This article is an excerpt from the Deliverable D4.2 Policy Recommendations on Inclusivity in Investment created by Impulse4Women for the FINE Project. For the entire deliverable text, please find it in the Resources area of the website.
As the European Union seeks to deepen its innovation economy and reduce structural inequalities in access to finance, supporting the inclusion of women, youth, and minority investors in VC and angel investment is a critical frontier. While entrepreneurship support has received growing attention under EU cohesion and competitiveness programmes, the profile of early-stage investors remains highly concentrated. Without intervention, capital allocation and investor influence will continue to reflect entrenched privilege rather than the diversity of European society. These policy recommendations aim to guide the European Commission in developing a regulatory, financial, and educational strategy to broaden investor participation across member states, with targeted attention to the needs of emerging, moderate, and advanced ecosystems.
REGULATORY AND POLICY FRAMEWORKS
To begin creating structural change, the EU should adopt formal guidelines requiring VC firms to report diversity metrics among both their investment teams and funded portfolios. Such measures would mirror existing ESG reporting frameworks and increase transparency around who makes investment decisions and who benefits from them. These guidelines could follow the model of the European Banking Authority’s diversity disclosures, already required of large credit institutions, and adapt them to private equity and venture finance [1].
Alongside transparency, the EU should establish incentive structures for fund managers and angel networks that demonstrate inclusive practices. For instance, firms with a proven track record of engaging women, minority, or youth investors in decision-making roles could receive preferential access to EU-backed investment instruments, such as InvestEU or EIC Fund partnerships. This would mirror national initiatives like France’s Tibi 2 programme, which includes ESG-aligned impact targets for capital allocation [2]. A similar EU-level mechanism could reward firms that adopt inclusive governance structures and equitable carry distribution Practices.
FINANCIAL SUPPORT AND CO-INVESTMENT MODELS
Access to capital remains one of the most fundamental barriers for first-time investors. The Commission should expand its support for public co-investment models, with dedicated funding lines aimed at underrepresented investor groups. These funds would match or de-risk investments made by new women, youth, and minority angel syndicates, allowing them to participate alongside institutional capital with reduced exposure. A successful precedent is the EIF’s Gender-Smart Equity Investment Programme, which supports inclusive fund structures across several member states [3].
New grant schemes could also be introduced to cover legal and administrative costs associated with forming angel networks or micro-funds. These grants would help emerging groups in countries like Romania or Greece to overcome high entry thresholds and establish credible investment platforms. Additional mechanisms such as low-interest loans, pooled capital platforms, and cross-border syndication tools can be deployed through national development banks or under the umbrella of Horizon Europe’s innovation funding architecture. The EU could also pilot regional funds that distribute small-scale co-investment capital specifically for emerging ecosystems. These would enable less mature markets, such as Bulgaria or Malta. to build domestic investment pipelines inclusive of young and first-time investors.
EDUCATION AND AWARENESS PROGRAMS
The knowledge gap remains one of the most underestimated barriers to entry. The Commission should fund inclusive investment education programmes in partnership with national innovation agencies and investor networks. These programmes should target underrepresented groups through hands-on training in due diligence, financial structuring, portfolio management, and regulatory navigation. A successful international example is Singapore’s Startup SG Investor Readiness Programme, which tailors early-stage investor education to diverse entry points and experience levels [4].
Existing EU business mentorship platforms such as the Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) could be expanded to include modules on early-stage investing and LP engagement. While currently focused on SME internationalisation and innovation support, EEN’s broad footprint and trusted institutional links make it a strong candidate for expanded investor education mandates.
All EU member states should also be encouraged to adopt national mentorship platforms similar to Ireland’s NDRC accelerator or the Netherlands’ Code-V programme, which include direct coaching and outreach for new investors from diverse backgrounds [5]. These should be formalised through Erasmus+ or ESF+ as cross-border, multilingual training frameworks.
IMPLEMENTATION ROADMAP FOR THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION
To operationalise inclusive investment policies across the EU, the Commission must pursue a dual approach: immediate actions that deliver short-term momentum and structural reforms that support long-term transformation. This roadmap should prioritise emerging and moderate innovation ecosystems, where institutional capacity and investor diversity are comparatively limited, but the potential for ecosystem growth is high.
In the short term, the EU should begin by issuing regionally targeted diversity reporting guidance. VC firms and angel syndicates in countries such as Poland, Romania, or Greece could be required to collect and publish anonymised demographic data on fund managers, investment recipients, and limited partners. This approach would build on existing disclosure frameworks, such as those developed by the European Banking Authority, which already mandate diversity reporting for financial institutions. Adapting these principles for the VC sector would establish a foundation for evidence-based policymaking [6].
