Geneva Foundation for the Future

Impact, the new bastion of security?

Admin — 2026-01-25T14:35:36Z

What if projects aligned with systemic challenges were more resilient than traditional assets?

In a world where economic, social, and ecological instabilities are becoming the norm, a new trend is emerging: impact investments, far from being mere activist gestures, could well represent a safer, more liquid, and more sustainable path than traditional finance. And for good reason: integrating the century's real challenges — climate, biodiversity, social justice, regeneration — is no longer an ethical option but a long-term risk mitigation strategy.

Conversely, developing conventional businesses amounts to ignoring these factors — worse, accelerating the emergence of business difficulties.

So how can we integrate these new parameters of today's world into the very core of business models in order to generate profit *with*?

Facing risks head-on means absorbing them better

Contrary to popular belief, impact projects are not idealistic bets disconnected from financial realities. On the contrary, by taking into account ecological vulnerabilities, social tensions, or systemic fragilities, these projects tackle the root causes of risks that threaten entire value chains. A company that anticipates carbon constraints, rethinks its dependence on finite resources, or adopts a regenerative territorial approach is equipping itself to endure. This is called strategic resilience and is reflected in KPIs through risk reduction.

Sustainable business models, truly suited for the 21st century

What sets impact apart from conventional economic models? It's not just the intention. It's also the ability to integrate weak signals, planetary boundaries, and societal expectations. It's about building not against risks, but with them. It's, in the words of the white paper by the Geneva Foundation for the Future, “putting investment at the service of a regenerative economy” and reconnecting finance to real-world projects — without derivatives or opaque intermediation chains.

Liquidity, growth, and trust: the three underestimated levers

Investment flows into impact funds are booming. Why? Because they generate growth (in future-proof sectors), preserve trust (from consumers and regulators), and now offer real liquidity, rooted in tangible, useful, and lasting assets. Impact finance also attracts new generations of investors, who no longer want to choose between profitability and purpose — they demand both.

A security ecosystem under active construction

Around these projects, robust methodological tools are emerging, such as the AGILE tool, designed to assess the viability, governance, and efficiency of impact projects based on five main categories of criteria: Alignment, Governance, Intention, Leadership, Efficiency. This tool, adopted by the Geneva Foundation for the Future, allows for a detailed analysis of a project's capacity to endure — far beyond classic evaluations focused on immediate profitability.

Changing perspective, not just portfolios

While traditional finance remains trapped in short-term thinking, investors looking to secure their assets for the coming decades have no choice but to look elsewhere — more specifically, toward impact. Not out of generosity. But because that is where stability, relevance, and growth now lie.

Impact, more secure than traditional finance? Yes — provided we understand that risk is no longer where it used to be, and that we must face it and integrate it into the very heart of business models.

In other words, just as one can make money selling at a loss when the model is well designed, one can generate sustainable profit by integrating ecological risks from the outset — because anticipating crises already means turning them into value levers.

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

White Book AGILE - Impact Finance

Admin — 2025-09-01T05:00:00Z

The Geneva Foundation for the Future is pleased to offer you access to the AGILE White Paper, September 2025

Philanthropy - Investments - Incubation - Policies and strategies

Do you believe that finance is a tool capable of transforming the world?

163 pages resulting from three years of cross-sector collaboration at Geneva Forum at United Nations

View the White Book

Discover in this edition the AGILE tool for Impact finance, Philanthropy, Investments and Business development and incubation, the fruit of 3 years of collaboration, a shared framework for identifying, evaluating and financing transformative initiatives that generate revenues and returns on investment.

Co-constructed with representatives from all areas of finance, philanthropy and impact, it provides a common language for public, private and committed players. It has been designed to be compatible with all the different impact assessment and impact finance tools and standards currently in use. As a real open sesame, it makes it simple and easy to integrate all of these frameworks sometimes complex.

For those already practicing financial analysis of impact projects, it will simplify and accelerate their results, taking advantage of its agile nature [#].

This key document provides a comprehensive overview of Impact Finance and its current and future directions, for use by major philanthropists, foundations and individual donors, as well as by family offices, hedge funds, banks, private investors, asset managers and business angels.

This White Paper reveals an unprecedented bridge between philanthropy, investment and impact projects, with many concrete references that can be used on a daily basis.

Consult the White Paper to join a global movement towards regenerative, transparent reality-rooted finance.

The white book can be accessed for free with a simple login.

Practical, ready-to-use advice and tools for all professions in finance and impact entrepreneurship.

Content of the White Paper

Synthetic Content: towards aligned, agile, and regenerative finance

Global Diagnostic: details the abundance of unallocated capital, in contrast with high-impact projects that are insufficiently funded.

More than 4 trillion dollars are lacking each year to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [*], despite record global liquidity, all in a context where financially profitable economic models are emerging in the fields of entrepreneurship and impact infrastructure.

Strategic Convergence: ongoing and future alignment of finance, philanthropy, and grassroots initiatives to address climate, social, and economic emergencies.

A proactive vision: finance as a systemic lever for transformation, oriented towards economic and industrial resilience, ecological regeneration, and social justice.

The AGILE tool, a shared interface:

A deliberately simple and agile intersectoral methodology for everyday use, based on 5 families of operational criteria, resulting from 3 years of collaborative work involving various finance professions:
Alignment – Governance – Intention – Leadership – Efficiency.
- Ready-to-use evaluation grids:
  - Scoring on 6 levels.
  - Collaborative dashboards.
  - Interoperability with ESG [**] taxonomies, SDGs and public criteria.
- Participatory and transdisciplinary methodology: co-construction with experts, public institutions, incubators, project leaders, and philanthropists.
- Framework compatible with international standards:
  The AGILE tool integrates SDG (UN) indicators, ESG (financial) indicators, and the requirements of public funders to maximize transparency and regulatory compatibility.
- Shared governance and open platform:
  Pooled access to tools, training, mentoring, evaluation services, and legal structuring for impact projects.
- Identification, Evaluation, Selection, Monitoring and Mentoring of impact projects:
  Scenarios and case studies on the use of the AGILE tool to direct funds towards small, medium and large-scale impact projects, as well as infrastructure projects.

A strategic toolbox:
- For foundations: invest according to their values, with leverage effect.
- For investors: secure risk through alignment with public criteria.
- For institutions: standardize calls for projects and strengthen collaborations.
- For impact incubators: simplified reception and mentoring for start-ups, NGOs and large-scale projects.
- For project leaders (small, medium, large, infrastructural): demonstrate the financial viability and profitability of their impact.

