996). 

References 
Bamfield, J. (1998). "Retail Civil Recovery: Filling a Deficit in 
the Criminal Justice System?" International Journal of Risk, 
Security and Crime Prevention 2:257267. 
(1997). Making Shoplifters Pay. London: The Social 
Market Foundation. 
Beck, A., and A. Willis (1999). "Context-Specific Measures of 
CCTV Effectiveness in the Retail Sector." In K. Painter and 
N. Tilley (eds.), Surveillance of Public Space: CCTV, Street 
Lighting and Crime Prevention, Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10. 
Monsey, N.Y.: Criminal Justice Press. 
Better Business Bureau of WNY Inc. (1993). "Stop 
Shoplifting Education Program." Annual report. Buffalo, 
N.Y.: Better Business Bureau of WNY Inc. 
Buckle, A., D. Farrington, J. Burrows, M. Speed, and T. Burns-
Howell (1992). "Measuring Shoplifting by Repeated 
Systematic Counting." Security Journal 3(3):137146. 
Budden, M. (1999). Preventing Shoplifting Without Being Sued: 
Practical Advice for Retail Executives. Westport, Conn.: 
Quorum Books. 
Burrows, J. (1988). Retail Crime: Prevention Through Crime 
Analysis. Crime Prevention Unit, Paper 11. London: Home 
Office Crime Prevention Unit. 
Clarke, R. (1999). Hot Products: Understanding, Anticipating and 
Reducing the Demand for Stolen Goods. Police Research Series, 
Paper 112. London: Home Office. 
DiLonardo, R. (1996). "Defining and Measuring the 
Economic Benefit of Electronic Article Surveillance." 
Security Journal 7(1):39. 

DiLonardo, R., and R. Clarke (1996). "Reducing the Rewards 
of Shoplifting: An Evaluation of Ink Tags." Security Journal 
7(1):1114. 
Ekblom, P. (1986). The Prevention of Shop Theft: An Approach 
Through Crime Analysis. Crime Prevention Unit, Paper 5. 
London: Home Office Crime Prevention Unit. 
Farrington, D. (1999). "Measuring, Explaining and Preventing 
Shoplifting: A Review of British Research." Security Journal 
12(1):927. 
Farrington, D., S. Bowen, A. Buckle, T. Burns-Howell, J. 
Burrows and M. Speed (1993). "An Experiment on the 
Prevention of Shoplifting." Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 1. 
Monsey, N.Y.: Criminal Justice Press. 
Handford, M. (1994). "Electronic Tagging in Action: A Case 
Study in Retailing." In M. Gill (ed.), Crime at Work: Studies in 
Security and Crime Prevention, Vol. 1. Leicester, England: 
Perpetuity Press. 
Hayes, R. (1999). "Shop Theft: An Analysis of Shoplifter 
Perceptions and Situational Factors." Security Journal 
12(2):7118. 
(1997). "Retail Theft: An Analysis of Apprehended 
Shoplifters." Security Journal 8(3):233246. 
(1993). Retail Security and Loss Prevention. Boston: 
Butterworth-Heinemann. 
Hobson, K. (2001). "Hey, Security Tag Makers: You're It." 
U.S. News & World Report, May 14, p. 34. 
Hope, T. (1991). "Crime Information in Retailing: Prevention 
Through Analysis." Security Journal 2(4):240245. 

