The Global Impact Investing Network estimates that over 3,907 organizations worldwide now manage $1.571 trillion in impact investing assets.
That number reflects a 21 percent compound annual growth rate since 2019, but the more consequential shift is not in volume but in structure. Capital that was once delivered through informal networks and trust-based relationships now flows through institutional channels that require verifiable governance, standardized reporting and third-party verification.
Sheikh Ahmed Dalmook Al Maktoum, chairman of Inmā Emirates Holdings, recently restructured a decades-old private family office into an institutional holding company headquartered in Dubai. The reorganization responds to a specific market constraint: pension funds, foundations and sovereign wealth vehicles cannot co-invest with structures that lack formal investment committees, independent oversight and externally validated impact assessments.
The structural gap that institutionalization fixes
Family offices from the Gulf region have excelled in bilateral business transactions in the past precisely because they operated outside of institutional constraints. Decisions were made quickly, relationships replaced due diligence committees, and flexibility enabled creative structuring that was not possible with rigid institutional guidelines.
This model fails when family offices try to scale through co-investments. A $50 million port concession can be implemented with relationship capital, but a $500 million infrastructure program that requires the participation of a pension fund cannot. Institutional allocators face fiduciary obligations, regulatory scrutiny and board-level accountability that require documented processes regardless of the counterparty’s reputation.
Almost 50,000 European companies are now required to publish verified impact metrics in accordance with the EU directive on corporate sustainability reporting. According to KEY ESG analysis, ESG-focused institutional investments are expected to reach $33.9 trillion by 2026, representing 21.5 percent of global assets under management. Capital of this magnitude requires standardized interfaces: governance frameworks that translate relationship-driven business flow into formats that institutional compliance departments can process.
How Sheikh Ahmed Dalmook Al Maktoum Structures Governance at Scale
Inmā operates under an investment committee with independent oversight and publishes project-specific performance indicators that are subject to external validation. Metrics track service delivery uptime, jobs created and environmental outcomes. These are benchmarks that are consistent with the framework conditions of development finance institutions and enable a direct comparison with competing sources of capital.
Such an architecture fulfills a specific function: it makes Gulf Impact capital fungible with institutional money. A Dutch pension fund evaluating infrastructure exposure in emerging markets can now evaluate Inmā-structured deals using the same criteria that apply to co-financing opportunities from the IFC or the African Development Bank. The governance wrapper, not the underlying asset or geography, determines institutional accessibility.
The 50-year Karachi Port Trust concession with Abu Dhabi Ports illustrates this dynamic. Long-term infrastructure assets generate predictable cash flows that institutional investors need, while governance frameworks provide the audit trails their compliance functions need.
The 94 percent performance metric
GIIN’s 2024 Impact Investor Survey found that 94 percent of respondents reported that both financial and impact performance met expectations, a data point that challenges the persistent assumption that impact investing requires discounted returns.
The impact extends beyond marketing to the fiduciary sector. Institutional allocators operating in a fiduciary capacity cannot accept below-market returns regardless of social benefit, which has historically limited impact investing to philanthropic spin-offs or ESG-specific mandates with lower return thresholds. The 94 percent value allows impact investments to compete for general allocation alongside traditional asset classes.
Sheikh Ahmed Dalmook Al Maktoum structures investments according to four thematic pillars, which serve as both screening criteria and a measurement framework:
- Modernizing the public sector: Digital infrastructure and governance systems that improve government performance
- Private Enterprise Development: Commercial ventures that create jobs and tax revenue
- Environmental Sustainability: Clean Energy and Climate Resilient Infrastructure
- Community involvement: Projects that expand access to essential services
Institutional partners can map these categories onto their own sustainability mandates and report results through existing ESG disclosure channels.
Combined financing and risk-return calculations
Blended finance structures combine concessional capital from development institutions with commercial tranches from private investors. Development finance institutions absorb first-loss positions or provide guarantees that shift risk-adjusted returns into ranges acceptable to commercial capital, fundamentally changing project economics.
According to Delphos analysis, multilateral development banks and DFIs co-financed about 30 percent of private investment in infrastructure in low- and middle-income countries in 2024, while MDBs mobilized a record $137 billion in climate finance for emerging markets in the same year. Every discounted dollar made available through these structures mobilizes multiples of private finance that would otherwise remain in developed market assets.
Over 50 percent of private infrastructure investments in 2024 were classified as green, led by renewable energy projects. The Emerging Africa & Asia Infrastructure Fund brings together donor-backed capital, DFI support and private investment to finance solar, wind and grid projects that individual capital sources alone could not finance. As Gulf investors adopt similar governance standards, the competitive dynamic changes: projects that have previously depended on DFI participation gain alternative sources of capital, and DFIs themselves gain co-investment partners who bring both capital and regional relationships not available through traditional development finance channels.
What restrictions limit institutional use?
Two main constraints limit the pace of institutional capital deployment for impact investments:
- Standardized metrics: Without widely accepted measurement frameworks, institutional investors cannot compare impact opportunities or verify fund managers’ claims against consistent benchmarks. GIIN’s IRIS system and the new ESRS standards close this gap, but adoption remains variable across regions and asset classes.
- Liquidity: Impact investments typically involve illiquid assets such as infrastructure, real estate and private companies that institutional portfolios can only absorb in limited quantities. Secondary markets for impact assets remain underdeveloped, limiting capital recycling and limiting overall allocation capacity.
Inmā’s focus on revenue-generating infrastructure partially addresses both limitations. Port concessions and power plants produce measurable results such as container throughput and megawatt-hours delivered that translate directly into performance metrics, while long-term concessions provide predictable exit periods that replace liquid secondary markets.
Impact on access to capital in emerging markets
The institutionalization of impact investing creates a new level of financing between traditional development assistance and commercial project financing, offering emerging market governments access to capital without the conditionality of multilateral lending or the return thresholds of purely commercial investments.
The West’s official development aid fell 9 percent in 2024, marking the first decline in six years, according to OECD data. Alternative sources of capital fill a growing gap, and Gulf investors with operational track records and government relationships can participate in this space, provided they demonstrate credibility through governance frameworks that require institutional partners.
The open question is speed. The institutional capital seeking impact exposure exceeds the supply of investment-ready opportunities that meet governance standards, resulting in a bottleneck at the project preparation phase rather than the capital formation phase. Family offices that institutionalize early gain first-mover access to co-investment opportunities and the relationship capital that accumulates through successful joint ventures. Sheikh Ahmed Dalmook Al Maktoum’s restructuring of Inmā Emirates Holdings provides a template for how Gulf Capital can bridge this gap by transforming relationship-based deal flow into institutional-grade investment products.
