The production paradox: making a sustainability film without undermining it

There’s an awkward question sitting in the middle of most sustainability film briefs. The client wants to demonstrate their environmental credentials. However, the production required to do it – crew travel, equipment freight, generators, catering – has its own environmental cost.

For most productions, nobody mentions this. We think that needs to change.

What production actually costs the planet

A typical one-day location shoot involves a crew of up to fifteen people travelling to location, often from different cities. Add equipment hire, a generator if mains power isn’t available, catering for the day, and materials for any set dressing. The carbon footprint is rarely calculated.

AdGreen – the production industry’s standard for measuring and reducing environmental impact – exists because someone started doing the sums. The numbers are not always comfortable. A mid-budget commercial production can generate several tonnes of CO2 equivalent before a frame is shot.

For a brand making sustainability claims in its film, this creates a credibility problem. Not a legal one – yet. But a genuine one.

What the industry is starting to do

AdGreen training is now standard practice at responsible production companies. It means measuring the production’s carbon footprint before, during and after the shoot, and taking active steps to reduce it. Local crew hire where possible. Reduced travel. Renewable energy on set. Sustainable catering.

As a B Corp, we’ve built these practices into how we work. However, we’d be dishonest if we claimed every production is carbon neutral. Some briefs require international locations or specialist equipment with no low-carbon equivalent. In those cases, transparency matters more than pretending the problem doesn’t exist.

The brief makes the difference

The most effective way to reduce a production’s environmental impact is at the brief stage, not the production stage. Decisions made in the first conversation – location, crew size, shoot days, format – determine the majority of the footprint. Decisions made in post can only refine what the brief already set in motion.

Therefore, if sustainability is a genuine priority, it should be in the brief. Not as a constraint. As a creative parameter. Some of the most interesting production decisions we’ve made have come from asking: what if we couldn’t fly anyone?

What genuinely sustainable production looks like

It doesn’t look like a carbon offset purchased at the end. Offsetting is better than nothing. But it’s not the same as reducing the footprint in the first place. The AdGreen approach is to measure first, reduce where possible, then offset what remains – in that order.

In addition, it means making choices with genuine environmental impact. Plant-based catering has a smaller footprint than meat-heavy catering. Local crew hire significantly reduces travel emissions. Shooting at locations accessible by public transport makes a measurable difference.

For brands whose sustainability credentials are central to their identity, the production process is part of the story. A brand that makes a sustainability film using practices it would never accept in its own supply chain is creating a problem, not communicating one.

Why this matters more in 2026

The EU Green Claims Directive is tightening the standards for what brands can claim in sustainability marketing. But scrutiny is extending beyond the words in the film. How the film was made is increasingly part of the accountability picture.

Brands that treat sustainable production as a PR exercise are running a risk. Brands that embed it in how they commission content are building something more durable.

We’re not perfect at this. But we measure it, we’re honest about it, and we’re getting better. That’s what B Corp certification requires – and it’s what we’d encourage any brand to ask of their production partner.