Why We Don’t Measure Success Only in Tonnes

In food waste and composting, success is often measured in tonnes.

Tonnes diverted from landfill.

Tonnes processed.

Tonnes treated, transported, managed.

These numbers matter. They help councils report progress and justify infrastructure. They give scale to a problem that is genuinely large.

But at Generation Soil, we don’t measure success only in tonnes.

Because regeneration cannot be understood through volume alone.

What Tonnes Can Tell Us

Measuring food waste by weight makes sense in a disposal-focused system.

Food waste is treated as a liability to be removed as efficiently as possible. The heavier the material moved out of sight, the more successful the system appears.

Tonnes are useful for understanding throughput.

They are useful for carbon accounting.

They are useful for funding bids and policy targets.

But they only tell part of the story.

What Tonnes Miss Entirely

Tonnes tell us nothing about what happens next.

They do not show whether nutrients return to soil or leave the area permanently.

They do not show whether compost is biologically active or inert.

They do not show whether people understand the system they are part of.

Most importantly, tonnes do not show whether a system is building resilience or simply managing waste.

This is where measurement begins to distort behaviour.

When Volume Becomes the Goal

When success is defined primarily by volume, systems are pushed to scale fast.

Speed is prioritised over biology.

Throughput is prioritised over care.

Distance increases because larger systems require larger catchments.

Food waste travels further.

Responsibility becomes abstract.

Learning disappears from view.

In these systems, compost often becomes a by-product rather than a living material.

Regeneration Works Differently

Regenerative systems do not optimise for maximum throughput.

They optimise for relationships.

Relationships between food waste and soil.

Between people and place.

Between time, care, and biological processes.

This is why community-scale composting can appear slower.

And why that slowness matters.

What We Measure Instead

At Generation Soil, we still track weights. We have to.

But we also pay attention to things that don’t show up in tonnage reports.

Visibility

Can people see where their food waste goes?

This is explored in What Happens When Food Waste Stays Local, where we show how keeping nutrients close changes behaviour, understanding, and care.

Visibility builds trust.

It builds accountability.

It builds learning.

Participation

How many people are involved, not just how much material moves?

Composting becomes resilient when participation replaces perfection. This is central to Composting Is Participation, Not Waste Disposal, where composting is framed as a shared practice rather than an individual technical task.

People staying involved over time matters more than flawless inputs.

Soil Response

Does the compost actually improve soil health?

Living compost is not defined by weight. It is defined by biological activity, structure, and the soil’s response to it.

As discussed in Why Living Compost Feeds More Than Plants, compost success shows up in water retention, aggregation, microbial diversity, and plant resilience.

These outcomes take time.

They accumulate slowly.

They cannot be rushed.

Learning and Confidence

Do people feel more confident engaging with food waste and soil?

Shared composting builds sensory awareness. Smell becomes information. Texture becomes feedback. Decomposition becomes familiar.

This learning-by-doing is explored in What People Learn by Composting Together, where knowledge emerges through practice rather than instruction.

No tonnage metric captures this.

Why Smaller Can Be Stronger

Community-scale composting does not replace municipal systems.

It complements them.

Large systems handle volume.

Local systems handle relationships, soil health, and learning.

Trying to force all composting into a single logic of scale weakens both.

Regeneration depends on diversity of systems, not uniformity.

A Different Definition of Success

For us, success looks like this:

Food waste staying within the city.

Soil improving year on year.

People understanding what they are part of.

Participation continuing even when it’s imperfect.

These outcomes are slower to measure.

Harder to quantify.

But far more durable.

Measuring What Actually Matters

Tonnes will always have a place in waste reporting.

But regeneration requires additional questions:

• Does this system return nutrients to soil?

• Does it build understanding rather than distance?

• Does it strengthen local resilience?

If the answer is yes, the system is working, even if the tonnage looks modest.

Moving Beyond Volume

Food waste is not just a quantity problem.

It is a relationship problem.

By measuring only tonnes, we risk optimising the wrong thing.

By measuring care, participation, soil response, and learning alongside volume, we begin to build systems that last.

That is why we don’t measure success only in tonnes.