[EXTENDED VERSION] Narratives, Capital, and the Climate Transition: 20 Latin Investors On What’s Ahead
In this extended edition of our July newsletter, we’re sharing the full interviews from all the participants.
For our July newsletter edition, we explored how climate action is being reshaped in a world where global consensus is breaking down, geopolitical tensions are rising, and there’s increasing demand for tangible impact from solutions. We spoke with 20 investors and ecosystem leaders from Latin America who evaluate ideas, support teams, and mobilize capital every day, and we shared a summary of their insights.
In this extended edition, we’re publishing their full responses. You can dive deeper into what a specific person said, or read through the diverse perspectives on the challenges and opportunities facing Latin American climate investment in this new context.
These were the questions we asked:
In recent years, climate topics like energy efficiency or adaptation have gained strategic importance. At the same time, more skeptical narratives around climate action have emerged in some global power centers. How do you interpret this shift in context? What implications—if any—does it have for developing climate solutions in the region?
What impact—if any—are these dynamics having on your investment thesis or project selection?
What new challenges and opportunities do you see for the region? How do you view the investment landscape for climate or regenerative solutions in the coming years?
If you move your cursor to the far left of the screen, Substack lets you navigate the article by subtitles, which is helpful for finding each interviewee’s section.
Once again, a huge thank you to all the investors who shared their thoughts!
Matías Peire. Founder and CEO, GRIDX (Argentina)
The way to counter this decline in visibility and interest in impact or climate action narratives is to focus the climate discussion less on the future and more on the present. We’re facing soil degradation, water degradation, and biodiversity loss that are already having clear impacts on productive systems today; we don’t need to wait for the scientific predictions about volatility and the problems it will bring to come true.
There’s an opportunity in really understanding these current challenges and making production more sustainable because of its productive benefits. This means we’re more focused on production efficiency, cost improvements, and the P&L analyses of the businesses adopting these solutions. That’s always been true for us, but it’s even more pronounced now. And in the end, it will bring about the real solutions the world needs—ones that will naturally and genuinely displace unsustainable practices.
It always seemed like the problem was distant in Latin America because we’re not major carbon dioxide emitters. But if we use the planetary boundaries framework, the problem is very close. Land use and food production contribute far more to breaching those boundaries than greenhouse gas emissions do. And we’re major food producers: we depend on nature to maintain that advantage and our place in the world. If we don’t adapt, Latin America’s productive system will suffer greatly.
We have the critical mass in life sciences needed to deliver the solutions for the productive resilience we need. I see an opportunity for that adaptation to emerge from the region. There are already signs in the appetite for adopting biological inputs in extensive agriculture. The universe of products and services to meet that need isn’t fully defined yet, but that’s the big opportunity, isn’t it?
Laura Ortiz Montemayor. Chief Purpose Officer, SVX México, and GP, Regenera Ventures Fund (Mexico)
I had said that 2024 would be the year when natural capital would finally reach the mainstream in finance, and I think it did. It was the first time the biodiversity COP had more momentum than the climate change COP. That has many implications for the natural capital sector. On one hand, it’s becoming more widely known and more institutions are including it in their strategies—like Goldman Sachs and BBVA. On the other, some of these new players arrive without any commitment to social justice or positive impact for communities; they come with an extractive vision.
The shift in the United States is at the federal level, but in California and other states there’s still strong climate support. There are indeed things on pause when it comes to moving capital—a decrease in drive and momentum that’s been felt in Mexico and Colombia, where large budgets had been allocated for climate finance.
Our investment thesis hasn’t changed; what has changed is our pool of investors. But we’re still investing 100% in natural capital, nature-based solutions, and the transition to regenerative management of productive landscapes. Production, value-added, consumer products, forestry and ecotourism projects—everything that involves landscape regeneration.
The landscape for climate or regenerative investments is growing rapidly. At the Latin American Regenerative Investment Summit (LARIS) we organized in March 2025, we showcased seven funds viewing the regenerative transition as an interesting, investable theme with huge potential. In the showcase, 12 projects pitched their startups and averaged USD 600,000 per investment.
One of the challenges is to stop seeing Latin America as the world’s commodity bank and start being the world’s biodiversity laboratory. We need to overcome these extractivist, neo-colonial ideas that aim to monetize biodiversity for the benefit of the Global North at the expense of the Global South. Another huge challenge is the concept of “sacrifice zones”: the energy transition is happening at the cost of mining in the Global South. We have to stand united, supporting communities. But that doesn’t overshadow the fact that a regenerative transition across Latin America is a huge opportunity; we need to keep building the conditions for life to thrive.
Timothy Rann. Managing Partner, Mercy Corps Ventures (Ecuador)
In the US the corporate world is trying to figure out where the lines are drawn as it relates to diversity, equity inclusion, to ESG, to climate, because the new administration has shifted its rhetoric and policies. They've taken drastic steps, but most of the companies are still either overtly or silently continuing to integrate climate risk analytics into what they do. How climate relates to supply chain, energy usage, energy sources, risk–these are just business principles now, and companies are still committing resources to it. We're seeing a move away from money going into sustainability budgets to it being integrated into where it aligns with business. The current administration accelerated that trend.
