Not all stores closings suffer that crime problem as that is likely more in larger cities. Some just cannot compete profitably.
My son lives with his family in the Black Hills in a town of less than 6,000 isolated from the nearest towns of similar size by an hour. It is not exactly a crime-ridden town, just rural.
The local Safeway notified them a few weeks ago they are closing, so the only local grocery my son's family will be left with is Walmart.
It is just the way it goes in rural communities, especially when Walmart arrives and stays.
Another case I know about is near me in East Texas in town of about that same size which is worse for the community. A Walmart moved in and it took just a couple of years for the local grocery and hardware stores to close down as they could not compete.
Then Walmart closed after a few more years, leaving the community stranded with little local shopping presence.
Economics dictate, not crime or racist profiling.
While lower population areas suffer closures because the base isn't big enough to support more than one store, usually the store won't even get built. That leaves smaller options, Jack and Jill, other lesser chains, that will fill that gap if WalMart hasn't already. It's tough in more rural environments,and sometimes people will travel to fill the larder, as much as 200 miles or more (one way) because the savings when buying in bulk make the trip worthwhile. Other shopping can be done while at those larger cities.
But in those larger cities, I think you will find that decay in the area leads to people who seek lower or subsidized rent, and high crime tends to accompany that. Note, that demographics can include economics, education level, age, and not just race, and I think you will see that my comment was defensible and NOT racist unless you want to interpret it that way.
Crime is intimately linked with economics, however. If the area is crime ridden, who wants to shop there? If the store is getting seriously ripped off, a profit becomes harder to make--and according to the stats in the OP, employees are a big part of that problem, so it depends on the moral fiber of the employees as well. If the numbers show that those problems may be linked to a combination of racial and economic demographics, let the chips fall where they may. It becomes a question of the probability that the retail price will be collected for the unit of goods, and if that probability is reduced, profit will be, too, unless the loss is compensated for by higher prices.
The higher the prices, the more thieves can 'justify' their larceny, and it becomes a vicious circle until the store is closed. You might be able 'somehow' to force the store to remain open, but they don't have to stock the shelves with stuff to steal.
