In the spring of 2025, a select group of impact investors came together through the CLIC peer exchange to address a growing challenge: using climate and nature impact data to increase investment in low-carbon, climate-resilient, and nature-positive agrifood systems globally. The exchange highlighted the vital role of impact data, not just as a reporting mechanism, but as a tool to drive better decisions, unlock capital, and build trust across the investment chain. Here are five key takeaways from the discussions:
1. Impact measurement is essential, but underfunded and underutilized
Despite growing awareness of its critical role in climate mitigation and adaptation, the agrifood sector still receives a fraction of global climate finance—only 7% according to CLIC research. Strong impact measurement can help direct capital more effectively and tell a compelling story to funders, investors and stakeholders. Asset managers would be more likely to allocate resources to climate- and nature-positive agrifood companies and improve impact measurement with more pressure and funding from limited partners (LPs) to report on validated metrics.
2. Data collection should be proportionate and fit-for-purpose
There’s no one-size-fits-all approach to impact measurement. Early-stage agri-SMEs often lack the resources to meet complex data collection and reporting requirements. Overly detailed frameworks can delay disbursements and drive SMEs toward conventional, less demanding financing. Instead, investors should prioritize strategic, “good enough” data that supports business improvement and de-risks investment. Acumen’s Trellis initiative, for example, validates business models for adaptation finance while tracking key farmer resilience metrics through partners like 60 Decibels. Impact investors and their partners can help highlight “no regret” impact pathways through case studies, significantly reducing the need for impact validation.
Investors should prioritize strategic, “good enough” data that supports business improvement and de-risks investment.
3. Impact assessment tools need to be intuitive and investor-friendly
The field is rich with technical tools for climate and nature impact assessment, but many were built for researchers, not investors. Not all these tools are open access, creating a barrier to integrating them into investment workflows. Pre-investment assessments are still expensive and blighted by the lack of data availability, making investors rely on a mix of simple output indicators and case studies at the post-investment stage. There are still gaps in attribution, comparability, and local contextualization, especially for impacts on nature and climate resilience. However, user-friendly tools are emerging—promising examples include CGIAR’s ACLIMATAR and Mercy Corps Venture’s Climate Assessment Tool.
4. Balancing flexibility with standardization is key
The impact assessment landscape is increasingly crowded and complex, with myriad tools, frameworks, and taxonomies that slow decision-making and complicate reporting. While a universal framework may not be feasible due to the diversity of agrifood systems, greater consolidation and alignment around leading approaches—such as, GIIN’S IRIS+, 60 Decibels’ Climate Resilience Assessment, and Climate Bonds Initiative’s Resilience Taxonomy (CBRT)—would reduce costs, improve comparability, and facilitate standardization at scale. Collaboration platforms like the Adaptation and Resilience Investors Collaborative (ARIC) and AgBase could help drive harmonized approaches while respecting contextual nuances. Learning initiatives like CLIC and Alliance of Biodiversity International and CIAT’s (ABC) upcoming masterclass on Impact Measurement and Management in a Climate Context for agri-SMEs can help streamline and consolidate existing metrics and tools to support impact reporting for A&R, as well as mitigation and nature impacts.
5. Collaboration is critical to systemic change
Achieving transformational impact in agrifood systems requires collective action. It demands collaboration across funders, investors, technical assistance providers, and platforms to create systemic change. More collaborative spaces like CLIC’s investor peer exchange are needed to break silos and build a consensus on a common strategy to measure impact. Greater alignment between impact actors will avoid duplicating efforts and adding new methodologies to an overcrowded space.
Greater alignment between impact actors will avoid duplicating efforts and adding new methodologies to an overcrowded space.
The CLIC peer exchange reinforced a central insight: climate and nature impact data must be a means to an end—better decisions, faster funding, and greater resilience. The tools and frameworks exist. What’s needed now is collective action, smart simplification, and intentional alignment to turn data into impact at scale.
The peer exchange was co-hosted by CLIC and ISF Advisors. CLIC is grateful for the valuable input of the peer exchange participants including:
Luan Mans, Impact Manager, Acumen
Julia Mensink, Head of Impact, Acumen
Alec Martin, Managing Director, Impact-ESG-Climate, AgDevCo
Mauricio Benitez, Managing Partner, Big Valley
Maxime Bayen, Operating Partner, Catalyst Fund
Alexandra Ames, Officer, Ceniarth
Burra Dharani Dhar, Data Products Lead, CGIAR
Luca Torre, Founder and Co-CEO, GAWA Capital
Barbara Akello, Senior Officer, Technical Assistance, Finance in Motion
Melissa Tickle, Investment Director, Finca Ventures
Timothy Rann, Managing Partner, Mercy Corps Ventures
Lillian Alexander, Director of Impact, Mercy Corps Ventures
Collins Marita, Technical Director, Strategic Learning, Mercy Corps Agrifin
Emmanouela Varoucha, Impact Manager, Rabo Foundation
Elizabeth Teague, Senior Director, Climate Resilience, Root Capital
Ana Orians, Senior Impact Monitoring Manager, Root Capital