Europe is dealing with some of the same challenges as the U.S.—how to grow a manufacturing-driven economy, invest in AI, lead in innovation—but their political leaders are taking another stand. They’re saying, if you want to sell agricultural or nature-based commodities into the EU, those products need to meet sustainability standards. That starts with being deforestation-free. So we’re moving away from voluntary fair trade or Rainforest Alliance certifications—which helped with consumer optics—and we’ve got governments, major buyers, saying: this is a requirement. That’s a shift—from a voluntary regime to a mandated one. That’s a huge moment. Offering tools and resources for compliance opens up new market opportunities for emerging markets.
Even though the political rhetoric around climate can feel negative right now, the long-term direction is still there.
My bigger concern is that climate is an exponential problem. The longer we wait, the worse it gets. And I don’t think we’re going to invest our way out of this with private sector solutions. That’s good, but it’s too slow.
Capital is indeed shifting—fast. Chickpea and lentil production is moving north to Canada, for example, because that’s where the climate supports it. Insurers are pulling out of parts of California and Florida because they’re simply not insurable anymore. They’re not waiting for permission. But here’s the thing—it’s easy for someone with resources to buy land in Canada and make a good return, but that leaves behind the people who are most vulnerable and least responsible. And if the transition is purely market-driven, it’ll not only be slower, it’ll be exclusionary.
Despite that, there’s a lot of potential for Latin America not just to participate in the transition, but to lead parts of it. The people least responsible for climate change and most affected by it are often the ones with the clearest view of what solutions are going to work. And are already innovating in ways that make sense for their own contexts. For them, there’s also less baggage. In the U.S. or Europe, you’ve got huge entrenched industries with massive interests in maintaining the status quo. That exists in Latin America too, but there's more openness to rethinking systems.
And when you zoom out and look at Latin America structurally, it’s incredibly well-positioned. You've got strong tech talent, a relatively young and educated workforce, cost advantages, time zone alignment with the U.S.—all of that makes it a great place to build. And the region is critical—you’ve got biodiversity, agricultural strength, critical minerals, you name it. It’s a global hotspot for natural capital.
So as that market grows—around things like carbon sequestration, biodiversity credits, regenerative land use—Latin America is going to be front and center. Not just as a source of raw materials, but as a generator of new ideas and models.
Juan Pablo Garavaglia. Founder and CEO, ARCHE (Argentina)
[The context] depends a lot on the country or region. Europe is very advanced in energy efficiency and climate impact, and many initiatives and funds with that focus are based there, but the downside is that they change country by country. The United States is a powerhouse and sets the tone, and President Trump is reallocating climate and science funds toward infrastructure, defense, and oil & gas. It's typical for the U.S. to have those swings. The projects we were analyzing there—in areas like hydrogen, biochar, carbon capture, renewable energy, or energy storage—are now on hold, with uncertainty around how the EPA will handle permits or how IRA subsidies will be managed.
Climate issues need to have commercial viability; they have to be profitable first and then climate-focused—that’s the rule now. Latin America remains an immature ecosystem, with few players and limited available capital. Most startups still have a long way to go before they can advance and compete globally. In climate tech, we see two or three very good startups per year; the rest still have a long way to go. As an investor, sometimes you can compensate for those gaps, but other times you can’t.
At Arche, we expanded our scope to several deep tech verticals from the start, which helped us maintain high-quality deal flow. We developed our two VC funds (Pre-Seed Arche Women on STEM and Arche’s Seed CVC) with our own capital, which makes us independent of the situation in the U.S., because today raising capital for a new climate tech fund from investors there is nearly impossible—and that’s one reason for the lack of capital in the region. Biotech and AI remain strong pillars in the region, and some capital shows up because there’s global interest in them, plus the quality of startups in those areas is very high—world-class.
We haven’t changed our thesis, but we have changed how we assess the growth potential of startups. They ask us for advice on expanding to the United States or Europe, but those players have very different rules. That gives us an idea of whether they’ll be able to raise additional capital in Series A, B, and so on. Today it’s harder for local startups to keep expanding beyond the region.
On the investment side, there is very little capital available in Latin America. There are few impact funds, and LPs in the region are turning to more traditional forms of investment (like natural resources such as Vaca Muerta or lithium, for example) or real estate. There’s some FOMO, which we don’t subscribe to, and few actually do due diligence, so capital allocation ends up being inefficient and sometimes illogical.
In climate tech, there have been many global advances while the region is falling behind. I just came back from Berlin, where we participated in Deep Tech Momentum, and I had the chance to meet with European startups working on new materials, AI, nuclear fusion—all extremely advanced, nearly impossible to compete with from here because they have different support systems, like funding from universities and governments.