Optimization tool for industrial or high-impact projects:

A concrete application of the AGILE tool makes it possible to evaluate large-scale projects (infrastructure, hybrid models, Social Impact Bonds [***], etc.).

International case studies:

Presentation of proven models (Europe, Africa, Asia, Latin America), implementing blended finance, community-based approaches, and structural innovations and forward-looking recommendations.

An evolving Tool box:

Practical guide for impact assessment for investors and decision-makers, updated based on feedback from ecosystem members.

Strategic recommendations:

For public actors, organizational leaders, policymakers, to adapt investment policies to impact imperatives, with shared criteria and interoperable tools.

(clic to unfold)

The AGILE impact finance tool explained and made available

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

[#]

Those already well versed in the general context of impact finance can go directly to the Toolbox section of the document, however, the introductory sections explain the ins and outs of the choices that led to the design of the tool to give it its key facilitating and simplifying effect.

[*]

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

[**]

Criteria for responsible finance "Environmental, Social, Governance".

[***]

Social Impact Bonds (SIB) are social impact obligations that link private financing and performance measured against public objectives

AI and Impact Finance: A New Era of Simplicity, Power, and Purpose

Admin — 2025-08-22T16:16:30Z

The Geneva Foundation for the Future is proud to announce a bold step forward: putting the full power of Artificial Intelligence at the service of Impact Finance that is at once focused, just, and optimal—and at the same time assertive, powerful, and capable of delivering high returns.
This is not about creating yet another layer of complexity in a financial world already crowded with jargon, fragmented tools, and confusing metrics. Quite the opposite. Our mission is to make finance for impact simple, intuitive, and accessible—for financiers, bank employees, corporate executives, and the world's largest financial institutions.

More Than Technology: A Human and Ethical Foundation

The AGILE framework is at the heart of this transformation. It was not designed as a gadget, nor as a passing trend in impact evaluation. It was built as the core engineering of evaluation in impact finance, a foundation that remains valid and trustworthy whatever the level of digitalization or automation that surrounds it.
Artificial Intelligence will accelerate processes, crunch data, and streamline reporting. But AI alone is not enough. As we learned at the Geneva Forum (2023), the real frontier of innovation is not technological—it is relational and moral. What matters is not the algorithms themselves, but the human-centered and nature-based choices embedded in their design.
That is why the AGILE framework is more than a method:

[[A lever for collective action, enabling actors across finance, philanthropy, public institutions, and civil society to speak a common language and join forces.
-, turning evaluation into a participatory and accountable process, with criteria that everyone can see, understand, and trust.
-, ensuring that impact objectives are explicit, verifiable, and aligned with long-term values rather than short-term speculation.

–
AI-powered evaluation tools dramatically increase - by directing capital toward high-impact projects with proven social and environmental value. Beyond identifying already eligible ventures, these tools reveal pathways for projects to evolve—often with the guidance of their bankers—toward - that are both profitable and aligned with societal needs. As companies transition into -, they generate stronger financial performance, resilience, and long-term value. Their genuine utility to society not only ensures sustained demand but also creates a uniquely secure environment for investors. In short, -.

–
Ethics is not a slogan—it is something we build together. It is nourished mutually, shared in practice, and strengthened every day. Each grid, each criterion, is not just a checklist: it is a -.
Through its collective and daily use, the AGILE tool} reduces dependence on disconnected financial engineering, mitigates the risks of greenwashing, and ensures that A lever for transparency.
By guiding AI with this methodology, the Geneva Foundation for the Future ensures that technology does not fragment our world but instead becomes a A lever for ethical performance.

Higher Returns Through AI-Guided Impact Investing

This is the future of Impact Finance: one where returns on investment, one where complexity is simplified, and where collaboration and trust are the true currencies of transformation.
We warmly invite all financiers, corporate leaders, bankers, philanthropists, and changemakers to purpose-driven business models. Anyone who registers for free on our website to read the White Book will automatically gain access to the AGILE tool and will be kept informed of each new release—whether AI-driven platforms or methodological manuals—ready to be used according to their own needs, convenience, and professional goals.
Impact Finance, powered by AI and guided by AGILE, is not just a vision of tomorrow—it is a reality we are building together today.

AGILE: Efficiency Without Extra Cost
Traditional evaluation frameworks are often lengthy, complex, and expensive, requiring vast resources to process information without guaranteeing better decisions. By contrast, the AGILE tool focuses on a small set of key factors that drive impact, governance, and long-term value. This streamlined approach delivers the same reliability of results at a fraction of the cost.
Designed from the start with compatibility in mind, AGILE integrates seamlessly with the tools bankers, executives, and financial institutions already use. No need to replace existing systems—AGILE acts as a bridge and accelerator, reducing overheads while ensuring alignment with ESG, SDG, and legal taxonomies.
In short: less time, less cost, more clarity—and fully interoperable with today's professional practices.

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

The silent trap of criteria turning into objectives: a challenge for impact finance

Admin — 2025-08-17T07:33:56Z

Speaking about impact finance today means navigating an ocean of good intentions. Philanthropists, investors, companies, and public decision-makers all display indicators, dashboards, numerical commitments. “Reduce emissions by 30% by 2030,” “Achieve gender parity in leadership bodies,” “Increase the recycling rate to 90%.”

These criteria are indispensable: they set a course, make it possible to measure progress, to ensure accountability.

But a danger lurks: the one that British economist Charles Goodhart formulated as early as the 1970s: “When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.”

From thermometer to totem

A criterion is, at its origin, nothing more than a thermometer: a tool of observation to verify that action follows the right direction. But when governance, financial incentives, or public recognition crystallize around this number, the thermometer becomes a totem.

And as with any inversion between the world one wishes to measure and the measuring tool, one ends up serving the object rather than the reality it was meant to represent.

In impact finance, this slippage may be all the more problematic since we are speaking of finance that aims to improve the world. A philanthropic fund may, for example, focus on the number of beneficiaries reached, to the point of funding “large volume” projects with shallow depth of impact. A company may aim for a high ESG score by selecting indicators easy to optimize, while leaving aside structural issues. A public institution may calibrate its subsidies on standardized administrative criteria that in fact exclude innovative but atypical projects.

The mechanics of drift

How can this phenomenon actually take place?

Three main causes can combine and accelerate this slippage:

Pressure for rapid performance: funders may want visible results, often within short timeframes, incompatible with systemic transformation.

Standardization of taxonomies: the pursuit of ESG/SDG/EU Green Taxonomy alignment is necessary, but it can lead to freezing criteria designed for evaluation into rigid objectives.

Lack of iteration in governance: when a criterion is set at the launch of a program and remains unchanged despite evolving contexts, it loses its ability to guide meaningfully.

