A Chat With Incoming Chair Markus Freiburg
As Impact Europe enters a new chapter in its governance, we are marking this moment with a short editorial series that gives voice to the people shaping it. After our conversation with outgoing Chair Leslie Johnston, we now pass the word to Markus Freiburg (FASE), who has officially taken over the baton -or should we say lightsaber- since start of June.
You are stepping into the Chair role at a particular inflection point for impact capital mobilisation in Europe. How do you read this moment, and why does it matter who leads the field now?
Europe is facing a convergence of pressures — demographic transition, climate urgency, technological disruption, and growing geopolitical uncertainty — at a moment when public finance is contracting globally. This is precisely when private and philanthropic capital needs to step up.
Impact Europe's strength has always been its ability to convene actors who wouldn't necessarily share the same space. Building the trust that allows these connections — and extending it to new audiences — requires people who understand both the practical mechanics of capital deployment and the longer-term systems change we're working toward.
What is your vision for Impact Europe by 2030, and what would need to be true about the ecosystem around it for that vision to be achievable?
By 2030, Impact Europe is the go-to community for any European and European-focused capital provider serious about impact. We engage the full spectrum of capital from foundations to finance-first investors. We have set the ambitious goal to increase the share of capital intentionally deployed for measurable social and environmental outcomes from around 3% to 10% of eligible AUM.
For this to happen, the ecosystem needs to close some persistent gaps:
- More coherent regulatory frameworks.
- Stronger bridges between philanthropic, blended, and institutional capital.
- A shared language that allows actors across the full spectrum to work together rather than in parallel.
Europe has the capital. What it still needs is the coordination and the courage to change the system.
Where do you see the biggest tensions the field needs to work through and how should Impact Europe help navigate them?
There are a few tensions I see in the field. There is a tension between depth and scale — between rigorous, additionality-driven practice and our aspiration to grow the market quickly. We are strengthening a sophisticated core community, while building entry points for mainstream capital at the same time.
In my view both parts of the capital spectrum are necessary, but the sequencing matters — you build the bridge from a strong foundation. Impact Europe's role is not to resolve these tensions artificially, but to hold the space for honest, evidence-based conversation among people who are invested in getting the answers right.
What does Impact Europe need to do differently to remain genuinely relevant to its members and to the broader European policy and capital landscape through to 2030?
Relevance in this field is hard-won and easily lost. To keep it, Impact Europe needs to move more decisively from convenor to market orchestrator — not just bringing people together, but helping to shape outcomes.
That means:
- Producing sharper market intelligence.
- Building clearer pathways between different forms of capital.
- Showing up in EU policy processes with a cross-market perspective that no single institution or segment can provide alone.
It also means being honest when the field is underperforming, and creating space for that kind of critical reflection. Members should experience Impact Europe as a place that challenges them, not just affirms them.
What kind of network do you want Impact Europe to be, not just in what it does, but in how it feels to be part of it?
I want Impact Europe to be the place where the most important conversations among impact capital providers in Europe happen. A genuine community of practice where a foundation deploying catalytic grants and an institutional investor structuring blended finance vehicles can sit at the same table and actually learn from each other.
That requires intellectual honesty, psychological safety, and enough heterogeneity to keep things interesting. If our members leave events feeling sharper, better connected, and slightly challenged in their assumptions — that's the network we want to be.