Alongside transparency measures, the Commission should expand access to capital through EU-backed co-investment models. These funds should be earmarked specifically for diverse-led investor groups operating in less mature ecosystems, providing matching capital or de-risking mechanisms for investments made by syndicates involving women, youth, or minority investors.
A viable model for this is the European Angels Fund, which already supports angel investing by co-financing individual transactions in partnership with national governments [7]. This fund structure could be adapted to deliver additional support in Bulgaria or Romania, where national venture markets are small and participation by underrepresented investors remains rare. Another early intervention should involve the creation of inclusive investor education programmes tailored to the socio-economic realities of emerging and moderate ecosystems.
Training delivered in local languages, in partnership with regional universities or business associations, would help prepare aspiring investors to enter the space confidently. In addition, cross-border digital platforms that connect novice investors in, for example, Hungary or Poland with co-investment opportunities and mentorship in more advanced hubs could help reduce the geographic isolation often felt in smaller markets.
In the medium term, deeper institutional alignment is required. Member states should be encouraged to offer tax incentives or fast-track regulatory approvals to funds that meet minimum diversity thresholds in both team composition and portfolio allocation. Governments could also partner with local development banks to establish inclusive innovation hubs in cities such as Warsaw, Athens, or Sofia. These centres would provide not only startup support but also capacity-building for new investor groups, including tailored support for younger individuals and first-time fund managers.
Public-private partnerships will be key to sustainability. EU institutions should coordinate with national ministries, accelerators, and advocacy groups to build mentorship and sponsorship schemes that guide new investors from underrepresented backgrounds through their first deals. Programmes like Rising Tide Europe already provide an example of how guided syndicate participation can open up investor ecosystems to more diverse participants [8].
To ensure progress is measurable and transparent, the EU should adopt a performance framework with disaggregated indicators. Key performance indicators (KPIs) should include participation metrics, such as the percentage of EU-backed VC and angel funds managed or co-invested by women, youth, or minority individuals, and the percentage of new fund managers from underrepresented backgrounds onboarded annually. Capital deployment data should track the volume and geographic distribution of EU-supported investments channelled through inclusive syndicates or diverse-led funds, particularly in the emerging ecosystems of Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary. Enrolment figures in Commission-sponsored training or mentorship initiatives should also be captured and disaggregated by age, gender, and ethnicity.
Additional indicators should include the number of cross-border transactions or partnerships facilitated via EU digital investment platforms, and the regional diversity of those engagements, as well as policy adoption rates measuring national uptake of Commission-recommended reforms, such as diversity reporting mandates, tax incentives for inclusive funds, and regional accelerator models. Cross-border activity facilitated by EU platforms, particularly in emerging and moderate markets, should be tracked and evaluated regularly, with findings feeding into Horizon Europe and InvestEU strategy reviews. To support consistent monitoring, the Commission could consider establishing a centralised EU observatory for investor diversity, modelled on similar tracking mechanisms used in entrepreneurship policy, to ensure annual data collection and evidence-based adaptation of strategy.
By centring inclusion as a pillar of investment competitiveness, the EU can move beyond rhetoric toward measurable, structural transformation. The regions most in need of capital diversification, those with growing but undercapitalised ecosystems, stand to benefit the most from a deliberate and well-financed roadmap.
| Short Term Recommendations | 1. Issue regionally targeted diversity reporting guidance. Countries collect & publish anonymised data on investment individuals, building on existing disclosure frameworks. |
| 2. Adapt transparent principles for the VC sector to establish a foundation for evidence-based policymaking. | |
| 3. Expand access to capital through co-investment models, earmarked for diverse-led investor groups, using a fund-structure that delivers support to developing countries. | |
| 4. Creation of inclusive investor education programmes tailored to socio-economic realities, delivered in local languages & in partnership with regional universities/organizations | |
| 5. Cross-border digital platforms that connect novice investors with co-investment opportunities to reduce geographic isolation | |
| Medium Term Recommendations | 1. Member states offer tax incentives or fast-track regulatory approvals to funds that meet minimum diversity thresholds |
| 2. Governments partner with local development banks to establish inclusive innovation hubs, to allow for support & capacity-building. | |
| 3. Public-private partnerships: EU institutions build schemes that guide new underrepresented investors through their first deals, using existing programmes as a guideline. | |
| 4. Adopt a performance framework with disaggregated indicators, evaluating regularly with finding feeding into strategy reviews. | |
| 5. Establishing a centralised EU observatory for investor diversity to ensure annual data collection and evidence-based adaptation of strategy |