Perverse effects in every sphere

In philanthropy: the temptation of “naming” and quantified storytelling may push to fund what is photogenic rather than what is transformative.

In impact investing: a portfolio may aim for a precise percentage of SDG alignment, favoring projects that tick boxes on paper but do not truly innovate.

In business: internal ESG objectives may lead to symbolic trade-offs – such as reducing a carbon indicator on a pilot site, while the overall footprint remains unchanged.

In policymaking: public programs may bend to the logic of “compliance” (to European criteria, for example), losing sight of territorial specificities and real community needs.

The AGILE philosophy: putting the criterion back in its place

The AGILE tool, as promoted by the Geneva Foundation for the Future, offers a methodological response to this trap. (You can consult the AGILE tool in the White Paper published by the Foundation.).

Let us, however, take the exercise of applying the 5 approaches Alignment, Governance, Intention, Leadership, and Efficiency, to the AGILE tool itself, simply for the sake of coherence.

With A for Alignment: evaluation criteria must remain aligned with a strategic intention and shared values, and not become ends in themselves.

With G for Governance: governance must include feedback loops that regularly revise the criteria in light of on-the-ground reality.

With I for Intention: intention is the compass; criteria are maps to be updated, not borders to be respected at all costs.

With L for Leadership: responsible leadership knows how to explain why an indicator changes and defend the legitimacy of a revised objective.

And finally, with E for Efficiency: efficiency is not merely about hitting numbers, but about maximizing the ratio between resources used and real transformation.

Breaking free from the “tyranny of the indicator”

Authentic impact finance must be organized to accept that criteria are living, evolving, and sometimes abandoned in favor of others more relevant.

This requires daily courage: the courage to stay constantly up to date, to explain to stakeholders that a falling number is not always a failure, and that an indicator removed and replaced by another is not a regression, but the sign of methodological maturity. Provided, of course, that the reflections and work on this matter are documented, and that exchange seminars with all stakeholders are organized.

Philanthropic coalitions and hybrid funds can thus lead by example by publishing not only their numerical results but also the reasons why certain indicators were modified or replaced.

Toward a culture of critical revision

If we wish to avoid impact finance turning into a mere contest of labels and ratings, we must rehabilitate critical revision:

Train teams to detect the perverse effects of a criterion turned into an objective.

Introduce “sentinel indicators” that measure the very relevance of the criteria.

Promote multi-stakeholder panels to validate and adjust criteria continuously.

Communicate honestly about the limitations of each measure.

In a world saturated with quantified objectives, relevance cannot be decreed; it must be cultivated.

Impact finance – whether stemming from philanthropy, markets, business, or the State – must remember that its criteria are only means to serve an intention.

The day the means are confused with the ends, the original intention is betrayed, and this opens the door to greenwashing, meaningless standardization, and loss of trust.

To always keep criteria in their place, let us not place them on the altar of objectives, but in the toolbox of change.

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Towards a coherent philanthropy: why foundations must invest their funds in impact projects

Admin — 2025-08-17T07:24:33Z

Understanding how foundations work

A foundation is a legal and financial entity created to serve a mission of general interest. It relies on three main mechanisms:

The initial or endowment fund: a starting capital, sometimes considerable, given by a founder or a group of founders.

The financial management of this endowment: to endure, the foundation invests its capital, most often in traditional financial markets, in order to generate regular income.

Redistribution: the income from these investments is used to finance actions, often in the form of donations (grants, scholarships, support for charitable or research projects).

For decades, this model operated according to a very simple logic:

On one side, financial management, aimed at maximizing returns (often placed in standard products, sometimes even contradicting the foundation's social mission).

On the other, philanthropy, which uses these returns to support projects with a positive impact.

This dissociation was long perceived as normal, even necessary: “first make the money grow, in order to give later.”

The problem of coherence

But this model is now being called into question. How can a foundation claim to defend the climate, human rights, or education… while investing its capital in destructive sectors (fossil fuels, food speculation, polluting industries)?

This financial dichotomy has two negative effects:

It undermines the credibility and reputation of foundations.

It limits their transformative potential, as their own funds sometimes support the very causes they seek to fight.

This is where the principle of coherence comes in: aligning the foundation's investments with its philanthropic mission.

Impact investing: a virtuous coherence

This is not to say that a foundation must replace its donations with investments. Free, selfless giving remains at the heart of philanthropy.

But it is important to understand that:

The funds invested to generate the income for donations can also be placed in projects with a positive impact.

Thus, every franc invested already works for the foundation's mission, even before being redistributed as a donation.

In other words:

Investment generates an immediate impact (through the choice of projects aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals, ecological transition, or social inclusion).

The income from this investment then makes it possible to give more to projects consistent with the same mission.

It is a virtuous circle: Impact investments → Sustainable income → Reinforced donations.

The advantages for foundations

Adopting this coherence offers numerous benefits:

Ethical alignment: the foundation fully lives its mission, without contradiction between its asset portfolio and its donations.

Strengthening legitimacy: donors, beneficiaries, and partners perceive the foundation as both trustworthy and visionary.

Financial stability: impact investments, often tied to the real economy (renewable energy, social infrastructure, sustainable agriculture), offer resilient returns less exposed to speculative bubbles.

Attractiveness to younger generations: many philanthropists and wealthy families today wish to give meaning to their wealth.

The advantages for banks and financial actors

Banks, wealth managers, and investment funds also find direct interest in this evolution:

New financial products: demand from foundations pushes the development of impact funds, green bonds, or hybrid vehicles.

Strengthened partnerships: banks become partners in the foundation's mission, and no longer merely technical service providers.

Reduction of long-term risks: responsible investments reduce exposure to climate, social, and regulatory crises.

Systemic and societal advantages

Finally, this coherence has effects at the global level:

Acceleration of the ecological and social transition: billions in capital, today invested neutrally or harmfully, are reoriented toward positive projects.

Ripple effect: if foundations, often exemplary, lead the way, other investors (pension funds, insurers, family offices) will follow.

Reduction of paradoxes: avoiding the vicious circle where investments worsen crises that donations then attempt to repair.

A historic opportunity

We are entering a new era of philanthropy: an integrated philanthropy, where the boundary between investing and giving turns into a virtuous continuum.

Foundations now have a historic opportunity to reinvent their role:

No longer simply “distributors of donations,”

But financial actors in their own right, capable of channeling all of their capital toward building a fairer, more sustainable, more resilient world.

It is in this spirit that the Geneva Foundation for the Future, through its AGILE tool, offers a shared and rigorous method to help foundations, banks, investors, and project leaders align their practices.