Lastly, there’s the topic of regeneration, which we’ve been following for a while. We’re preparing a specific project outside of ARCHE to attract European capital to regenerative projects in Latin America. But it’s still a topic that isn’t well developed. There’s a lot of conversation about regeneration—especially as a way of life—but when you look for projects with real scaling potential, there are few. We see interesting opportunities in Argentina, Colombia, Mexico, and Costa Rica. There’s a lot of work to be done, even though the potential is there.
Sunna Ventures Team (Mexico/United States)
The shift in context is partly due to the lack of concrete results from some of the technologies promoted over the past decade, and a growing demand for more pragmatic, profitable, and scalable solutions. The dominant narrative is evolving: from a philanthropic view of sustainability toward one focused on efficiency, impact, and economic return. Concepts like “energy security” have gained prominence, driving the energy transition not just for environmental reasons but also for strategic and economic necessity. This represents an opportunity for Latin America: the focus is no longer just on being “green,” but on being a critical part of the global solution from a competitive and structurally necessary angle.
At Sunna, we’re adjusting our thesis to take a step back in the value chain. Instead of focusing exclusively on end-consumer solutions, we’re looking for enabling technologies in strategic sectors for the energy transition: critical minerals, industrial automation and robotics, energy resilience, and climate adaptation solutions. These areas are fundamental for unlocking bottlenecks in the transition. We believe the future lies in investing in the technological and operational foundations that will allow effective climate solutions to scale.
One of the main challenges in the region is developing climate business models that don’t rely on subsidies or regulatory policies but stand on their intrinsic value in operational efficiency, cost reduction, and scalability. We see important opportunities in models that integrate climate impact with competitive financial returns, particularly in sectors like distributed energy, regenerative agriculture, resilient infrastructure, and mitigation or carbon capture technologies.
Looking ahead, we envision a more mature investment ecosystem where climate criteria are structurally integrated into risk and value assessments. The region has a comparative advantage in natural resources, technical talent, and space to innovate models from scratch. The challenge is to capitalize on that opportunity before other regions capture that strategic value.
Galit Flasterstein. Managing partner, Danta Fund (Costa Rica)
In agtech, climate solutions can be viewed from two perspectives. Farmers are interested in sustainability, but—first and foremost—they care about the effectiveness of their business. In both the United States and Latin America, farmers are constantly approached to adopt sustainable solutions, but if those don’t lead to cost savings and higher production, they’re not willing to adopt them.
On the other hand, there are large corporations that have a mandate to become more sustainable but whose client is the farmer. The solutions that startups offer need to deliver both a commercial benefit and sustainability.
Most of the applications we receive at Danta Fund already consider sustainability. However, our thesis and startup selection first analyze commercial success, and then environmental benefit. Since we invest at such early stages, the environmental benefit can’t yet be measured—but the commercial one can be validated with field trials.
In agtech, climate and regenerative solutions make up almost 100% of what we see. The first startup we invested in, Unibaio, not only saves farmers money with a product that’s cheaper than conventional options but, being natural, also helps regenerate the soil. It also reduces farmers’ use of agrochemicals, makes it easier to export to countries with strict regulations, and boosts their sales—not just because of the ease of exporting, but also because the products are marketed as healthier to consumers.
Andrés Baehr. Managing partner, Savia Ventures (Mexico)
[The shift in context] means we have to forget about the “green premium” and look for value propositions that focus on cost savings or increased profits. Startups in the region are already adapted to this reality or will have to incorporate it. That’s actually an advantage for Latin America, where startups are used to operating without subsidies. They were born in resilience.
Our thesis already included this criterion. Companies need solutions to lower energy costs, reduce water consumption, and the list goes on. Whether it’s “climate action” or not is irrelevant. The reality is that most of us don’t really know what “climate action” even means. Better to change the narrative. At Savia, we use words like “impact,” “sustainability,” and “regeneration” as little as possible.
We’re at a moment of opportunity, especially in climate deep tech. The need for these solutions will only grow. Corporations are under increasing financial and operational pressure to mitigate climate impacts in their value chains. I see the scenario we want to create: Latin America as a huge incubator of climate solutions tackling problems on a global scale. Unlocked potential and big money for those who see this opportunity, like Antom.
Waldo Soto Bruna. Co-founder and director, 2811, and co-founder, Reciprocal (Chile)
The current context is shifting and uncertain. But if we assume we live in an environment of uncertainty, then that uncertainty shouldn’t surprise us. The key is how we respond. This requires adaptive strategy and leadership. Uncertainty varies by region, industry, and country. In Europe, for example, war, cuts to public spending, low growth, and political swings are constantly changing the landscape. In the United States, changes to subsidies for electric vehicles are also shifting the rules of the game. We have to learn to be entrepreneurs in that context.
