In this edition of 0100 Impact Talks, we sit down with Tony Greenham, Managing Director of Sustainability at the British Business Bank, to explore how public capital is shaping the future of venture investing in the UK and beyond.
Tony leads the integration of sustainability across the Bank’s strategy, operations, and investment activities. He joined the British Business Bank as ESG Director in March 2023 and was appointed Managing Director of Sustainability later that same year.
With more than 20 years of experience in sustainable finance—including senior roles at PwC, Barclays, and Liontrust—Tony brings deep insight from both the private sector and policy research. He also holds degrees from Oxford and the London School of Economics.
In this conversation, Tony shares his perspective on how ESG frameworks are evolving in the venture landscape, the British Business Bank’s role as an anchor LP, and why resilience and long-term thinking are essential in navigating the complex intersections of finance, impact, and geopolitics.
Let’s start with the role the British Business Bank plays in venture fundraising. You’re often seen as an anchor investor—how do you balance that role, and why is it so critical for developing a diverse VC ecosystem in the UK and Europe?
We’re a public bank, fully owned by the government, and our aim is to build the venture market in the UK—and more broadly in Europe—in several ways. People often talk about blended finance in terms of concessionary capital or philanthropic support, but we don’t do too much of that.
What we do is cornerstone new funds. Being the first investor helps unlock other LP commitments. It’s also about scale. The UK is great at starting companies, but there’s been a lack of growth capital. As a result, companies often move to the US, where there's a deeper pool of capital. So sometimes we’re the first in, but sometimes we’re the ones completing the round—that’s just as important.
We also aim to support diversity in the VC ecosystem, including GPs at different stages. We invest in UK VCs with European portfolios, and we’re happy to invest in European fund managers building a footprint in the UK.
From your role in sustainability, how does your approach differ when investing in early-stage vs. growth-stage startups, or first-time vs. growth-stage funds?
Great question. We really focus on proportionality. It’s important to recognize that ESG expectations must match a company’s stage. A 5-person startup will look very different from a 200-person company with an independent board.
The same applies to VC firms—some are on their first fund, others manage large global portfolios. Expectations need to be tailored accordingly.
Also, I should say—we’re still developing our own practice. We're not holding ourselves out as a perfect example. ESG in venture is still relatively new, and the frameworks that come from public markets don’t translate well. We need forward-looking, adaptable approaches.
You’ve worked in the private sector and in NGOs. Now you’re in the public sector. What’s been most challenging in that transition?
Honestly, the hardest part is translating insight into practice. Diagnosing problems in sustainable finance is easy—but implementing solutions in an investing institution is much harder. The economy is largely unsustainable, and most companies operate within that context.
You can rarely invest only in companies with no negative impact. What matters is whether they recognize their impacts and have a plan to improve. That’s the difference between greenwashing and genuine transition.
Let’s talk about defense and dual-use tech. This is a hot topic in Europe now. What’s the UK’s stance?
Tony: Unlike some European institutions, the British Business Bank has never had a blanket exclusion on defense. We already had a platform through our National Security Strategic Investment Fund. It’s focused on national security—not offensive weapons, but yes, we’ve always had the capacity to invest in dual-use technologies.
What’s changed is urgency. Governments across Europe, including the UK, are increasing defense spending. The real issue is assessing dual-use tech case by case. Many technologies—AI, telecom, social media—can be both beneficial and harmful. ESG frameworks need to evolve to accommodate this complexity.
ESG is under pressure globally. In the US, it's become a political flashpoint. What’s your long-term view?
The fundamentals haven’t changed. ESG—when interpreted as responsible investment—remains best practice. Many US investors are simply changing the language, not the practice.
In Europe, no major investor is pulling back. Clean tech continues to be economically superior, even if some policies slow its adoption. The risk lies in political disruption—not the viability of sustainable investing.
Yes, ESG has a branding problem. We've renamed our team Sustainability—not because the work has changed, but because the term ESG has become politicized. The key is not what you call it, but how you act.
Finally, let’s talk about resilience. Recent blackouts in Spain raise questions about energy reliability. How do you balance resilience, sustainability, and affordability?
Great point. Clean energy is more affordable in the long term, but we need investment in the grid to support it. That’s not a cost—it’s infrastructure. And yet, fossil-fuel interests often frame it as a cost to delay the transition.
Resilience means having buffers in the system—something economics often ignores. We've optimized for efficiency and ended up with fragile systems. COVID, climate change, geopolitical shocks—all of these expose how brittle our supply chains and energy systems are. We need to build resilient, not just efficient, systems.
Many of our listeners are GPs actively fundraising. What are you looking for when evaluating a fund?
The good news is—we’re still deploying capital. We invest alongside private capital, so if private LPs pause, that slows things. But our mandate is to be counter-cyclical—to invest especially during downturns.
What we’re looking for hasn’t changed: strong fundamentals, clear value propositions, and thoughtful approaches to ESG that reflect a fund’s size, maturity, and sector. Funds understanding resilience, social value, and long-term thinking will be better positioned for success.
This has been a rich conversation, and I’m grateful to be part of it. The big takeaway? ESG isn’t a checklist—it’s a way to drive value for society and investors alike. The journey matters.