Thus, finance regains its meaning: not an abstract mechanism of speculation, but a living force at the service of life itself.

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Access to Liquidity: How to Address This Central Risk in Impact Investing

Admin — 2025-08-01T17:36:00Z

As growing volumes of capital seek to invest in impact projects with returns over increasingly shorter timeframes, from days to decades, this article explores a pathway that is both simple and deeply suited to the urgency of our world: directly connecting money to projects by structuring them into successive, economically viable stages that are meaningful and yield measurable returns.

This article draws on insights from the AGILE White Paper, which identifies the systemic barriers to liquidity access, proposes concrete tools for evaluation (AGILE) and disintermediation, and illustrates—through the replicable case of Objectif Sciences International—how return on investment can be structured over 3, 5, or 10 years depending on the amounts invested. It reveals a new culture of finance—plural, agile, and grounded in reality—where financial instruments are finally aligned with the rhythms of the projects and societies they are meant to serve.

The theme of access to liquidity as a major risk in impact investing is addressed explicitly and recurrently across several sections of the AGILE White Paper.

Pages 17 to 21 – Chapter 1: "Excess Capital, Lacking Projects"

Analysis of the paradox between abundant capital and underfunded projects.
Highlights the structural barriers preventing smooth capital flow, especially for projects with high social or environmental potential.
Reference to the lack of shared interfaces and inadequate criteria used by traditional funders.

“While large amounts of capital are available globally, they often remain disconnected from field-ready, impact-oriented initiatives due to a lack of adapted structures and tools.”

AGILE White Paper

Page 34 – Chapter 2: "Foundational Principles of Impact Finance"

Discusses the need for agile mechanisms to meet the concrete liquidity needs of projects.
Calls for flexibility in resource mobilization, particularly for hybrid or non-commercial projects.

AGILE White Paper

Page 51 – Chapter 5: "Unlocking Capital Flows for Scalable Impact"

Central focus on capital flow bottlenecks and the lack of scaling pathways.
Identifies funding discontinuity risks as a major cause of failure.
Proposes the creation of dedicated refinancing tools linked to impact indicators.

AGILE White Paper

Page 118 – Chapter 3: "Divide Between Local Projects and Global Financing"

Discussion on the gap between local scale and globalized finance.
Highlights the complexity of capital flows and difficulty accessing liquidity for field actors.

AGILE White Paper

Page 132 – Final section: "AGILE as a Lever for Transparency and Ethical Performance"

The AGILE is presented as a lever to facilitate capital flows.
Emphasis on disintermediation to reconnect capital and the field.

Going Further: What If the Simplest Solution Were... the Most Direct One?

Towards financial products connected to real-world projects, based on progressive ROI models.

In a world where financial flows are often abstract and disconnected from real-world urgencies, a simple idea is beginning to take hold—championed for decades by some ethical and impact-oriented financial institutions: the simplest solution to fund impact would be to invest directly in projects with sound business models, structured around successive return-on-investment stages.

Far from naive, this idea is backed by decades of practical experimentation.

A Vital Need for Liquidity and Simplicity

Impact finance, while promising, continues to be hampered by:

long-term closed-end funds,
opaque criteria,
excessive intermediation,
which the AGILE tool presented in the White Paper aims to address with simple solutions.

Yet many high-impact projects can generate ROI within 3 to 5 years, provided they are:

supported,
properly scaled,
and structured into coherent phases.

The Principle of “Successive Sub-Projects”

An ambitious impact project is built:

step by step,
on economically viable foundations,
with measurable progression.

Creating financial products adapted to this logic enables investors to:

diversify their entry points,
access gradual returns,
reinvest as the project progresses.

This project-scaling technique, based on a succession of realistic sub-projects, has been implemented by Thomas EGLI since his first project coaching assignments in 2001 upon returning from Japan, and is now being modeled here.

A Concrete Proposal: Investment Vehicles via AGILE

The Geneva Foundation for the Future, through the AGILE, supports projects using this methodology so that they themselves become:

return-on-investment vehicles,
levers for systemic impact,
generators of direct social effects.

A well-structured project over 3 to 5 years can therefore offer:

direct or systemic impact,
ROI with liquidity,
attractiveness for all types of investors.

Flagship Example: Objectif Sciences International (OSI)

The NGO Objectif Sciences International, incubated within the Foundation's networks, is a textbook case:

For small to medium investments (€150,000 to €600,000): 5-year ROI with measurable effects.
For amounts over €1 million: Business plan with ROI in 7 to 10 years.
No derivatives, with direct flows to the field, revenues generated locally, and strategic oversight based on 30 years of experience.

This model is:

replicable,
scalable,
and socially and financially profitable.

Towards a New Culture of Impact Investing

In light of today's challenges, finance now has the opportunity to:

reconnect with field needs,
integrate proven models,
ensure clear and measurable returns.

This is the approach proposed by the Geneva Foundation for the Future through:

economic modeling,
strategic mentoring,
modular investment products.

What if investing in impact finally meant investing in something measurable, useful, and profitable?

Changing perspective means:

seeing projects not as rigid blocks,
but as a succession of virtuous, value-generating circles—for the planet, for society, and for portfolios.

Why Access to Liquidity Is a Central Risk in Impact Investing

1. Misalignment between capital timelines and project needs
- Long-term projects vs. short-term return expectations.
- Result: cash flow interruptions during critical phases.

2. Fragmentation of funding circuits
- Siloing between philanthropy, public finance, and private capital.
- Frequent funding gaps (pre-revenue, scaling, bridge rounds).

3. Lack of structured refinancing mechanisms
- No clear pathway after the “proof of concept” phase.
- Risk of undercapitalizing otherwise high-performing projects.

4. Inadequate allocation criteria for field realities
- Traditional financial metrics not applicable to social or environmental projects.
- Difficult credit access—even for solid projects.

5. Volatility or withdrawal of funders due to “perceived risk”
- Rural or non-commercial projects often excluded.
- Hence the importance of blended finance.

6. Impact on monitoring and evaluation
- Less liquidity = less impact tracking.
- Projects sacrifice quality to survive.

What Does the Geneva Foundation for the Future Propose?

A AGILE to:
- Identify, evaluate, and monitor projects.
- Align with SDGs, ESG criteria, legal taxonomies.

An approach that is:
- Direct, fluid, and shared.
- Operationalized from Geneva.

Recommendations to:
- Structure ethical liquidity flows.
- Reconnect capital with the field.
- Ensure project sustainability.

Investing at the Scale of Reality: Plurality of Projects, Diversity of Timelines, Urgency of Needs

If we're now talking about many people wanting to invest large amounts of money into impact projects—and expecting returns within days, weeks, months, or quarters—then we're no longer just talking about yield. We're talking about a shift in scale. And that's exactly what the world needs.