You can’t depend on a single client or a single product. You need to look for mixed revenue models, avoid “one-shot” sales, and diversify funding sources. Not everything has to come from the market—it can come from international cooperation. For example, in Bolivia, the United Kingdom is making significant investments in the lithium battery sector, which opens opportunities for many local companies.
It seems obvious, but it’s worth repeating: we have to solve real problems. Abstract ideas or platforms without concrete applications are no longer enough. Now more than ever, solutions need a scientific basis, measurable impact, and must solve a problem for both the market and society.
It’s also a time to keep companies lean. With AI, global talent, and more flexible structures, it doesn’t make sense to maintain oversized organizations. Staying agile is almost a mantra. And another key: dedicating time and energy to legitimacy. We’re tackling very real issues that can directly affect a company’s finances or public policy goals. All collective, industry-wide, or coalition efforts to keep the climate narrative alive in public opinion are important. We need to keep investing in that coordination.
Scouting might become more expensive, and funds may prioritize companies that already have revenue or a solid customer base to reduce risk. In volatile contexts, many funds tend to compensate for exogenous risk (the global context) by lowering their endogenous risk (the type of portfolio they choose). That will likely push them toward more stable industries: energy efficiency, for example, is a vertical where banks and structured financing are already active. There could be more movement there. They may also seek out more stable geographies or move operations to countries with lower risk. We’re already seeing that with startups leaving the U.S. for Europe or the UK. There could also be a slowdown in the pipeline of later-stage startups, with fewer arriving at Series A or B with strong traction. That impacts the growth-stage funds.
The global context is complex. The war doesn’t feel as immediate in Latin America, but it has an impact. Many funds and investors are connected to Israel or Germany, and all of that trickles down through the system—even to those investing in Latin America. But there are always opportunities. The challenge is enormous, and that’s why the opportunity is too. There’s room to build better companies in energy transition, better agroecological solutions, better proposals in urbanism, construction, cities, and data management. The need is still there, and that keeps the opportunity alive.
Tomás Rauch. Investor, Tech Energy Ventures (Argentina)
The shift in context reflects a deep geopolitical reconfiguration, where the climate push driven by Western political agendas is giving way to narratives centered on energy sovereignty, industrial protection, and public spending efficiency. Even so, global investments in the energy transition continue to grow (USD 2.1 trillion in 2024, +10% over the previous year), suggesting the structural opportunity remains.
For Latin America, where we’ve never relied on favorable regulatory winds as a condition for investing, this new scenario validates our approach. The focus is shifting away from dependence on subsidies or regulatory mandates toward business models capable of delivering cleaner, cheaper products and/or energy through technological merit. Regions like ours (rich in resources) can leverage that competitive advantage to scale sectors such as solar and batteries, critical minerals, advanced geothermal, or sustainable fuels, to name a few.
Our thesis hasn’t changed in essence. On the contrary, the new context reinforces our conviction in technological solutions that can succeed because of economic and strategic advantage. For example, we continue to invest in key nodes of the battery value chain, including lithium extraction and purification technologies, and in companies relocating industrial capabilities with global expertise.
The energy sector is going through a historic moment. After two decades of stagnation, electricity demand in the U.S. is projected to double over the next 20 years, with nearly 80% of that new demand expected to be met with renewable energy. The growth in global electricity demand—driven by the expansion of data centers and the relocation of industrial capacity—is creating concrete opportunities for reliable, clean generation technologies, such as geothermal (a sector we’ve invested in since our fund’s early days and continue to see as a pillar of the transition), long-duration storage, and nuclear energy.
On the other hand, there remain critical decarbonization challenges in hard-to-abate industries like steel and cement. We remain convinced that technologies will emerge to address these challenges at competitive costs. In line with this vision, we’re building our position through initiatives like Tulum Energy: our venture-building project aiming to supply turquoise hydrogen to industrial plants to efficiently and economically decarbonize industrial operations.
The main challenge for the region is adapting to a more fragmented world with greater trade barriers and technological dependencies, especially in strategic sectors like electric mobility and storage. Yet this also opens opportunities to reposition the region as a source of critical resources, industrial capabilities, and talent.
We see a scenario with high volatility but also historic opportunities. In a world no longer focused solely on decarbonization but also on energy abundance and industrial competitiveness, Latin America can play a key role. Our strategy for the coming years is to identify opportunities where technology (not regulation) is the main driver of value creation. By leveraging Techint Group’s experience and capabilities, we believe great things can be built.
Catalina Taricco Zañartu. COO and CMO, Impacta VC, and President, Chilean Venture Capital Association (Chile)
Environmental challenges are no longer a future need—they’re a present emergency. The skeptical narratives that have emerged in centers of power often reflect short-term economic or political interests. In some cases, they’re even populist stances that rely on misinformation, which I find profoundly Machiavellian.
In Latin America, where we’re already living with the consequences of climate change (droughts, biodiversity loss, food insecurity), this kind of skepticism is a risk because it delays resource allocation, can stall sustainable innovation, and even discourage urgent public policies.
