September 24, 2024 • 4 mins
Facial Recognition technology will stay in 25 supermarkets, as Foodstuffs North Island deems its trial a success.
The company, which owns Pak'n'Save and New World, installed the technology in the stores for a six-month test.
Early results suggest it prevented about 130 serious incidents and was able to identify repeat offenders more than 1,700 times.
Company Secretary, Julian Benefield, told Mike Hosking the trial was focused on repeat offenders, which 38% of offences were caused by in the last quarter.
He says it's one of the most proactive technologies they could find, as offenders are less aggressive when approached earlier on in the store journey.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Food Stuff six months facial recognition trial seems to have
got the tick. The early indications suggests one hundred and
thirty events like assault and verbal abuse have been avoided.
They are standing by for a final report. But Foodstuff's
North Island General Counsel Julian Benfield, Well, it's Julian morning
to you.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Morning Mike.
Speaker 1 (00:17):
What have you got I mean when we say the
final report, what have you got in front of you?
And how much more was coming in a final report
that may or may not change anything.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Yeah, as you say, our trial has come to an end,
and so this trial of facial recognition technology in twenty
five stores was all about helping to keep our people safe.
We've got a draft report from our independent evaluator, so
that's an evaluator that we appointed based on the advice
of the Privacy Commission. The early results from them are strong.
It's showing seventeen hundred and forty seven actual matches of
(00:46):
repeat offenders. And as you have said that the early
results show that we've avoided serious incidents, one hundred and
thirty serious incidents, so that's things like assault, converible abuse.
The safety of our team is a top priority. So
avoiding around one hundred and thirty serious incidents is huge.
That's one hundred and thirty times that our team mem
design in harm's way or attacked or abused. And we've
also said that our customers are very supportive of what
(01:07):
we're doing. We are based on that draft report. We're
continuing to use facial recognition technology in the meantime while
we wait for that final report from an independent evaluator.
But they have said to us that they don't expect
the findings to materially change between draft report and final report.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
So how do you know it was avoided if it
didn't happen. How literally does that unfold?
Speaker 2 (01:28):
So we've got our independent evaluator. That factor has come
from the ends of the one hundred and thirty incidents
that are avoided has come from independent evaluator Scalety, who's
a respected research and evaluation firm. What they've looked at
is harmful behavior data at the twenty five trial stores
and compared that against the non trial stores. They've looked
at the direct deffect of facial recognition, so the evidence
(01:48):
that it's actually detected offenders in store, as well as
the deterrent effect which has been real, So offenders choosing
not to come to the store at all because they
think that the technology will detect them.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
Good bang for buck scenario, the technology to put it in,
how many you may or may not avoid, et cetera,
versus the cost of you know what, does it work?
Does it add up well?
Speaker 2 (02:09):
And these early results absolutely show that it's been a success.
You know, we've seen some serious and sort of incidents avoided,
minimal privacy impact based on early findings and customer support.
In terms of the cost, we don't have a fixed
budget to tack or retail crime. We can't put a
price on the safety of our team and customers. So
it alwyos been what we need to do to address
such an important issue? Is it?
Speaker 1 (02:30):
Could it be? Do you do I mean you might
be in the wrong department. Do you have a vibe
that you know? We were talking to Andrew cost At
the Police Commissioner before. This is all post COVID and
we're all angsty and angry and furious and cost of
living and all that sort of stuff. Is it possible
this thing will solve itself to a degree.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Well, we think we need to do more, and that's
why we've been raising attention to the retail crime issue
for two US so years now. We've seen massive increases
in retail crime during that period. It is fair to
say that there has been an increase in aggression in
our stores since COVID area. But our experts tell us
that it's not cost of living that is causing this issue.
(03:05):
Our security experts tell us it's professional criminals targeting brand
specific goods and links organized crime and not linked to
cost of living. And to be honest, no violence or
aggression and our stores is acceptable. You know, all of
our store teams deserve to return home safe every day.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
Those social media videos that I used to watch where
the guy would literally walk through barefoot, normally grab a
can of beers and a side of beef and then
just walk out as the security guard watched them do that.
Does that still happen? And if it does regularly.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
I mean it happens all the time. We've reported on
our incidents, and while they're slightly down this quarter, there
are a huge number of incidents that come through. And
you know, our trial is focused on repeat offenders, and
in the last quarter, thirty eight percent of all offenses
were caused by repeat offenders. So this facial recognition technology
helps us to identify the defenders before they come into
(03:58):
the store. And it's one of the most proactive technologies
that we can find because if you catch the offender
earlier on in the store journey, they tend to be
less aggressive when they're approached.
Speaker 1 (04:08):
Good conspiracy text, Mike, how many false positives? And how
do we know they aren't using the data of an
additional surveillance and shopper tracking.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Yeah, well on the second point, absolutely not. This We've
been very clear and transparent to New Zealand about the
fact that this is solely about retail crime and it
is solely about keep targeting repeat affendas and stopping them
from doing more harm. That is all it's about. It's
not about anything else. That is the sole focus of
our trial.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
All right, Julian, appreciate it very much. Julian Benefield, who
is with Foodstuffs in North Island their general counsel. For
more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to news
talks that'd be from six am weekdays, or follow the
podcast on iHeartRadio.