New Investors with Varied Horizons

In recent years, the rise of impact finance has attracted a new generation of investors:

Individuals, who want their money to have visible and immediate usefulness;
Family offices, eager to anchor their capital in transformative short- and medium-term initiatives;
Public or philanthropic institutions, aiming to allocate funds more quickly while maintaining traceability and impact standards.

These investors are not necessarily expecting long-term financial returns. Many are seeking quicker paybacks:

Daily, for some microfinance or basic services products;
Weekly, in buy/sell impact models (local agriculture, short supply chains);
Monthly or quarterly, for projects generating regular income (community spaces, renewable energy, community health...).

This evolution calls for a profound adaptation of impact finance instruments.

A Plurality of Timelines = A Plurality of Projects

Historically, most impact investment funds operate on 5- to 10-year horizons. This timeframe remains essential for systemic projects.

But it is far from being the only one. The success of the ecological, social, and economic transition depends on a portfolio of projects with varied maturities, capable of:

addressing urgent needs (food security, housing, access to healthcare),
supporting transitional efforts (economic activity creation, training, local supply chain development),
structuring the long term (resilient infrastructure, research, policy reforms).

This is the logic of multi-temporality embedded in the AGILE tool developed by the Geneva Foundation for the Future: each project is assessed for its ability to generate impact across multiple timelines, with return thresholds defined from the outset.

Adapting Financial Vehicles to Ground Realities

Impact is not a deferred product. It is a living dynamic.

If we want to accelerate the flow of capital to useful projects, we can, for example:

create fractional investment instruments,
enable modular capital exits (via “maturity tranches”),
fund impact from weekly to decadal timescales.

The tools already exist: micro-leasing, revenue-based financing, short-term impact bonds, community revolving funds, etc. What's now needed is to:

standardize access to these instruments,
align evaluation criteria (through AGILE),
structure the ecosystem around agile liquidity calendars.

And That's Exactly What the World Needs

According to data from the UNEP, the IPCC, and the OECD, investment needs in sustainable infrastructure, essential services, and social innovation are estimated at over $6 trillion per year by 2030.

But these needs are:

dispersed,
heterogeneous,
underfunded.
Meeting this reality means financing more projects—smaller, closer, more frequent, and faster.

And this requires:

increasing the volume of investable projects,
diversifying their legal and economic structures,
accepting tiered ROI, non-standard, sometimes symbolic, often hybrid.

This is the focus of the Geneva Foundation for the Future's 30-year mentoring work, especially through the replicable example of Objectif Sciences International:

a systemic impact model,
capable of generating revenue from the early stages,
structured into profitable, integrated sub-projects,
with ROI in 3–5 years for smaller investments, and 10 years for strategic commitments.

A Gentle Revolution in Capital

What if we stopped opposing liquidity and impact?

What current developments show us is that tangible impact can be generated at all scales and speeds, provided the models are designed that way.

Instead of trying to force all projects into the same financial calendars, it's time to recognize that project agility also means temporal agility.

The future of impact finance lies in embracing this diversity: not one single model, but a living ecosystem of multifaceted projects, able to meet the challenges of the real world—over days, months, or decades.

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Toward the Emergence of Independent Rating Agencies for Impact Investments

Admin — 2025-07-17T12:57:57Z

In the coming years, the world of impact investing is poised to undergo a structural evolution: the rise of independent rating agencies dedicated exclusively to measuring, evaluating, and certifying impact. Just as financial markets have long relied on the credibility of credit rating agencies to assess the solvency of states and corporations, the impact sector now urgently requires trusted intermediaries to assess the integrity, measurability, and intentionality of impact projects.

The Need for Independent Oversight

As the boundaries between philanthropy, finance, and social enterprise become increasingly blurred, so too does the line between profit-driven and purpose-driven capital. Amid this convergence, one recurring challenge persists: how to ensure that what claims to be "impact" truly delivers on its promises. Greenwashing, social-washing, impact-washing, and fragmented methodologies undermine trust across the ecosystem. Without standardized, neutral, and transparent assessments, the credibility and scalability of impact investing remain at risk.

Independent impact rating agencies could provide that missing pillar of trust. Their role would not be to dictate what constitutes meaningful impact, but rather to offer a structured, transparent, and comparable evaluation of impact strategies, governance mechanisms, measurement tools, and results.

Learning from the Credit Market—Without Replicating Its Failures

The experience of traditional credit rating agencies offers both a precedent and a warning. In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, their conflicts of interest and lack of oversight revealed the dangers of unregulated power. For impact finance, independent agencies must be designed differently from the start: with participatory governance, methodological pluralism, and alignment with public taxonomies (such as SDGs, ESG criteria, and national strategies for sustainable development).

They would need to be non-profit or benefit-driven entities, accountable to multi-stakeholder boards composed of public institutions, investors, project leaders, academic experts, and civil society representatives.

A Role Already in the Making

The Geneva Foundation for the Future anticipates this evolution. With its AGILE tool—a participatory, evolving, and interoperable evaluation framework—the Foundation is laying the groundwork for such agencies to emerge and thrive. The AGILE model demonstrates how a common language and shared evaluation criteria can foster trust, facilitate co-investment, and align actors around measurable, systemic outcomes.

Moreover, Geneva Foundation's cross-sectoral governance and emphasis on field proximity offer a model of transparency and credibility that rating agencies will need to emulate. By supporting open-source standards and methodological co-construction, the Foundation helps prevent the monopolization or privatization of impact evaluation.

What Could These Agencies Look Like?

A next-generation impact rating agency might function as:

A platform for certification, offering modular evaluations tailored to different project sizes and sectors;
A repository of validated indicators aligned with SDGs and ESG frameworks;
A guardian of independence, trained to detect tokenism or “cosmetic impact” practices;
A trusted third party in blended finance deals, reducing due diligence costs and de-risking investments;
A knowledge hub, producing regular analyses on sector trends, innovations, and gaps.

In time, a constellation of regional or thematic agencies could emerge, reflecting cultural diversity, sectoral specificity, and the pluralism of social values.

Foresight in Action

Rather than waiting for scandals to demand oversight, the impact sector can take a proactive stance—designing rating institutions that embody the values it seeks to promote: inclusion, transparency, long-termism, and stewardship. These agencies would not only assess projects but also foster continuous learning and feedback loops, elevating the sector as a whole.

In short, the emergence of independent impact rating agencies is not only desirable—it is inevitable. The question is whether they will be shaped by the actors of impact themselves, or imposed later by regulatory or market forces. The time to act is now.

