Why Filming Is Declining Across the UK and How Regions Can Revive Their Film Industries
Britain still looks like a screen success story from the outside. The UK has world-class crews, respected studios, generous tax reliefs, historic streets, dramatic coastlines and a long record of attracting major international productions. Yet across many towns, cities and rural areas, the experience feels very different. Fewer shoots arrive. Local crews wait longer between jobs. Councils see fewer location requests. Hospitality, transport and supply firms lose the short bursts of spending that film and high-end TV once brought.
The decline is not simple. It is not a collapse of the whole UK screen sector. It is a regional squeeze driven by uneven investment, tighter budgets, global competition, changing viewing habits and a commissioning slowdown after the streaming boom. The result is a film economy that can look healthy in headline figures while leaving many places outside the main production hubs exposed.
The UK screen sector is strong, but the slowdown is real
The UK has spent much of the past decade building one of the most attractive production bases in Europe. Major studios around London and the South East have expanded. High-end TV has grown quickly. International films continue to use UK crews, VFX houses and stages.
But the boom has cooled.
According to BFI production statistics, combined UK spend on film and high-end television reached a record level in 2022, then fell sharply in 2023. The BFI reported UK film and high-end TV production spend of about £4.23 billion in 2023, down by roughly 32% from the previous year. The fall reflected several pressures at once, including the US writers’ and actors’ strikes, a wider pullback in streaming production and tighter commissioning across broadcasters.
Cinema habits also changed. UK cinema admissions were around 176 million in 2019, before dropping heavily during the pandemic. They have recovered only partly since then, sitting well below pre-pandemic levels in recent years. That matters because theatrical performance still shapes investor confidence, distribution plans and the types of films that get made.
For the regions, the problem is sharper. Large inward investment productions often cluster where infrastructure is strongest, mainly London, the South East and major studio zones. Smaller independent films, local features and regional television productions are more vulnerable to cuts. These are the projects that often use local streets, community venues, small suppliers and emerging crews.
Why production is pulling away from regions
No single factor explains the decline in regional filming. The current pressure comes from several trends that reinforce each other.
Budget cuts and commissioning caution have hit smaller productions first
Public service broadcasters remain central to regional production. They commission drama, factual programmes, children’s content and local stories that commercial platforms may not fund. When broadcaster budgets tighten, regional ecosystems feel it quickly.
The BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 all face pressure from advertising shifts, licence fee constraints, inflation and competition from global platforms. Film4 and the BFI remain vital supporters of British independent cinema, but they cannot absorb every gap in the market.
Independent film is especially exposed. Rising labour, accommodation, transport and energy costs mean a £2 million or £3 million budget buys less than it did a few years ago. Producers then reduce shoot days, avoid complex locations or move production to places with stronger incentives. Regional shoots become harder to justify unless the story demands them.
Other countries compete more aggressively for shoots
The UK’s tax relief system has long been a strength. Yet other countries have become more ambitious. Ireland, Hungary, Spain, Germany, Canada and parts of eastern Europe offer competitive rebates, lower costs, large crews and modern studio space.
The decision is often financial. If a producer can recreate a British street abroad while saving money, the local economic argument in favour of shooting in the UK weakens. This does not affect only blockbuster films. Mid-budget dramas and streaming series also compare incentives, accommodation costs, permissions and crew availability.
The UK still wins many major projects, but competition reduces the number of productions willing to travel across Britain for location work. Regions without fast permit systems, clear crew databases or film-friendly local authorities can lose out before a scout even visits.
Audience tastes have shifted towards fewer, bigger bets
Film and television audiences now spread their attention across cinema, streaming, gaming, short-form video and social platforms. Viewers still love British stories, but the economics behind them have changed.
Streamers and broadcasters increasingly favour projects that feel safe internationally. That can mean known intellectual property, crime drama, fantasy, prestige literary adaptations and returning series. Local stories without obvious global appeal face a harder sell.
This shift affects the kinds of places that appear on screen. A fantasy series may need controlled studio stages. A franchise film may use a few iconic locations, then complete most work on sets or through visual effects. A regional social drama, by contrast, spends money in local neighbourhoods, hires local extras and uses real community spaces. When fewer of those projects get greenlit, regional visibility falls.
What the decline means for local economies and communities
Filming is often described as cultural activity, but for host regions it is also direct spending. A shoot pays for hotels, catering, security, taxis, storage, builders, electricians, costume hire, props, waste services and location fees. It also creates work experience for students and entry-level crew.
A BFI-commissioned Screen Business report estimated that UK film tax relief generated £8.30 in gross value added for every £1 of relief during the period it studied. Figures like this explain why countries compete so hard for production spend. Screen work has a supply chain that reaches far beyond actors and directors.
The loss of filming can be felt in three ways.
Work becomes less reliable for local crews. Camera assistants, sparks, runners, location marshals and make-up artists often work freelance. If productions cluster elsewhere, people either leave the industry, move to London, or accept less regular work.
Local suppliers lose high-value short contracts. Hotels and restaurants may benefit for several weeks from one shoot. Rural areas can see a noticeable boost when cast and crew stay nearby.
Communities lose screen identity. Film tourism is not guaranteed, but it can be powerful when a place becomes linked with a popular story. Without regular production, fewer places build that connection.
Case studies show both the gains and the risks
The best way to understand regional filming is to look at places that have benefited, and why those benefits are hard to sustain.
Northern Ireland used screen production to change its profile
Northern Ireland’s screen economy grew strongly through a mix of public support, studio capacity, skilled crews and standout productions. Game of Thrones is the obvious example. Filmed extensively in Northern Ireland, it helped promote locations such as the Dark Hedges, Ballintoy and Castle Ward to international visitors.