References 
Klemke, L. (1992). The Sociology of Shoplifting: Boosters and 
Snitches Today. Westport, Conn.: Praeger Publishers. 
Krasnovsky, T., and R. Lane (1998). "Shoplifting: A Review of 
the Literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior 3(3):219235. 
Lo, L. (1994). "Exploring Teenage Shoplifting Behavior: A 
Choice-and-Constraint Approach." Environment and Behavior 
26(5):613639. 
McCulloch, H. (1996). Shop Theft: Improving the Police Response. 
Crime Detection and Prevention Series, Paper 76. London: 
Home Office. 
McNees, M., D. Egli, R. Marshall, J. Schnelle, and T. Risley 
(1976). "Shoplifting Prevention: Providing Information 
Through Signs." Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 
9(4):399405. 
Nelson, A., R. Bromley and C. Thomas (1996). "The 
Geography of Shoplifting in a British City: Evidence From 
Cardiff." Geoforum 27(3):409423. 
Nelson, D., and S. Perrone (2000). "Understanding and 
Controlling Retail Theft." Trends and Issues in Criminal Justice. 
Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology. 
Sacco, V. (1985). "Shoplifting Prevention: The Role of 
Communication-Based Intervention Strategies." Canadian 
Journal of Criminology 27(1):1529. 
Sherman, L., and P. Gartin (1986). Differential Recidivism: A 
Field Experiment on the Specific Sanction Effects of Arrest for 
Shoplifting. Washington, D.C.: Crime Control Institute. 
Walsh, D. (1978). Shoplifting: Controlling a Major Crime. London: 
Macmillan Press Ltd. 

About the Author 
Ronald V. Clarke 
Ronald V. Clarke is a professor at the School of Criminal 
Justice, Rutgers University. He previously headed the British 
government's criminological research department, where he 
had a significant role in developing situational crime 
prevention and the British Crime Survey. Clarke is the 
founding editor of Crime Prevention Studies, and his publications 
include Designing Out Crime (HMSO 1980), The Reasoning 
Criminal (Springer-Verlag 1986), Business and Crime Prevention 
(Criminal Justice Press 1997), and Situational Crime Prevention: 
Successful Case Studies (Harrow and Heston 1997). Together 
with Herman Goldstein, he has recently been working on 
problem-oriented policing projects for the Charlotte-
Mecklenburg (N.C.) Police Department. Since 1998, he has 
chaired the selection committee for the annual Herman 
Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented 
Policing. Clarke holds a docorate in psychology from the 
University of London. 

Recommended Readings 
 
A Police Guide to Surveying Citizens and Their 
Environments, 
Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1993. This 
guide offers a practical introduction for police practitioners 
to two types of surveys that police find useful: surveying 
public opinion and surveying the physical environment. It 
provides guidance on whether and how to conduct cost-
effective surveys. 
 
Assessing Responses to Problems: An 
Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers, by 
John E. Eck (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 
Community Oriented Policing Services, 2001). This guide is 
a companion to the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series. It 
provides basic guidance to measuring and assessing 
problem-oriented policing efforts. 
 
Conducting Community Surveys, by Deborah Weisel 
(Bureau of Justice Statistics and Office of Community 
Oriented Policing Services, 1999). This guide, along with 
accompanying computer software, provides practical, basic 
pointers for police in conducting community surveys. The 
document is also available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs. 
 
Crime Prevention Studies, 
edited by Ronald V. Clarke 
(Criminal Justice Press, 1993, et seq.). This is a series of 
volumes of applied and theoretical research on reducing 
opportunities for crime. Many chapters are evaluations of 
initiatives to reduce specific crime and disorder problems. 

 
Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing:The 1999 
Herman Goldstein Award Winners. This document 
produced by the National Institute of Justice in 
collaboration with the Office of Community Oriented 
Policing Services and the Police Executive Research Forum 
provides detailed reports of the best submissions to the 
annual award program that recognizes exemplary problem-
oriented responses to various community problems. A 
similar publication is available for the award winners from 
subsequent years. The documents are also available at 
www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. 
 
Not Rocket Science? Problem-Solving and Crime 
Reduction, 
by Tim Read and Nick Tilley (Home Office 
Crime Reduction Research Series, 2000). Identifies and 
describes the factors that make problem-solving effective or 
ineffective as it is being practiced in police forces in 
England and Wales. 
 
Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical Theory for 
Crime Prevention, 
by Marcus Felson and Ronald V. 
Clarke (Home Office Police Research Series, Paper No. 98, 
1998). Explains how crime theories such as routine activity 
theory, rational choice theory and crime pattern theory have 
practical implications for the police in their efforts to 
prevent crime. 
 