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Compatibility in Grid and Assertiveness in Detail: Two key factors that differentiate the AGILE tool

Admin — 2024-07-22T16:32:00Z

In today's crowded landscape of ESG frameworks, SDG mappings, and regulatory taxonomies, one challenge persists: how to make evaluation frameworks both

G. Références de cohérence (ressources publiques – rappel)

with existing tools and precise compatible to capture what really matters in impact finance—while always remaining as cost-efficient, fast, and relevant as possible.
The Geneva Foundation for the Future's AGILE tool stands out because it addresses both.
Its design is not only about compatibility in mind—a philosophy of alignment—but about compatibility in grid: structural and operational interoperability with the evaluation matrices already used by banks, investors, NGOs, and corporations.

enough
AGILE was engineered to integrate seamlessly with established frameworks such as

Compatibility in Grid: Immediate Interoperability

. Its criteria can be placed directly alongside these existing grids, without requiring stakeholders to abandon or rebuild their current systems.
For bankers, investors, and corporate leaders, this means ESG standards, the UN SDGs, the EU Green Taxonomy, ISO26000 or Impact incubators plateforms' complex grids. AGILE functions as a -, reinforcing familiar processes while enhancing them with a sharper focus on impact.

no disruption
Where traditional evaluation grids often expand into bridge and an accelerator, AGILE does something different. It concentrates on

Assertiveness in Detail: The Small Factors That Decide Success

—the small, often overlooked details that determine whether a project will succeed or fail over the long term.
This lengthy checklists of sub-criteria ensures that critical elements are not diluted in bureaucratic complexity. By targeting what truly matters, AGILE enables more accurate evaluations, stronger resilience of investments, and more robust performance across time.

decisive micro-factors
The combination of assertiveness in detail and

Why This Matters for Impact Finance

makes AGILE not only simpler and more cost-effective than traditional frameworks, but also compatibility in grid.

For assertiveness in detail, it means faster, cheaper due diligence while staying aligned with all regulatory frameworks.
For more precise and future-proof, it means higher confidence that capital is directed to projects with true long-term viability.
For banks, it means their projects can be recognized as investors without being buried under unnecessary evaluation burdens.
In short: NGOs and enterprises.

bankable and impact-driven

The AGILE doesn't replace existing systems—it makes them smarter, sharper, and more effective are not a simple adaptation of existing frameworks (ESG, SDG, legal taxonomies, etc.), but they introduce

Going Further (Technical Resources)

that change the game. This is precisely what enables:

a AGILE criteria,
a disruptive biases,
and an stronger impact of funded projects.

higher return on investment

The increased durability tool is designed to be On compatibility in grid (accounting / structural compatibility between frameworks:) with the frameworks already in use (ESG, SDG, EU Green Taxonomy, ISO26000, etc.).
Its criteria can be integrated AGILE existing frameworks, without having to rebuild evaluation tools.
This allows structurally compatible, without disrupting practices: for bankers, investors, and executives, AGILE works as a directly alongside rather than a substitute.

immediate interoperability

AGILE is not only a technical framework, it is also a bridge and accelerator.
It facilitates compatibility “in spirit,” bringing together actors who speak different languages (finance, philanthropy, NGOs, companies).
This approach allows On compatibility in mind (compatibility of philosophies and stakeholder logics):, strengthening trust, and creating a philosophy of convergence among stakeholders.

However, the participatory work bringing together all finance professions over 3 consecutive years at the Geneva Forum made it possible to integrate within the AGILE tool very disruptive biases that do not appear in classic frameworks, and which precisely generate stronger impact, higher return on investment, and greater project durability.

To find the full set of these key factor criteria along with their background and implications, please read the White Paper.

simplifying the understanding of complexity
common language

A. Guiding Principles (Normative Definitions)

Intrinsic capacity of the AGILE tool to align structurally and operationally with existing frameworks (ESG, SDG, European Green Taxonomy, ISO 26000, IRIS+, OECD/DAC, etc.), without rebuilding existing evaluation systems.

1) Structural Compatibility between Frameworks

Immediate interoperability in “bridge mode,” export/import via criteria mapping, side-by-side reading, or native integration.
Definition: no disruption of tools, rapid adoption by bankers, executives, investors, NGOs, consultancies, public institutions.

Consequence:
Benefits: Cultural and methodological convergence among heterogeneous actors (finance, philanthropy, NGOs, companies, public sector) through a common language and shared rituals (workshops, reviews, dashboards, committees).

2) Compatibility in Minds

simplify the understanding of complexity, strengthen trust, ease coordination.

Definition:
Purpose: AGILE's focus on decisive microfactors (few, but highly predictive) that explain project success and resilience over the long term, rather than accumulating dozens of weakly discriminating sub-criteria.

3) Assertiveness in Detail

clarity of intention and causality of impact, alignment of mission–business model, participatory governance and accountability, quality of leadership and succession, impact reinvestment plan (impact capex), data discipline (traceability, auditability), adaptability capacity (quick adjustments), direct field links (disintermediation), evolving regulatory compliance.

Definition:

Explicit and verifiable intentionality (ex ante), not only ex post reporting.
Assertiveness in detail: few factors, but “high predictive density.”
Collective ethical performance: ethics as a co-constructed and iterative practice (governance, transparency, inclusion) integrated into evaluation engineering.
Financial disintermediation: preference for short chains, without speculative derivatives, connected to the field.
Systemic trust-building: a project's ability to create/maintain trust among actors (reducing hidden costs and operational risks).
Alignment across silos: universal interface between finance, philanthropy, NGOs, and companies.
Efficiency as an ethical principle: frugality (time/costs) is both an ethical value and an operational criterion.

Examples of microfactors:

4) Disruptive AGILE Criteria (differentiating vs. classic frameworks)

Inventory of frameworks in use (ESG, SDG, European Taxonomy, ISO 26000, local regulatory obligations).
AGILE ↔ frameworks crosswalk: for each AGILE pillar (Alignment, Governance, Intention, Leadership, Efficiency), identify corresponding existing criteria.
Gaps & redundancies: identify what is missing (e.g. intentionality, microfactors) and what is superfluous.
Light integration: insert AGILE side-by-side (complementary columns) or as an overlay (weightings/modules).
Iteration: quarterly review with stakeholders (bank, project, foundation, auditor) to adjust weightings and thresholds.

