Safety as an Investment

Friday 04 September 2026

Subscribe to NLA's newsletter

Commercial Director
Inline Risk Solutions (ILRS)

Safety is fundamental to the success of London’s business districts. Garth Banks, Commercial Director at ILRS, explores how BIDs can take a coordinated, evidence-led approach to security, strengthening public confidence, supporting place performance and building long-term resilience.

Why London's business districts should treat security as a driver of place performance, not simply a cost

Security is often treated as a cost line, a necessity, but something to contain when budgets are under pressure. For a Business Improvement District, we believe that is the wrong starting point. Safety is part of the infrastructure of a successful place. It influences whether people visit, how long they stay, whether staff feel comfortable working there and how businesses experience the area in which they are investing.

The Scale of the Decision

Greater London now has 81 BIDs representing 25,401 business premises and almost £72.4 million in annual levy income. The relevant question is not simply how much to spend on security, but whether the investment is targeted at the right risks and whether its impact can be demonstrated.¹

1. Safety is an economic issue

The latest retail evidence is serious, but it is not a story of uninterrupted deterioration. The British Retail Consortium's 2026 Crime Report recorded 1,600 incidents of violence and abuse against retail workers each day. That was down by a fifth from the previous year, yet it remained the second highest level on record and more than three times the pre-pandemic rate. An average day still included 118 incidents of physical violence and 36 involving a weapon. Retailers also detected 5.5 million incidents of shop theft.²

That improvement does matter, as the BRC links it to sustained security investment, closer collaboration and a better police response, with retailers spending more than £5 billion on security over five years. It is evidence that coordinated action can change outcomes, while also showing how far there is to go. ²

Figure 1. Incidents per day. Source: British Retail Consortium Crime Reports 2025 and 2026. The latest reporting period is September 2024 to August 2025.

2. The risk picture is elevated, but not uniform

Official statistics add important balance. Police recorded shoplifting fell by 4 per cent in the year to March 2026, from 530,324 to 507,086 offences, after several years of sharp increases. It remains historically elevated, but a credible investment case should acknowledge movement in both directions.³

Anti-social behaviour presents a different picture with The Crime Survey for England and Wales estimating that 40.9 per cent of people experienced or witnessed ASB in the year to March 2026, up from 35.5 per cent. The ONS cautions that part of the increase reflects a change in survey questions, although some of it was genuine. Police recorded ASB remained at about one million incidents.³

The Crime and Policing Act 2026 has also changed the operating context, creating a standalone offence of assaulting a retail worker and repeals the summary trial provision for shop theft valued at £200 or less. Theft below £200 was always illegal, the Government's stated concern was the perceived immunity created by the earlier provision.⁴

3. Perception is part of place performance

Crime data tells only part of the story because people make decisions on the basis of how a place feels. In Q3 2025/26, 68 per cent of Londoners said they felt safe walking alone in their local area after dark, falling to 58 per cent among women. The gap was unchanged from the previous year. In October 2025, 44 per cent of Londoners said they were worried about crime and 43 per cent about anti-social behaviour.⁵

This does not prove that one security intervention will increase spend or reduce vacancies. Footfall and investment are shaped by transport, the local offer, the economy and many other factors. But perceived safety is one of the conditions that enables people to use a place confidently, particularly after dark. A BID should therefore treat it as a measurable place management outcome, not a vague communications claim.

Figure 2. Percentage feeling safe walking alone in their local area after dark. Source: GLA State of London / MOPAC Public Attitude Survey.⁵

4. From security spend to security investment

The strongest economic framework comes from the Home Office's 2026 update to the economic and social costs of crime. Using 2019/20 as a pre-pandemic baseline, it estimates that commercial crime across nine business sectors carried a total cost of £16.9 billion. Commercial robbery accounted for £6.8 billion, commercial theft £5.5 billion and commercial burglary £3.4 billion. [6] (Robbery means stealing from someone using or threatening force. Burglary means entering a property without permission, in order to steal from it, commit a serious assault or cause criminal damage. Theft is the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another).

The figures are a historical baseline rather than a current bill for London's BIDs, and the Home Office cautions that some inputs have since been superseded. Their value is conceptual. The framework divides the cost of crime into anticipation, consequence and response. Security is part of the cost of anticipation, where money is spent in advance to reduce the likelihood or impact of a much larger consequence.⁶

Figure 3. Estimated economic and social cost in 2019/20 prices across nine commercial sectors. Components are rounded and sum to £16.8bn; the Home Office published total is £16.9bn.⁶

Investment does not simply mean spending more

Evidence on crime reduction shows why design matters, the College of Policing's evidence review associates CCTV with an overall 13 per cent reduction in crime, but the effect varies. Actively monitored CCTV produced a statistically significant 15 per cent reduction, while CCTV used with multiple complementary interventions was associated with a 34 per cent reduction. CCTV alone showed no significant overall effect on violent crime or disorder. Improved street lighting has separately been associated with an average 21 per cent reduction across the reviewed studies.⁷ ⁸

The better question

Not 'how much security can we afford?' but 'which combination of people, technology, environmental design, intelligence and partnership activity is most likely to improve this place and how will we know?'