Problem Analysis in Policing, by Rachel Boba (Police 
Foundation, 2003). Introduces and defines problem analysis 
and provides guidance on how problem analysis can be 
integrated and institutionalized into modern policing 
practices. 

 
Problem-Oriented Policing, by Herman Goldstein 
(McGraw-Hill, 1990, and Temple University Press, 1990). 
Explains the principles and methods of problem-oriented 
policing, provides examples of it in practice, and discusses 
how a police agency can implement the concept. 
 
Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime Prevention, 
by Anthony A. Braga (Criminal Justice Press, 2003). 
Provides a through review of significant policing research 
about problem places, high-activity offenders, and repeat 
victims, with a focus on the applicability of those findings 
to problem-oriented policing. Explains how police 
departments can facilitate problem-oriented policing by 
improving crime analysis, measuring performance, and 
securing productive partnerships. 
 
Problem-Oriented Policing: Reflections on the 
First 20 Years, by Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of 
Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 
2000). Describes how the most critical elements of 
Herman Goldstein's problem-oriented policing model have 
developed in practice over its 20-year history, and proposes 
future directions for problem-oriented policing. The report 
is also available at www.cops.usdoj.gov. 
 
Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in 
Newport News, by John E. Eck and William Spelman 
(Police Executive Research Forum, 1987). Explains the 
rationale behind problem-oriented policing and the 
problem-solving process, and provides examples of 
effective problem-solving in one agency. 

 
Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing Crime 
and Disorder Through Problem-Solving 
Partnerships by Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott 
Phillips, Tammy Rinehart and Meg Townsend. (U.S. 
Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 
Policing Services, 1998) (also available at 
www.cops.usdoj.gov). Provides a brief introduction to 
problem-solving, basic information on the SARA model 
and detailed suggestions about the problem-solving process. 
 
Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case 
Studies, 
Second Edition, edited by Ronald V. Clarke 
(Harrow and Heston, 1997). Explains the principles and 
methods of situational crime prevention, and presents over 
20 case studies of effective crime prevention initiatives. 
 
Tackling Crime and Other Public-Safety Problems: 
Case Studies in Problem-Solving, 
by Rana Sampson 
and Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 
Community Oriented Policing Services, 2000) (also available 
at www.cops.usdoj.gov). Presents case studies of effective 
police problem-solving on 18 types of crime and disorder 
problems. 
 
Using Analysis for Problem-Solving: A Guidebook 
for Law Enforcement, 
by Timothy S. Bynum (U.S. 
Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 
Policing Services, 2001). Provides an introduction for 
police to analyzing problems within the context of 
problem-oriented policing. 
 
Using Research: A Primer for Law Enforcement 
Managers, 
Second Edition, by John E. Eck and Nancy G. 
LaVigne (Police Executive Research Forum, 1994). Explains 
many of the basics of research as it applies to police 
management and problem-solving. 

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 
Problem-Specific Guides series: 
1. 
Assaults in and Around Bars. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 
ISBN: 1-932582-00-2 
2. 
Street Prostitution. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-01-0 
3. 
Speeding in Residential Areas. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 
ISBN: 1-932582-02-9 
4. 
Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes. 
Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-03-7 
5. 
False Burglar Alarms. Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-04-5 
6. 
Disorderly Youth in Public Places. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 
ISBN: 1-932582-05-3 
7. 
Loud Car Stereos. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-06-1 
8. 
Robbery at Automated Teller Machines. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 
ISBN: 1-932582-07-X 
9. 
Graffiti. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-08-8 
10. 
Thefts of and From Cars in Parking Facilities. Ronald V. 
Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-09-6 
11. 
Shoplifting. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-10-X 
12. 
Bullying in Schools. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-11-8 
13. 
Panhandling. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-12-6 
14. 
Rave Parties. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-13-4 
15. 
Burglary of Retail Establishments. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. 
ISBN: 1-932582-14-2 
16. 
Clandestine Drug Labs. Michael S. Scott. 2002. 
ISBN: 1-932582-15-0 
17. 
Acquaintance Rape of College Students. Rana Sampson. 2002. 
ISBN: 1-932582-16-9 
18. 
Burglary of Single-Family Houses. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 
2002. ISBN: 1-932582-17-7 
19. 
Misuse and Abuse of 911. Rana Sampson. 2002. 
ISBN: 1-932582-18-5 
20. 
Financial Crimes Against the Elderly. 
Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-22-3 