But there’s room for hope. This same context has pushed many people and organizations to double down and act more decisively. From our role as an impact investment fund, we’re committed to supporting concrete climate solutions that are not only sustainable but regenerative. Because the world we leave for our children undoubtedly depends on the decisions we make today.
In our investment thesis, these skeptical narratives don’t slow us down—they strengthen our conviction. They’re a reminder of the urgency ahead and the need to keep shining a light on the problems we face as humanity. And to act decisively. We see enormous opportunity in entrepreneurs creating regenerative, resilient, and scalable proposals. We believe that in contexts of denial or backsliding, it makes even more sense to mobilize purpose-driven capital.
Latin America still faces big gaps in innovation infrastructure and technological development. But that’s precisely why there’s so much to build. We have an abundance of natural resources, unique biodiversity, and an increasingly dynamic entrepreneurial ecosystem. All of this positions us strategically to lead climate solutions on a global scale.
Investing in regenerative solutions is a real business opportunity. It’s an attractive investment thesis with competitive returns and growing interest from large funds and institutional investors. We see this reflected in the rise of specialized vehicles, the growth of climate tech verticals, and the fact that these issues are now on both public and private agendas. There’s still a long way to go, but the direction is clear. Our job as a sector is to keep pushing this transformation with intention, capital, and collaboration so this opportunity becomes real solutions for the region and the planet.
Carlos Becco. Senior agtech advisor, and author of the books “The agri digital revolution” and “From Villains to Heroes” (Argentina)
I’m convinced that the scientific evidence supporting the climate crisis is overwhelming, and the need to work on energy efficiency is essential. I also believe that the skeptical narratives that have emerged in some global power centers are driven by sectoral interests trying to defend a privileged position. Unfortunately, they create confusion and may slow the progress of climate tech projects—though they won’t stop them.
The sustainability component has become an essential requirement in every investment project we support or invest in. It’s an absolute must.
Every week I get news about new investment funds arriving in the region, where the focus on climate or regenerative solutions is either a priority or at least a major interest. I also see major players in the agricultural sector choosing to bet on innovation—like groups such as ACA or La Segunda, which have announced significant investments in funds like Innventure and SF500. Demand is growing steadily. The limiting factor is that most of these funds invest at early stages and don’t have the capacity to lead rounds.
Gideon Blaauw. Regional lead, CleanTechHub (Colombia)
This year there were many changes driven by the new positioning of the United States. Institutional stances and business strategies are adjusting their visions toward 2030 or 2050. Narratives are shifting too: for example, now people talk about “green growth” instead of “climate change.”
Operationally, this doesn’t directly affect us, since we’ve always positioned ourselves around the concept of clean technology. What does change is the narrative. Green growth is one of the current themes, and that fits well with our vision because we’ve never promoted ideas of degrowth or limiting growth. We’re not activists. Our entrepreneurial approach has always been tied to innovation, disruption, and growth.
As for Latin America, I see many opportunities. Our economies resemble those of Africa or Southeast Asia more than those of Europe or North America. There’s a lot to learn from the Global South and also much to share. For example, in circular economy, where there are highly informal structures, we can learn from how other regions are organizing and think about how to formalize those processes.
Our focus is on cross-cutting areas like energy transition, circular economy, and bioeconomy. These are fields that can transform entire value chains: from local businesses to multinationals, they can influence their Scope 1, 2, and especially 3 emissions. That’s the key: how to transform whole systems.
One question we often get is whether real investment markets exist in Latin America or if they’re just too difficult. We believe they do exist—but they only respond to truly solid proposals. If the proposal isn’t clear, it simply won’t get identified.
Eugenio Cantuarias. Partner, AceleraLatam (Chile)
The shift in narrative doesn’t mean the problem is losing relevance, but rather a reordering of priorities and expectations in the face of economic, geopolitical, and technological pressures. We see a divergence between political narrative and the practical progress of capital and technology.
In Latin America, the immediate impact is lower. The region doesn’t define global narratives, but it does strongly feel the externalities of climate change: water stress, food insecurity, soil degradation. This makes regenerative and adaptation solutions not optional but inevitable. It increases the local sense of urgency and the need for homegrown solutions that don’t rely on global agreements.
At AceleraLatam and AceleraVentures we haven’t changed our thesis due to narrative shifts, but we have refined our filters: we look for solutions with immediate application, validated technical traction, and measurable environmental-economic returns. We favor models with vertical integration or local partnerships so as not to depend on political agendas or fragile incentives. And we pay more attention to models with “climate resilience as a service”—technologies for adaptation in agriculture, water management, and regenerative carbon capture—rather than purely financial offsets. We’ve also seen growing interest in hybrid models (climate tech + fintech, or climate tech + supply chain), which requires a more cross-cutting approach to acceleration and investment.
