Where Do the 4’000 Billion euros Invested Each Year in Impact Finance Actually Go?

Image: In light of the collapse in funding for multilateralism and eco-responsible projects, Geneva’s Broken Chair takes on an entirely new meaning today...

Each year, approximately 4’000 billion euros are mobilized through what is now referred to as impact finance. These amounts reflect a growing commitment to combine economic value creation with societal contribution in a world facing major systemic challenges.

How can international institutions and multilateral hubs like Geneva be better integrated into this momentum?

This phenomenon carries real promise. But it is equally legitimate to ask: how do these financial flows actually circulate? And to what extent can international institutions—such as those within the UN system in Geneva—be fully involved?

By Mr. Thomas EGLI, Founder and CEO of the Geneva Forum.

A Growing Momentum, but Still Fragile Bridges

The growing interest in impact finance is a major collective breakthrough. Many public, private, and philanthropic actors are already contributing to it with conviction and creativity.

Yet there are still bridges to strengthen—especially between large-scale mobilized funds and high-impact transformative projects, particularly those rooted in local or emerging ecosystems.

Several studies, including the White Paper by the Geneva Foundation for the Future (September 2025), from a Foundation currently being established in Geneva, highlight a shared observation:

“The abundance of capital has not yet led to an abundance of funded projects. There is a gap between what is available and what is effectively deployed in the field.”

This means acknowledging that a large share of impact finance still flows through channels disconnected from traditional multilateral mechanisms, in order to explore how to bridge these two worlds.

Geneva: A Role to Evolve, Not to Question

International Geneva has long held a unique place in the global ecosystem. Its historical role in dialogue, regulation, and coordination remains a valuable resource.

Today, it could also become a strategic convergence space between finance actors, social innovation leaders, philanthropists, and public institutions. Some impact flows already pass through Geneva, via the UNDP, UNCDF, or hybrid funds.

But at the scale of the 4’000 billion euros mentioned, the numbers show that the volumes directly channeled through multilateral organizations remain modest:

The UN Joint Staff Pension Fund (UNJSPF) reports around USD 1.8 billion in impact investing assets, yet not managed through the UN System or International Geneva.
The UNDP’s Sustainable Finance Hub cites nearly USD 867 billion aligned with the SDGs—but again, these flows do not transit through these platforms.
OECD-tracked blended finance flows represent only a small portion of the total market—and are directly engaged in field projects (which is a good thing).

This is not a lack of commitment, but perhaps a call to rethink the forms of cooperation and intermediation, in order to integrate new funding mechanisms and leverage the current expansion of impact finance.

The Geneva Forum Conference on Impact Finance brings together financiers from all sectors (family offices, banks, impact funds, major philanthropists, development banks...) and project operators of all kinds, to align the initiatives of International Geneva and the UN System with these new sources of funding. The next edition will be held as part of the 17th Geneva Forum, from December 8 to 12, 2025.

Shared Challenges of Interconnection

To strengthen this convergence, several levers have been identified in recent work:

Translate existing efforts into the language of impact, even if that means developing parallel versions using impact-oriented terminology.
Facilitate interoperability of tools across private finance, philanthropy, and multilateral frameworks.
Widen access to impact projects by simplifying eligibility conditions and reducing institutional distance.
Support shared, transparent, yet flexible evaluation mechanisms, such as the AGILE tool developed by the Geneva Foundation for the Future.
Acknowledge the complementarity of cultures and timelines between local project leaders, public funders, and asset managers.

These approaches are not meant to replace what already exists, but to complement it—guided by a spirit of collective intelligence.

Toward a Geneva as a Hub for the Finance of Tomorrow?

Geneva has the potential to become a central articulation point between global capital and local or systemic initiatives. It already has the networks, the skills, and the values to do so.

To this end, it may be helpful to:

Strengthen operational interfaces between traditional actors and new entrants.
Value spaces for prototyping and dialogue at the intersection of sectors.
Adopt and circulate new standards, such as those proposed in the AGILE tool, compatible with SDG, ESG, and EU frameworks, while simplifying daily operations.
Create shorter, clearer, and more accessible pathways between the decision to engage capital and its concrete implementation.

A Shared Horizon to Bring into View

No single actor holds the full solution. But every stakeholder can contribute to ensuring that impact finance truly delivers on its promises—for life, for communities, for peace, and for the common good.

The message from researchers, practitioners, and institutions is not one of blame. It is an invitation to do better, together.

What if Geneva became not only the place for major conferences—but also for major implementation?

That would be a strong signal at a time when the world needs concrete examples and aligned momentum.

Making Impact Visible in the Actions of International Geneva

Impact projects already exist in Geneva. They may not all carry that label, but their essence is there. International Organizations speak of solidarity, humanitarian aid, sustainable development, human rights, or peacebuilding. These are all missions that fall fully within the logic of impact. What impact finance proposes today is not to reinvent everything—but to make what many are already doing more visible, measurable, and fundable.

The first step is to translate existing initiatives into the frameworks now recognized by funders—such as the Sustainable Development Goals, ESG criteria, or the AGILE tool developed by the Geneva Foundation for the Future. A WHO mission on community health, an IOM program on sustainable migration, or a UNHCR operation supporting refugee education—each of these can be understood through an impact lens, as long as their effects are formalized, measured, and shown to be systemically relevant. The challenge is not drastic transformation—it is interface design.

A second key is to slightly adapt practices to make them more compatible with new funder expectations. This might mean adding simple impact indicators, opening governance to local stakeholders, or developing hybrid economic models. Geneva’s actors do not need to change who they are—but rather, better articulate what they already do in a language impact investors understand. This is also a way for them to regain strategic autonomy and diversify their funding sources.

Finally, the Geneva Forum provides a tangible space for this alignment and visibility. It serves as a translator between languages, a convergence point between action cultures. By annually bringing together actors from the UN system, global humanitarian networks, committed businesses, and international funders, it offers a unique opportunity to reposition International Geneva as a living crossroads for the impact economy. This momentum could breathe new life—and new resources—into a multilateralism grounded in service to the global common good.