5. Measure what changes

Of course, a BID cannot credibly attribute every movement in footfall or spend to security. It can, however, build a disciplined before-and-after evidence base, compare locations and time periods, and combine operational data with member and public perception. The GLA's High Streets Data Service already gives participating boroughs and BIDs access to footfall, spend and vacancy measures across more than 600 high streets and 200 town centres.⁹

A practical scorecard should combine leading and lagging indicators: reported incidents and repeat locations; time to detect and respond; outcomes and referrals; member reporting and confidence; public perceptions of safety; after-dark footfall and dwell time; indexed spend; and vacancy. The objective is not to claim perfect causation, it is to show whether an intervention was delivered, whether the immediate risk changed and whether wider place indicators moved in the expected direction.

6. Martyn’s Law should widen the collaboration conversation

Martyn’s Law establishes new responsibilities for qualifying premises and events, but safety across a business district cannot be managed one front door at a time. Risks frequently cross the boundaries between venues, offices, shops, public spaces, transport approaches, open air markets and temporary events, whether or not every location or activity falls formally within the Act. Legal responsibility will remain with the relevant premises operators and event organisers, but BIDs can provide the connective tissue between them, bringing together landlords, businesses, venue and market operators, local authorities, police and security partners to share intelligence, map responsibilities, identify gaps, establish common communications and exercise coordinated responses. The opportunity is not for a BID to assume another organisation’s legal duties, but to start a broader conversation about how individually compliant premises can contribute to a district that is collectively prepared. Compliance may sit with individual duty holders; resilience depends on collaboration.¹⁰

The BID's role

Compliance belongs to individual duty holders. District resilience is collaborative. A BID can provide the connective tissue, mapping responsibilities, sharing intelligence, facilitating common communications, coordinating exercises and identifying gaps between premises.

7. What a BID can do now

Taken together, the changing crime picture, the commercial importance of perceived safety, the need to demonstrate value and the collaborative implications of Martyn’s Law all point towards a more deliberate, district-wide approach. BIDs can start exploring practical steps they could take now to strengthen safety, coordination, confidence and resilience across their areas.

Understand. Build a district risk and incident picture using member reports, police and local authority data, location patterns and perception evidence.
Prioritise. Separate high frequency problems, high consequence risk and confidence eroding disorder. Define the outcome sought in each hotspot or time window.
Coordinate. Map responsible persons, partners, communications and escalation routes. Use the BID to connect occupiers without blurring legal accountability.
Intervene. Select a layered response incorporating people, monitored technology, environmental design, intelligence, reporting and partnership activity, matched to the problem.
Measure. Set a baseline, monitor operational and place indicators, review unintended effects and adjust. Report what changed as well as what was delivered.

An invitation to test the argument

The case for safety as an investment is not that every pound of security spend automatically creates commercial value. It is that a well defined safety outcome, an evidence led intervention and a credible method of measurement allow a BID to make better choices and explain those choices to levy payers. Martyn's Law adds urgency, but the opportunity is broader, to build districts that are more coordinated, more confident and more resilient.

ILRS would welcome a working conversation with BID directors around the real problems they are trying to solve around retail crime, anti-social behaviour, after dark confidence, hotspot management and district preparedness and how those problems can be translated into practical, measurable action.

Sources

¹ British BIDs, 2026 Spring Report View source

² British Retail Consortium, Crime Report 2026 View source

³ ONS, Crime in England and Wales: year ending March 2026 View source
⁴ Home Office, Crime and Policing Act 2026: retail crime factsheet View source
⁵ GLA, State of London: Crime View source
⁶ Home Office, Economic and social costs of crime 2019 to 2020 View source
⁷ College of Policing, Crime Reduction Toolkit: CCTV View source

⁸ College of Policing, Crime Reduction Toolkit: street lighting View source
⁹ GLA, High Streets Data Service View source
¹⁰ Home Office, Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025: statutory guidance — updated 25 August 2026 View source

Subscribe to NLA's newsletter

Garth Banks

Commercial Director
Inline Risk Solutions (ILRS)