The impact went beyond tourism. The production supported local crew training, facilities, set construction and post-production services. It also gave Northern Ireland a global screen identity that would have been difficult to buy through tourism campaigns alone.
The risk is reliance on a small number of large shows. When global commissioning slows, studios and crews need a wider base of domestic and international projects. A region cannot build long-term resilience on one hit.
Scotland shows the value of place, but also the need for infrastructure
Scotland has a strong screen offer: historic cities, islands, mountains, coastline and skilled creative talent. Productions such as Outlander have helped turn Scottish locations into visitor attractions. Screen Scotland has also pushed for more production activity and better support across the country.
Yet Scotland’s challenge has long been the gap between stunning locations and full production infrastructure. If a region lacks enough stage space, local crew depth or post-production capacity, a project may film selected exteriors there but spend most of its money elsewhere.
This is a common regional pattern. A place provides the beauty, while another place captures the bulk of the budget.
Wales has built momentum through studios and local support
Wales has attracted major productions through a combination of studio facilities, striking scenery and active public support. Bad Wolf’s presence in Cardiff and productions linked to Welsh locations have helped build a stronger screen base.
The lesson from Wales is that regional growth needs anchors. A studio, a significant production company or a long-running series can support training routes and supplier confidence. Without anchors, local talent often leaves.
Cornwall and coastal regions show how fragile location value can be
Series such as Poldark gave Cornwall and the south-west a screen boost by presenting landscapes that audiences recognised and wanted to visit. But location-led success can fade if production does not return.
For places built around seasonal tourism, film shoots can help fill quieter months. Hotels, cafés and transport firms benefit when a crew arrives outside peak holiday season. If those shoots decline, local economies lose a useful counterweight to seasonal instability.
The regional divide is also a skills divide
Production follows confidence. Producers choose places where they believe they can hire crews, solve problems, secure permits and finish on time. When a region has fewer shoots, its crew base thins. When the crew base thins, fewer shoots come. The cycle is hard to break.
Training alone is not enough. Many regions already have universities, colleges and talented graduates. The missing link is often paid progression. Entry-level workers need repeated jobs, not a single workshop. Mid-career crew need enough volume to stay local. Department heads need trust from producers who may be used to hiring from established hubs.
This is why local film offices matter. The best ones do more than issue permits. They keep current crew directories, connect producers to suppliers, help solve location problems and make the region feel easy to work in.
How regions can revive filming
The UK does not need every region to become a mini-Hollywood. It needs each region to identify what it can offer, then make that offer simple, visible and reliable.
Build film-friendly local authorities
Councils can make a direct difference. Slow permits, unclear fees and inconsistent rules push productions away. Clear guidance helps, especially for independent producers with limited time.
A strong local film office should offer:
A simple permit process with named contacts
A location library with practical details
Clear parking, road closure and public space guidance
Links to local crew, suppliers and accommodation
Support for residents affected by filming
Small improvements can change producer behaviour. If one town is easier to work with than another, it gets recommended.
Use targeted regional production funds
Small regional funds can unlock projects that would otherwise shoot elsewhere. They work best when tied to local spend, training placements and screen credit for the area.
Funding does not need to cover a whole production. It can close a gap, support location costs or help a producer hire locally. The return comes through wages, supplier spend and longer-term visibility.
Connect tourism and screen strategy
Film tourism should start before release, not years later. Regions can plan walking routes, visitor interpretation, heritage partnerships and local business participation while production is under way, provided confidentiality rules allow it.
This needs care. Communities should not be treated as backdrops. Visitor pressure can damage fragile sites. Good screen tourism spreads benefits, manages crowds and respects residents.
Support independent and mid-budget work
Big inward investment productions bring large spend, but they are mobile. Independent films and mid-budget dramas often create deeper links with place. They use real streets, local stories and regional talent.
The UK’s Independent Film Tax Credit, announced in 2024 for qualifying lower-budget films, is a promising step. By offering stronger support for films with budgets up to a set threshold, it could help British producers keep culturally specific projects alive. For regions, the key question is whether that support translates into shoots outside the main hubs.
Create permanent skills ladders
Training should be linked to real productions. Paid placements, local trainee quotas, shadowing schemes and partnerships with colleges can help new workers stay in the industry.
Regions also need support for mid-career crew. A runner can train locally, but if the next five rungs of the ladder are somewhere else, the region loses that person. Long-term crew development requires repeated production volume.
Invest in practical infrastructure
Not every region needs a major studio. Some need smaller build spaces, costume stores, unit bases, workshops or post-production rooms. Practical infrastructure reduces friction. It allows productions to spend more locally rather than importing everything from established hubs.
The most useful investments often look unglamorous: secure storage, reliable power, parking for unit vehicles, wet-weather cover and good transport links.
A national strategy needs regional detail
The UK can remain a leading screen production centre while still failing many regions. That is the central tension. Headline production spend does not show whether local crews in Cumbria, Cornwall, the north-east, the Highlands or the Welsh valleys are getting steady work.
Revival needs national policy and local execution. Tax relief can attract productions, but regions need the capacity to hold them. Broadcasters can commit to out-of-London production, but local suppliers need enough notice and support to benefit. Councils can welcome filming, but residents must see value rather than disruption.
The goal should be a broader screen economy where more places share the gains. That means measuring success not only by total UK spend, but by:
Regional production days
Local crew hires
Supplier spend within the host area
Paid trainee placements
Repeat productions
Tourism and community impact after release
If filming is declining across parts of the UK, the answer is not nostalgia for a past boom. It is a practical rebuild. Regions that combine clear permissions, targeted funding, skilled crews, useful infrastructure and respect for local communities can compete again.
The UK already has the locations and the talent. The next task is to make filming outside the main hubs easier, fairer and more economically rewarding for the places that appear on screen.
Comments