Food Stuff six months facial recognition trial seems to have
got the tick. The early indications suggests one hundred and
thirty events like assault and verbal abuse have been avoided.
They are standing by for a final report. But Foodstuff's
North Island General Counsel Julian Benfield, Well, it's Julian morning
to you.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Morning Mike.
Speaker 1 (00:17):
What have you got I mean when we say the
final report, what have you got in front of you?
And how much more was coming in a final report
that may or may not change anything.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Yeah, as you say, our trial has come to an end,
and so this trial of facial recognition technology in twenty
five stores was all about helping to keep our people safe.
We've got a draft report from our independent evaluator, so
that's an evaluator that we appointed based on the advice
of the Privacy Commission. The early results from them are strong.
It's showing seventeen hundred and forty seven actual matches of
(00:46):
repeat offenders. And as you have said that the early
results show that we've avoided serious incidents, one hundred and
thirty serious incidents, so that's things like assault, converible abuse.
The safety of our team is a top priority. So
avoiding around one hundred and thirty serious incidents is huge.
That's one hundred and thirty times that our team mem
design in harm's way or attacked or abused. And we've
also said that our customers are very supportive of what
(01:07):
we're doing. We are based on that draft report. We're
continuing to use facial recognition technology in the meantime while
we wait for that final report from an independent evaluator.
But they have said to us that they don't expect
the findings to materially change between draft report and final report.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
So how do you know it was avoided if it
didn't happen. How literally does that unfold?
Speaker 2 (01:28):
So we've got our independent evaluator. That factor has come
from the ends of the one hundred and thirty incidents
that are avoided has come from independent evaluator Scalety, who's
a respected research and evaluation firm. What they've looked at
is harmful behavior data at the twenty five trial stores
and compared that against the non trial stores. They've looked
at the direct deffect of facial recognition, so the evidence
(01:48):
that it's actually detected offenders in store, as well as
the deterrent effect which has been real, So offenders choosing
not to come to the store at all because they
think that the technology will detect them.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
Good bang for buck scenario, the technology to put it in,
how many you may or may not avoid, et cetera,
versus the cost of you know what, does it work?
Does it add up well?
Speaker 2 (02:09):
And these early results absolutely show that it's been a success.
You know, we've seen some serious and sort of incidents avoided,
minimal privacy impact based on early findings and customer support.
In terms of the cost, we don't have a fixed
budget to tack or retail crime. We can't put a
price on the safety of our team and customers. So
it alwyos been what we need to do to address
such an important issue? Is it?
Speaker 1 (02:30):
Could it be? Do you do I mean you might
be in the wrong department. Do you have a vibe
that you know? We were talking to Andrew cost At
the Police Commissioner before. This is all post COVID and
we're all angsty and angry and furious and cost of
living and all that sort of stuff. Is it possible
this thing will solve itself to a degree.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Well, we think we need to do more, and that's
why we've been raising attention to the retail crime issue
for two US so years now. We've seen massive increases
in retail crime during that period. It is fair to
say that there has been an increase in aggression in
our stores since COVID area. But our experts tell us
that it's not cost of living that is causing this issue.
(03:05):
Our security experts tell us it's professional criminals targeting brand
specific goods and links organized crime and not linked to
cost of living. And to be honest, no violence or
aggression and our stores is acceptable. You know, all of
our store teams deserve to return home safe every day.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
Those social media videos that I used to watch where
the guy would literally walk through barefoot, normally grab a
can of beers and a side of beef and then
just walk out as the security guard watched them do that.
Does that still happen? And if it does regularly.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
I mean it happens all the time. We've reported on
our incidents, and while they're slightly down this quarter, there
are a huge number of incidents that come through. And
you know, our trial is focused on repeat offenders, and
in the last quarter, thirty eight percent of all offenses
were caused by repeat offenders. So this facial recognition technology
helps us to identify the defenders before they come into
(03:58):
the store. And it's one of the most proactive technologies
that we can find because if you catch the offender
earlier on in the store journey, they tend to be
less aggressive when they're approached.
Speaker 1 (04:08):
Good conspiracy text, Mike, how many false positives? And how
do we know they aren't using the data of an
additional surveillance and shopper tracking.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
Yeah, well on the second point, absolutely not. This We've
been very clear and transparent to New Zealand about the
fact that this is solely about retail crime and it
is solely about keep targeting repeat affendas and stopping them
from doing more harm. That is all it's about. It's
not about anything else. That is the sole focus of
our trial.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
All right, Julian, appreciate it very much. Julian Benefield, who
is with Foodstuffs in North Island their general counsel. For
more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to news
talks that'd be from six am weekdays, or follow the
podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.