B. Operational Doctrine (How to Deploy)

Identification: eligibility checklist + signals of intentionality (Intentionality) and alignment (Alignment).
Initial assessment: short AGILE grid (microfactors) + ESG/SDG/Taxonomy mapping.
Monitoring & follow-up: dynamic indicators (impact/risk), light audit, governance reviews.
Support & coaching: progress plans focused on microfactors (leadership, governance, business model).
Acceleration & scaling: replication, duplication, franchising, “bankable” growth plans.
Final assessment: impact report, societal ROI, lessons learned, reinvestment mechanisms.

B1. Mapping Method “Compatibility in Frameworks”

B2. AGILE Evaluation Flow (6 steps × 5 pillars)

80/20 → a limited core of factors explains most of the risk/return.
B3. Economic Rationale: Lower Cost, Faster, Same Reliability

fewer analysis hours, less friction, clearer decisions → capital deployed faster and higher success rate.

Logic:
The combination “Compatibility in Frameworks” + “Assertiveness in Detail” produces:
(i) reduced costs/time for due diligence,
(ii) increased rate of bankable projects,
(iii) increased durability (operational and regulatory resilience),
(iv) higher ROI (better selection and execution),
(v) reduced greenwashing.
Effect: accelerates data collection and analysis, but its value depends on human evaluation engineering (AGILE provides this “moral and relational framework”).

C. Value Theses (ROI, Durability, Trust)

AI:
Superior returns through AI-guided impact investing — AI-powered evaluation, anchored in the AGILE framework, directs capital toward high-impact, field-connected projects and reveals trajectories that enable companies to become both mission-driven and profitable. As mission alignment deepens, financial performance and resilience increase, creating a uniquely safe investment environment. Impact plus intelligence = profitability with sustainability.

D. Ready-to-Use Extracts (FR/EN → FR)

AGILE: Efficiency Without Extra Cost — Traditional frameworks are long and costly. AGILE focuses on a few decisive microfactors to deliver the same reliability at a fraction of the cost. Designed for compatibility in frameworks, it integrates into tools already used by bankers and executives, acting as a bridge and accelerator while remaining fully aligned with ESG, SDG, and legal taxonomies. Less time, less cost, more clarity.

D1. ROI Box

In today's saturated landscape of ESG frameworks, SDG mappings, and regulatory taxonomies, one challenge persists: how to make evaluation frameworks both compatible with existing tools and precise enough to capture what really matters in impact finance — while remaining as cost-effective, fast, and relevant as possible.

D2. Costs/Interoperability Box

Looking ahead, AI will accelerate impact evaluation, but its value depends on human-centered and nature-based evaluation engineering. AGILE anchors technology in transparency, trust, and shared intentionality — transforming complexity into convergence and systemic impact.

D3. Opening Sentence – Extended Version

D4. AI & Ethics

E. Internal FAQ (Standardized Responses)

Structural interoperability of AGILE with existing frameworks (ESG/SDG/Taxonomy/ISO) through parallel mapping or native integration; zero disruption, immediate adoption.
Q1. What is “Compatibility in Frameworks”?
R1. AGILE focuses on a short list of decisive microfactors (assertiveness in detail) that predict long-term success, reducing costs and delays without sacrificing reliability.
Q2. How does AGILE differ from long and complex frameworks?
R2. By revealing and strengthening mission–model alignment, governance quality, and data discipline — helping initiatives become mission-driven and investment-ready.
Q3. How does AGILE increase the number of bankable impact projects?
R3. Through explicit and verifiable intentionality, and field-connected indicators; preference for disintermediated finance rather than opaque or derivative structures.
Q4. How does AGILE reduce greenwashing?
R4. AI accelerates data flows; AGILE provides the methodological backbone and ethical safeguards to ensure relevance and trust.

Q5. What role does AI play in AGILE?

R5. five families – Alignment, Governance, Intention, Leadership, Efficiency.
F. Glossary (Extracts)

structural compatibility of reference frameworks.
AGILE: cultural/philosophical compatibility between actors.
Compatibility in Frameworks: focus on decisive microfactors.
Compatibility in Minds: direct link finance ↔ field, without speculative derivatives.
Assertiveness in Detail: creation/maintenance of multi-actor trust.

Disintermediation:

Geneva Foundation for the Future, White Paper & AGILE Tool (September 2025) –
https://www.geneva-for-future.foundation/White-Book-AGILE.html
Geneva Forum (2023), Declaration on Relational & Moral Innovation vs AI (summary cited in the White Paper).
Reference frameworks: UN SDGs, European Green Taxonomy, ISO 26000, IRIS+, OECD/DAC.

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Why might impact finance not have the desired impact?

Admin — 2024-05-03T09:23:03Z

Impact finance, despite its good intentions, can sometimes fail to achieve the desired impact for several reasons:

Impact measurement: Determining the real impact of an investment can be difficult. Measuring tangible and meaningful results on social or environmental issues can be complex and requires suitable performance indicators.

AGILE Solution & White Paper: The AGILE tool integrates, from the initial evaluation phase, a multidimensional measurement grid (Intention pillar) correlated with international indicators (IRIS+, SDGs, ESG) and enhanced with dynamic dashboards. The White Paper recommends aligning indicators with local realities while ensuring their comparability, thanks to an operational center capable of training project leaders in data collection and validation.

Trade-offs between impact and return on investment: There may be a trade-off between the desired social or environmental impact and the expected financial return. Impact investments may sometimes be less profitable in the short term, which can discourage investors.

AGILE Solution & White Paper: The Alignment pillar of the AGILE tool allows for weighting financial and non-financial criteria according to the investor's profile. The White Paper proposes the use of hybrid strategies (blended finance) combining philanthropic capital and private capital to secure impact while improving economic attractiveness. It is also possible to find more suitable business models that enable access to genuine virtuous circles.

Scaling issues: Some impact projects or initiatives may be effective on a small scale but face challenges when seeking to grow or be replicated on a larger scale.

AGILE Solution & White Paper: The Efficiency pillar includes acceleration and duplication modules allowing the assessment of the ability to replicate the model in other contexts. The White Paper recommends multi-stakeholder coalitions and the support of the International Campus for Impact Finance to promote scaling up with a structured transfer of skills.

Risk management: Impact investments may involve specific risks related to the nature of the social or environmental problems they address. For example, regulatory, political, or reputational risks may influence the success of these investments.

AGILE Solution & White Paper: The Governance pillar integrates early analysis of regulatory, political, and reputational risks, with mitigation plans shared between investors and project leaders. The White Paper advises using participatory governance as a tool for transparency and resilience against these risks.

Lack of transparency and standards: The absence of standards and transparency in the field of impact finance can lead to issues such as greenwashing (presenting regular investments as impact investments) or a lack of credibility in impact measurement.