Problem-Solving Tools series: 
 
Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for 
Police Problem-Solvers. John E. Eck. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-19-3 
Upcoming Problem-Oriented Guides for Police (2003) 
Problem-Specific Guides 
Check and Card Fraud 
Crimes Against Tourists 
Disorder at Budget Motels 
Domestic Violence 
Gun Violence Among Serious Youthful Offenders 
Mentally Ill Persons 
Prescription Fraud 
Robbery of Taxi Drivers 
Stalking 
Student Party Disturbances on College Campuses 
Problem-Solving Tools 
Repeat Victimization 
Using Offender Interviews to Inform Police Problem-Solving 
Response Guides 
The Benefits and Consequences of Police Crackdowns 
Street Closures 

Future Guide Topics (2004) 
Identity Theft 
School Break-Ins 
Street Racing 
Bomb Threats 
Binge Drinking on College Campuses 
Open-air Drug Markets 
Sexual Activity in Public Places 
Drunk Driving 
Cruising 
Bank Robbery 
Other Related COPS Office Publications 
 
Using Analysis for Problem-Solving: A Guidebook 
for Law Enforcement. Timothy S. Bynum. 
 
Problem-Oriented Policing: Reflections on the First 
20 Years. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 
 
Tackling Crime and Other Public-Safety Problems: 
Case Studies in Problem-Solving. Rana Sampson and 
Michael S. Scott. 2000. 
 
Community Policing, Community Justice, and 
Restorative Justice: Exploring the Links for the 
Delivery of a Balanced Approach to Public Safety. 
Caroline G. Nicholl. 1999. 
 
Toolbox for Implementing Restorative Justice and 
Advancing Community Policing. Caroline G. Nicholl. 
2000. 
 
Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing 
Crime and Disorder Through Problem-Solving 
Partnerships. Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott 
Phillips, Tammy Rinehart and Meg Townsend. 1998. 
 
Bringing Victims into Community Policing. The 
National Center for Victims of Crime and the Police 
Foundation. 2002. 

 
Call Management and Community Policing. Tom 
McEwen, Deborah Spence, Russell Wolff, Julie Wartell, 
Barbara Webster. 2003 
 
Crime Analysis in America. Keith Nicholls, PhD., 
Timothy C. OShea, PhD. 2003 
 
Problem Analysis in Policing. Rachel Boba, PhD. 
2003 
 
Reducing Theft at Construction Sites: Lessons 
From a Problem-Oriented Project. Ronald V. 
Clarke, Herman Goldstein. 2003 
 
The COPS Collaboration Toolkit: How to Build, 
Fix, and Sustain Productive Partnerships. Gwen O. 
Briscoe, Ph.D., Anna T. Laszlo, Tammy A. Rinehart. 
2001. 
 
The Law Enforcement Tech Guide: How to plan, 
purchase and manage technology (successfully!). 
Kelly J. Harris, William H. Romesburg. 2002. 
 
Theft From Cars in Center City Parking 
Facilities - A Case Study. Ronald V. Clarke, Herman 
Goldstein. 2003. 
For more information about the Problem-Oriented Guides for 
Police series and other COPS Office publications, please call 
the Department of Justice Response Center at 800.421.6770 
or visit COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov. 

FOR MORE INFORMATION: 
U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 
1100 Vermont Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20530 
To obtain details on COPS programs, call the 
U.S. Department of Justice Response Center at 800.421.6770 
Visit COPS Online at the address listed below. 
e08032030 Created Date: September 08, 2003 
ISBN: 1-932582-10-X 
www.cops.usdoj.gov