The main challenge for the region is the lack of patient capital infrastructure. Many funds still have short horizons and a strong appetite for SaaS-style growth, which doesn’t always align with the validation cycles of a climate tech startup. There’s real asymmetry in technical knowledge between founders and investors. Many regenerative deep tech solutions require technical networks, not just capital. And there’s a lack of clear, simple, auditable, and scalable ways to measure regenerative impact.
The region has unique conditions of biodiversity, biomass, and scientific talent to lead regeneration models applied to food, water, soil, and energy. There’s a new generation of founders who see regeneration not as philanthropy, but as a business resilience strategy. We’re seeing appetite from family offices, corporates, and alternative vehicles (SPVs, climate-linked debt) to co-invest in solutions with real impact and technical validation.
The investment climate doesn’t depend on ideological conviction, but on proving that solving the region’s biggest problem is good business.
Erika Sánchez Herrera. Coordinator of the CATAL1.5°T Initiative, German Technical Cooperation (GIZ) in Mexico
In Latin America, momentum has been built around climate action that, while it will face challenges from new global decisions, will not stop. More and more actors have embraced the narrative and driven strategies to address climate change. It’s not about philanthropy, but about urgency for the region’s competitiveness and economic development—which supports the search for climate solutions.
At CATAL1.5°T, we’ve seen firsthand the positive impact of investing in climate and tech entrepreneurship, which is why we’re committed to continuing to strengthen the climate tech startup ecosystem in the region. The ventures we select don’t just have climate impact—they also feature innovative business models, social impact, public benefit, and criteria for inclusion, diversity, and gender.
Entrepreneurs face challenges such as access to financing and developing pipeline and ecosystem gaps. On the financing side, globally, investment in climate tech has declined and faces obstacles like political instability, currency risks, and underdeveloped financial markets. Generally, private investment requires public sector intervention to bridge those gaps. Also, climate tech startups often have low financial diversification.
As for the second challenge, many climate tech startups in the region aren’t yet ready for investment because of technical needs, long development timelines, and ecosystem constraints.
Until we manage to overcome these barriers, the development of the ecosystem will be limited—and so will the consolidation of climate technologies.
Juan Soria. Managing partner, SF500 (Argentina)
Until just over a year ago, there was alignment among major countries' governments around the climate agenda. That pushed many companies—even through public opinion—to adopt ambitious climate and energy efficiency targets. Today the scenario is different. For various reasons, some major countries’ public policies are no longer prioritizing this agenda. They’re betting on a growth logic that doesn’t necessarily consider environmental impact, or they’re prioritizing industries where they’re already invested—not so much those focused on climate solutions, which they often see as a cost.
There’s less capital available, but that’s part of the cycles. There’s greater pressure for climate solutions not just to be “green,” but also to be better. Better performance, cheaper, faster. What’s being debated now is whether a green solution can justify a premium. And the pressure, basically, is: if it’s faster, better, and cheaper, then it can scale and compete.
Obviously, there’s also an underlying discussion about the subsidies different industries receive and how that shapes the playing field. But from our investment thesis, we continue to support science-based startups, in verticals ranging from human health to the planet. The climate focus remains a priority, but we have to be more creative and more demanding. These solutions need to build real competitive advantages tied to performance, price, and scalability. More is expected of them than a few years ago.
As for the challenges and opportunities in Latin America, we continue to see tremendous entrepreneurial creativity. For example, we invested in EIRÚ, a platform offering a concrete solution for tracking biodiversity and reducing the costs of that monitoring. There’s a clear need there, and we see it in the interest it’s generating. It has a solid scientific foundation, a highly capable team, and meets real demand in a growing niche that didn’t have a tool like this until now.
We’re in a time of greater uncertainty, with political and economic tensions that affect the narrative. But in the long term, the consequences of climate change are well documented, visible, and it’s only a matter of time before that reality pushes investment in this category forcefully again.
Facundo Garretón. Founder and CEO de Terraflos (Argentina)
We’re going through a stage of maturing the climate debate. While skeptical narratives persist, we don’t see denial so much as a tension between approaches and short-term economic priorities. At the same time, there’s an acceleration in the search for concrete solutions from the private sector, driven by consumer pressure, science, and new regulatory frameworks.
For Latin America, this represents a strategic opportunity: we’re a region with high biodiversity, a key role in the bioeconomy, and enormous potential to lead climate solutions based on science, regeneration, and sustainable production. But we need to build our own narrative and technological capacity, not just be suppliers of commodities or carbon offsets.
In our case, these changes strengthen our conviction. We believe the future is built by integrating science, nature, and technology to solve structural challenges like access to high-quality bioactives, preventive health, and regenerative production. Far from discouraging us, this context pushes us to double down on vertically integrated models that reduce dependence on finite natural resources, avoid deforestation, excessive water use, or soil degradation. Platforms that deliver positive environmental impact and sustainable economic value.
The biggest challenge is strategic: to stop reacting to global agendas and start building solutions from our bioeconomic identity. Latin America doesn’t need to copy Silicon Valley or Brussels models—it can lead a new generation of companies built on biodiversity, technology, and regeneration.