AGILE Solution & White Paper: The Alignment pillar imposes a common framework based on official taxonomies (SDG, ESG, EU Green Taxonomy) and shared criteria. The White Paper highlights the systematic publication of impact results via a collaborative cloud and a common lexicon to avoid any ambiguity.

Conflicting motivations: Some actors in the impact finance market may have conflicting motivations, which could lead to investment decisions less focused on real impact and more on marketing or social perception.

AGILE Solution & White Paper: The Intention pillar includes an intentionality test measuring the consistency between discourse and actual allocation of resources. The White Paper recommends cross-reviews (peer reviews) among members of the AGILE community to detect and correct discrepancies between stated objectives and actual practices.

Volatility and sustainability of projects: Some impact investments may be more prone to economic volatility or political changes, which can affect their long-term sustainability.

AGILE Solution & White Paper: The Efficiency pillar measures a project's resilience capacity through its financial flows, revenue diversity, and institutional partnerships. The White Paper recommends territorial anchoring and the establishment of stabilization funds co-financed by investors and philanthropists to cushion crises.

Beyond these challenges, the true path to transformation lies in a project's ability to achieve deep congruence between its mission, business model, and outcomes. When a project fully embodies its purpose while demonstrating effectiveness, it naturally generates greater value, trust, and revenue. This virtuous circle between real impact and economic performance organically attracts additional capital, strengthens the project's resilience, and multiplies its effects. Far from being a trade-off, impact then becomes a driver of sustainable profitability, not a limitation.

To overcome these challenges, it is crucial to develop robust impact measurement and reporting practices, enhance transparency and credibility, and educate investors on the nuances of impact finance. Furthermore, long-term commitment and strategic partnerships between public, private, and non-profit actors can help maximize the effectiveness of impact investments.

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

What is an impact project?

Admin — 2023-07-11T16:24:00Z

An impact project, often referred to as a social or environmental impact project, refers to an initiative specifically designed to generate a measurable positive change in society or the environment. These projects are generally focused on solving social or environmental problems and aim to create a significant and lasting impact.

All these projects either do not generate financial returns (and are eligible for grants, philanthropy...) or generate financial revenues - which may exceed the financial revenues of traditional projects - (and are eligible for loans or investment), but in all cases, they are considered "impact" projects from the moment they do more than merely offset negative externalities through a CSR or ESG approach, instead directly generating a positive balance natively, due to their business model.

The AGILE tool, created by the Geneva Foundation for the Future, in particular makes it possible to audit and assess what an impact project really has under the hood, in a very easy and simple way, on a daily basis.

You can read the White Paper published on this subject by the Foundation, however, here are some key characteristics of an impact project:

Clear goal of positive change: An impact project sets a specific goal aimed at improving a social or environmental condition. For example, reducing plastic pollution, improving access to education, or increasing youth employment.

Measurement of impact: Impact projects are designed to be measurable. This means they use specific indicators to evaluate their success in terms of social or environmental change. For example, the number of tons of plastic waste collected, the school success rate of children in a targeted region, or the number of jobs created.

Sustainability: The desired impact is not limited to the short term. Impact projects aim to produce lasting, long-term changes in society or the environment.

Innovative approach: Many impact projects adopt innovative approaches to solve existing problems. This can include using new technologies, alternative business models, or creative partnerships between the private sector, government, and nonprofit organizations. This can even extend to directly empowering citizens, through contributive or participatory formats.

Transparency and accountability: Impact projects often emphasize transparency and accountability in their operations and in communicating the results achieved.

In summary, an impact project is an intentional initiative that aims to catalyze significant positive changes in society or the environment, using measurable and sustainable methods to achieve its goals.

Geneva Foundation for the Future

Impact, the new bastion of security?

Facing risks head-on means absorbing them better

Sustainable business models, truly suited for the 21st century

Liquidity, growth, and trust: the three underestimated levers

A security ecosystem under active construction

Changing perspective, not just portfolios

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

White Book AGILE - Impact Finance

The Geneva Foundation for the Future is pleased to offer you access to the AGILE White Paper, September 2025

View the White Book

Content of the White Paper

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

AI and Impact Finance: A New Era of Simplicity, Power, and Purpose

More Than Technology: A Human and Ethical Foundation

Higher Returns Through AI-Guided Impact Investing

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

The silent trap of criteria turning into objectives: a challenge for impact finance

From thermometer to totem

The mechanics of drift

Perverse effects in every sphere

The AGILE philosophy: putting the criterion back in its place

Breaking free from the “tyranny of the indicator”

Toward a culture of critical revision

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Towards a coherent philanthropy: why foundations must invest their funds in impact projects

Understanding how foundations work

The problem of coherence

Impact investing: a virtuous coherence

The advantages for foundations

The advantages for banks and financial actors

Systemic and societal advantages

A historic opportunity

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Access to Liquidity: How to Address This Central Risk in Impact Investing

Pages 17 to 21 – Chapter 1: "Excess Capital, Lacking Projects"

Page 34 – Chapter 2: "Foundational Principles of Impact Finance"

Page 51 – Chapter 5: "Unlocking Capital Flows for Scalable Impact"

Page 118 – Chapter 3: "Divide Between Local Projects and Global Financing"

Page 132 – Final section: "AGILE as a Lever for Transparency and Ethical Performance"

Going Further: What If the Simplest Solution Were... the Most Direct One?

A Vital Need for Liquidity and Simplicity

The Principle of “Successive Sub-Projects”

A Concrete Proposal: Investment Vehicles via AGILE

Flagship Example: Objectif Sciences International (OSI)

Towards a New Culture of Impact Investing

Why Access to Liquidity Is a Central Risk in Impact Investing

What Does the Geneva Foundation for the Future Propose?

Investing at the Scale of Reality: Plurality of Projects, Diversity of Timelines, Urgency of Needs

New Investors with Varied Horizons

A Plurality of Timelines = A Plurality of Projects

Adapting Financial Vehicles to Ground Realities

And That's Exactly What the World Needs

A Gentle Revolution in Capital

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Toward the Emergence of Independent Rating Agencies for Impact Investments

The Need for Independent Oversight

Learning from the Credit Market—Without Replicating Its Failures

A Role Already in the Making

What Could These Agencies Look Like?

Foresight in Action

To access the content, get the link by email or log in if you already have an account.

Already registered?Just log in.

Have the access to the content sent to you by email:

Compatibility in Grid and Assertiveness in Detail: Two key factors that differentiate the AGILE tool

G. Références de cohérence (ressources publiques – rappel)

Compatibility in Grid: Immediate Interoperability

Assertiveness in Detail: The Small Factors That Decide Success

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.

Already registered?
Just log in.