Lights, camera… catastrophe? How film productions are navigating climate risk

As climate-related risks grow increasingly unpredictable, the film industry faces mounting challenges in deciding how – and where – to shoot its next big hit.

From wildfires in California to hurricanes in Florida, amplified natural catastrophe risks are forcing production firms to rethink their approach to location filming. At the heart of this is a balancing act: managing catastrophe exposure while maximizing the financial benefits of film tax credit incentives.

“Catastrophic risk is being discussed across the country,” said Peter Burt (pictured), president of entertainment at Intact Insurance Specialty Solutions. “For example, Miami has strong film tax incentives, but it’s historically a tough area (because of) hurricanes. Underwriters have to ask: Is it the right time of year? What’s the contingency plan?”

Burt said film productions have traditionally gravitated toward iconic filming destinations like Los Angeles or the scenic coasts of Florida. However, as climate patterns shift and the frequency of disasters increases, these areas are becoming riskier propositions.

Today, producers must be strategic about location choices, not just for potential for disruption due to extreme weather, but also to take advantage of film tax credit incentives.

Location selection and risk mitigation for the film industry

In the film industry, tax credits are financial incentives offered by governments, usually at the state, provincial, or national level, to attract film, television, and commercial productions to their jurisdictions. These incentives reduce the overall cost of production and can make a location significantly more financially appealing to producers.

States like New Mexico, Georgia, and New Jersey, which offer hefty tax credits and a comparatively lower catastrophe profile, have seen a rise in production activity, according to Burt. Internationally, countries such as Ireland and the UK, with tax incentives of up to 40%, are also gaining ground.

On the other hand, California, the film industry’s historic hub, has been losing productions due to a combination of rising wildfire risk and less competitive tax incentives.

“California has had fewer film tax credits compared to other states and countries, which has made it a less attractive place to shoot,” Burt said.

The Los Angeles wildfires in January had a minimal impact on productions because they occurred during a low-filming period, and the fires spread through mainly residential areas. However, the event has prompted carriers to raise their scrutiny on risk mitigation strategies and contingency plans by productions.

“We didn’t see a large volume of claims related to productions. Had the fires spread further, the impact would have been much more significant, especially in terms of production shutdowns and delays,” Burt said.

“There were some ripple effects, though. You saw disruptions in talent availability, crew shortages, photography logistics, and changes to shooting locations – all of which can increase costs and cause time delays. And since many people in the industry live in the affected areas, many actors and crew members were impacted personally.”

The insurance industry’s growing influence on filming and media production

Insurance carriers, particularly those specializing in entertainment, are now playing a central role in how and where productions are greenlit, according to Burt.

Underwriters are closely evaluating filming locations, accounting for seasonal disaster risks and historical exposure patterns. But it doesn’t mean film and media companies are ruling out cat-prone areas.

“We’ve definitely seen production companies become more proactive when it comes to safety planning, especially if they want to shoot in a high-risk area,” said Burt. “Underwriters now ask very specific questions. But even with strong plans in place, the decision of where to film usually comes down to finances, specifically, where they can get the best tax credits.”

When productions insist on filming in high-risk zones, carriers are responding with adapted underwriting strategies. These include higher deductibles, specific sub-limits for catastrophe exposures, and more rigorous contingency planning requirements. Carriers are also avoiding peak disaster seasons when insuring time-sensitive shoots in vulnerable areas.

“If a high-risk area like California suddenly offers attractive tax incentives, companies might still choose to shoot there,” Burt said. “In that case, we work closely with our risk control team to make sure solid mitigation plans are in place. Then the insurance submission is sent out to carriers, who need to get comfortable with the risk. It’s a mix of our own expertise and the willingness of carriers to underwrite that specific exposure.”

How AI and technology are helping production companies avoid catastrophe risks

To reduce dependency on volatile outdoor environments, productions are increasingly turning to technology. One key trend, Burt said, is the growing use of sound stages and controlled indoor environments.

“We recently had a film shot almost entirely on a soundstage in Las Vegas,” he told Insurance Business. “With CGI and other tech, you can now make a set look like it’s in Cabo or Paris, even if it’s just a stage in Los Angeles. That makes for a safer, more controllable environment.”

Beyond CGI, artificial intelligence (AI) and digital production tools are enabling teams to simulate complex environments without ever stepping foot outdoors. This not only minimizes exposure to weather-related risks but also helps streamline production costs.

AI is also being explored for post-production editing, scene reconstruction, and crowd generation, making filming faster and less dependent on large-scale physical setups. However, the industry is still navigating how to ethically and creatively integrate AI, particularly in the aftermath of recent labor strikes focused on AI’s role in creative work.

“Some companies embrace it, especially newer ones that blend tech and production,” Burt noted. “Others are more resistant.”