We see three clear opportunities: regenerative bioeconomy (functional foods, science-based cosmetics, supplements produced without planting), decentralized and adaptive technologies (from biotechnology to cellular agriculture and AI applied to health and climate), and new investment frameworks (patient capital, hybrid funds, and investors seeking real, measurable impact with returns).
Investment in climate and regenerative solutions will accelerate, but will shift toward proposals with a technological foundation and scientific evidence. That’s where we’re positioning Terraflos.
Christian Daube. Climate Innovation Lead, Latin America and the Caribbean, Climate-KIC (Denmark)
These narrative shifts will unfortunately have an impact in Latin America and the Caribbean. Part of the population will adopt these new ways of thinking, as will certain governments, funding agencies, and companies with headquarters, relationships, clients, or LPs connected to global power centers. This will likely influence the climate and innovation sector, as companies and funds may reduce their pursuit of innovative solutions to address their challenges.
However, that doesn’t change our thesis. We continue betting on ventures with highly scalable business models and solutions, with climate impact, paradigm-shifting potential, commitment to gender and DEI, and low environmental and social risk.
Climate solutions must focus on how to grow the region, or on looking toward similar markets—like Asia and Africa—where the challenges are the same (and unfortunately will keep growing). More investment is needed, especially through blended finance mechanisms that can help scale innovations willing to take on the risk of contributing to sustainability and regeneration.
Companies—big and small—need to work more with innovation to generate real benefits. There are few investors, and that’s not going to change in the short term, so the private sector must take a more active role in implementing innovations and strengthening the ecosystem.
Diego Serebrisky, Co-founder and managing partner, Dalus Capital (Mexico)
We’re definitely seeing more skeptical narratives around climate action. It’s not surprising: there are interest groups, particularly in sectors like oil and other fossil fuels, that have a lot at stake and want policies that slow or at least temper the energy transition. It’s unfortunate because it slows the progress of projects—and that directly impacts how much time we have, as humanity, to carry out this transition.
For Latin America, there will probably be less capital available, especially that which used to come from public agencies or U.S. government programs. But on the other hand, it remains a priority for many governments and private players. And we believe that development of solutions, both public and private, will continue.
A third of our most recent fund is focused on climate innovation startups, and that commitment remains. In fact, we’re actively looking for opportunities. Just a few weeks ago, we announced an investment in Puna Bio, an Argentine biotech startup for agriculture. It’s a clear example of mitigation (reducing chemical fertilizer use and therefore emissions) but also adaptation (helping degraded soils and crops better handle extreme climate conditions).
The biggest challenge remains the availability of financing. But we’re already seeing initiatives for funds with a 100% climate focus, at different stages, in both debt and potentially equity. We believe that will grow significantly over the coming months and next year. So we continue to see a positive trend. The conversations we’re having, both with major investors and with funds looking to allocate more climate capital, suggest this isn’t going to stop.
Matías Kelly. Founder, Sumatoria, and partner, Beta Impacto VC (Argentina)
We see two simultaneous dynamics. On one hand, globally there’s narrative fatigue in some sectors around climate urgency, especially when it’s presented as disconnected from the economic and social problems affecting millions of people today. That opens space for skeptical or denialist discourses.
But at the same time, in regions like Latin America, topics like energy efficiency, agricultural transition, water management, soil regeneration, or climate adaptation are increasingly central to productive challenges. It’s not just “climate action”—it’s also productivity, market access, economic resilience, long-term competitiveness.
The current context can be an opportunity if we manage to frame climate solutions as part of a broader development agenda: job creation, strengthening local communities, productive diversification, financial inclusion. If the climate message becomes something “useful and relevant” for producers, businesses, communities, and investors, the room for action grows.
These dynamics reinforce our need to integrate environmental impact with social and economic impact in a very concrete way. We continue prioritizing projects and ventures that can show how climate solutions create positive externalities in multiple dimensions: local employment, inclusion of small producers, improved community resilience. For example, we see strong potential in scalable agroecological models, distributed energy conversion (like biodigesters or SME efficiency), or productive soil and ecosystem regeneration models that also strengthen regional value chains.
Global tensions make us cautious about the risks of certain “green” financial mechanisms that don’t always end up benefiting territories or the most vulnerable players. That’s why we reinforce our focus on patient, relationship-based financing with a strong emphasis on purpose.
The structural challenges of Latin American economies (macroeconomic volatility, limited access to finance, high informality) remain a constraint. Many climate solutions require scales and timelines that the region’s traditional financial system isn’t always prepared to offer. But we see a huge opportunity in the growth of an “impact infrastructure” that’s starting to consolidate: investment platforms, hybrid vehicles, purpose-driven trusts, public-private partnerships, philanthropic actors willing to take on early-stage risk, and even regulations beginning to incorporate ESG and impact criteria.
