Does the events industry have a preference for good optics, but bad outcomes?

I recently introduced the idea that the events industry is acting on optics, not outcomes — and the data is backing it up.

Here’s one stat from our latest report: 57% of single-use serveware at events is now compostable.

That sounds like progress. But is it really?

To test what I knew I knew, but didn’t have hard evidence for – that compostables are a distracting waste of time – I dug in. Desk research was inconclusive. There’s a lot of noise on the internet. Sustainability professionals were split. They have expertise, but they also have access to the same noise. So I went straight to the people dealing with the end-of-life reality: the waste handlers. Biogen, Biffa – people who actually process this stuff.

Their message was clear: compostables suck.

Compostable in theory ≠ compostable in practice

Upfront I’ll say it: compostables are technically better than plastic. But practically they’re a nuisance. (And for the purists: they’re only not a nuisance if managed correctly, I know. But at scale, they rarely are.)

In England, we now have three standard waste streams:

• General waste
• Recycling
• Food waste

So where do compostables go?

• General waste? Frustratingly, yes. This is the least damaging place for them.
• Recycling or food waste? Absolutely not — and here’s why.

The Recycling Problem

Compostables can’t be recycled. They’re designed to degrade, which contaminates recycling streams and ruins entire batches.

When recycling is collected, it’s taken to a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) and tipped onto the floor for an initial inspection, if the collection is deemed to contain more than 5% contaminants, the entire ~25 tonne truckload gets rejected and sent to general waste. For scale – the average UK household produces ~1 tonne of waste per year.

And if they slip through, compostables still damage the system:

• They degrade recyclate quality (especially paper and card).
• They reduce resale value.
• They compromise trust in recycled materials further down the chain.

In short: compostables in recycling can actually result in more general waste, which is the express opposite of using them.

While no-one in waste management or sustainability would advise putting compostables in the recycling bin, most compostables are indistinguishable from ‘regular’ materials, compostables are making their way here anyway:

• Only 4/10 adults in the UK feel confident they’re putting their recycling in the right bin
• An estimated 84% of UK homes unintentionally contaminate their recycling bin
• ~17% of all recycling collected from households and business cannot be recycled due to contamination (up from 13.3% in the prior four years)

Compostables don’t improve the system – they jam it up.

The food waste problem

When it comes to compostables and food waste, here’s the deal…

Most UK food waste is sent to Anaerobic Digesters (ADs) — industrial facilities that break down organic matter in around 30 days to produce:

• Biogas (captured and used for renewable energy), and
• Digestate (a nutrient-rich fertiliser).

But compostable packaging takes too long to break down. Most compostables need 6–8 weeks, while ADs are designed to run on a 30-day cycle. That means:

• Compostables don’t break down in time.
• They interfere with the system’s efficiency.
• They’re considered contaminants — not inputs.

So when food waste arrives at an AD, the entire load is de-packaged. That means all packaging – plastic, paper, compostable, “biodegradable”, or otherwise – is removed and sent to general waste.

De-packaging happens at the start of the process when food waste is tipped onto the floor and either manually or mechanically stripped of anything that isn’t actual food.

If more than ~5% of the load is contaminated (i.e. the wrong type of waste, too much packaging, non-organics), the entire load can be rejected – packed back onto the truck – and sent off for incineration or landfill instead.

It’s not sorted. It’s not assessed for how ‘eco’ it is. It’s not sent somewhere else. It’s all treated as contamination and sent to the bin.

The only facilities in the UK that can process compostable packaging are IVCs (In-Vessel Composters) which use oxygen and time to compost material. But these are:

• Far fewer in number (only 24 across the UK, compared to 756 ADs)
• More expensive to operate, and
• Declining, as government incentives favour energy-producing ADs.

Even when food waste comes from supermarkets or manufacturers – where packaging is expected – the packaging is still removed and sent to disposal.

So what’s the point?

I worry I’ll upset a lot of people by saying this, but I’m not saying it to upset anyone. It’s not my opinion, it just is…

Unless you have:

• A separate compostables bin
• A process to ensure it doesn’t get contaminated with non-compostables
• A contractor to collect it
• A facility that accepts it

…then compostables don’t improve the system. They just confuse it.

The system is the problem — not the material

But this isn’t about bashing compostables. They have the potential to be an alternative to more harmful single use materials. This is about recognising that it’s not the materials we’re using that are the problem, it’s the system they’re in.

So I don’t want us to get hung up on compostables. I’m just using them because they’re such a perfect case study.

Disposability is everywhere in events. Graphics. Booths. Giveaways. Single-use anything. Single-use everything, most of the time! Our data shows that more than 75% of materials we use in events are disposed of.

Compostables just happen to be one of the most symbolic examples — where material choices are driven by perception of being better, rather than proven outcomes. They’re the perfect example of how slick marketing has convinced us we’re doing the right thing, when the real issue is that our infrastructure can’t support the choices we’re making.

It’s not that compostables are evil. It’s that they highlight a system that isn’t fit for purpose.

Behaviour change isn’t enough

We have to work within the system as it exists and right now, that system isn’t built for circularity. It isn’t built for reuse. It’s barely built for proper sorting. In the sustainability world, you hear the chants of “behaviour change! behaviour change! behaviour change!”

But behaviour is constrained by environment.

If you’re in a cage, you’re in a cage. You can pace, sit, stand — but you’re still in the cage.

As long as single-use remains the default, we are relying on individual behaviour to overcome structural limitations. That’s neither fair nor effective.

“Bring your own!”

“Ask for a composting service!”

“Separate your waste better!”

“Be less lazy!”

But the reality is that the way we behave is limited, or enabled, by infrastructure. Want people to compost correctly? Cool — where’s the compost stream? Want people to reuse? Cool — where’s the refill station?

If we want different outcomes, we need different infrastructure. One that’s designed to deliver on those outcomes.

And the outcome isn’t just “less single-use.” It’s an end to disposability as the default setting.

First we rethink

I’ve had these conversations with sustainability professionals…

And in at least one in two conversation I’m pointed to the waste hierarchy. I’m told we need to shout about reducing — reduce waste, reduce plastic, reduce emissions. That the problem with single use can be addressed if we focus on reducing what we’re consuming first.

And I say “YES! Let’s reduce!”

Please, please yes, let’s do that! I love that idea! Do it! Start now!

But the first step in the hierarchy is, in my view, the only one that really matters.

Rethink.

Rethink the system. Rethink the behaviours it enables. Rethink what success looks like. Rethink the optics that make us feel good, and the outcomes that actually matter.

Because if we don’t rethink, we’ll just keep making the same mistakes, just with shinier materials. This perspective has rattled more than a few cages, but I’ve yet to hear a convincing case that displaces what feels increasingly obvious: without infrastructure change, everything else is surface-level.

Yes, we need better behaviours. Yes, we can apply clever frameworks and tools. But if the system isn’t built to support the outcomes we want, we’re just keeping ourselves busy.

And I don’t believe that activity is the same thing as progress.

If you have a different perspective I haven’t considered – I’d love to have it shared with me! 

Data comes from our Temperature Check Europe 2025 report, an analysis of almost 1000 events that took place in Europe across 2024.

And please don’t be put off from using compostables IF you have the money, time, opportunity, can put in place the right onsite processes, there is no way you can implement a reusables system – even in part – and you are confident you can do the job right… please go for it! Use compostables!

This article was originally posted as a LinkedIn article by Anna Abdelnoor.