We imagine an ecosystem where climate financing is less concentrated in large projects and more oriented toward thousands of medium and small solutions, distributed across territories, combining innovation, regeneration, and inclusive development. If we can build investment vehicles adapted to that scale, the transformative potential is enormous.
Ruben Altman. Co-founder and CEO, Antom.la
Beyond the debates—whether pro or anti-ESG—there’s a physical and geopolitical reality that imposes itself. Water stress, extreme heat waves, and severe weather events are already part of the risk matrices for large companies, and they're affecting entire value chains. In this context, adaptation and resilience solutions (which often also contribute to mitigation) are becoming strategically important, opening opportunities for startups working in this space.
Global conflicts have also made the energy transition no longer just an environmental issue: today it’s about sovereignty. And this makes Latin America especially relevant—a region rich in natural resources, biodiversity, and local knowledge, but also vulnerable to the effects of climate change.
Some of the criticisms of environmental narratives are valid: there’s fatigue around greenwashing and solutions that rely more on external incentives than on real value propositions. In that sense, the current situation is helping us filter: it makes it clearer that a startup can’t depend solely on philanthropy or a niche of consumers who buy “to do good.” Positive impact has to come alongside desirable, competitive products.
Finally, we also see growing consensus around human health. And in most cases, the health of the planet and human health are deeply intertwined.
At Antom, we haven’t changed our investment thesis, because from the start we were convinced environmental impact has to go hand in hand with solid business models. We look for projects where revenue doesn’t rely on subsidies or on consumers’ environmental commitment, but on products or services that solve a real problem, create value, and are desirable—and that, as a result, are good for the planet.
Latin America faces both the challenge and the opportunity of transforming an economy based on food production to adapt to a new climate, technological, and geopolitical reality. We have everything needed to lead this transition, but also the risk of letting others define the path for us. We can be the protagonists of a regenerative agriculture built on biodiversity, adapted to new water and climate conditions, and to new consumption patterns (for example, what role will the region play when lab-grown meat scales up?). This transformation requires technology, but also vision and public-private collaboration capacity.
We see concrete opportunities in bioproducts, biomaterials, new production methods. Also in digital tools that help producers and companies make more informed decisions and adapt more quickly. There are also enormous opportunities in finance: we need instruments that enable solutions to scale—from climate insurance to loans for installing solar panels or transitioning to agroecological practices, or insurance for extreme events. The financial infrastructure for the transition is still under construction.
If we can work together intelligently, Latin America has the potential to offer the world a different vision of development: a vision that doesn’t just adapt, but proposes.
Agenda and Open Calls
CATAL1.5°T will hold its virtual Demo Day on July 8 and 9. Nineteen startups from LATAM will pitch across two themed sessions: Energy, Cities, Buildings, and Industry on July 8 and Mobility and Land Use on July 9, both from 4:00 to 6:00 pm CST. Register here.
The Digital Public Infrastructure for Privacy-Preserving Population-Scale Use Cases Challenge has opened its call for applications to support solutions that use public digital infrastructure to address environmental challenges in innovative ways. The program is looking for proposals that, for example, integrate data to optimize renewable energy, manage green transportation, monitor forests and biodiversity, promote sustainable agriculture, or improve water management. Applications are open until July 11. More information and applications here.
Decelera Americas has opened applications for its “deceleration” program aimed at impact startups seeking sustainable, strategic growth. The program offers personalized mentorship, access to international investors, and a global network of partners to help scale innovative solutions in areas like climate tech, circular economy, and clean technologies. It’s designed for founders who want to pause, reflect, and redefine their growth strategy with purpose. More information and applications here.
Mexico ClimAccelerator CHIH. Designed to support climate innovation startups in Chihuahua and Mexico, this program backed by EIT Climate KIC focuses on sustainable solutions operating in Chihuahua and nationwide. While it doesn’t offer direct funding, it helps build key skills, strategic alliances, and access to resources to secure financing. Application deadline: September 1.
Latimpacto, a Latin America and Caribbean network, gathers over 220 members to catalyze the strategic flow of human, intellectual, and financial capital toward social and environmental impact. In just five years, the network includes families, family offices, corporations, and more, investing in 16 countries across the region. Its approach is based on three pillars: Learn, Connect, Act. The event will be held September 1–3 in Medellín.
Climate Week Mexico (Mexico City). Taking place October 9–17, 2025, it will include a series of decentralized gatherings with organizations, leaders, and the community to promote collaboration, share knowledge, and strengthen the ecosystem of climate solutions.
Satgana Fund, focused on climate tech startups in pre-seed and seed stages, has an open call. It invests between €200,000 and €350,000, and offers strategic and operational support to entrepreneurs working to solve environmental challenges such as climate change, habitat destruction, resource depletion, and plastic pollution.
Rockstart has an open call for AgriFoodTech startups seeking investment and personalized support. The firm has invested in 63 startups in the sector over the past five years. They offer capital injections and tailored follow-up to help startups grow. Interested ventures can submit their pitch via the link.