From Subvention to Strategic Partnership: An Interview with Conferli

As associations face rising costs, tighter budgets, and growing expectations around sustainability and impact, one long-standing challenge has become increasingly visible: the lack of clarity around destination support and conference subvention. Often misunderstood as a simple financial incentive, subvention is in reality a broader mix of financial, in-kind, and strategic support –yet information remains fragmented and difficult to compare during the destination selection process.

With the launch of The Association Guide to Subvention – The Practical Edition and new destination support tools embedded in the Conferli platform, that landscape is starting to shift. These initiatives aim to reframe subvention as a strategic partnership rather than a late-stage negotiation, giving associations clearer insight into what destinations offer, when to engage, and how different forms of support can strengthen event quality, reduce risk, and support long-term impact.

In this interview, Nienke van der Malen (below), CEO and founder of Conferli, shares her perspective on why clarity around subvention is now critical for associations, how destination support models are evolving, and what both associations and destinations must do to build more transparent, value-driven partnerships in the years ahead.

1) Subvention has long been part of the association meetings landscape, but this guide argues it is fundamentally changing. How would you describe the shift from subvention as a transactional tool to a strategic partnership? Why is this distinction so important for associations today?

Subvention has long been part of the conference world, but it has often been narrowly interpreted as a financial contribution. The guide makes clear that this view is incomplete. Subvention is any form of destination support with financial value attached, and in many cases, that value comes through practical, in-kind, and strategic support rather than cash alone.

What is changing is not the existence of subvention, but how it is understood and used. Destinations increasingly frame subvention as a partnership investment: support that helps associations reduce risk, improve quality, increase accessibility, and deliver impact. This can include venue discounts, marketing support, access to local networks, sustainability services, or help creating legacy programmes.

This distinction is crucial for associations today. Boards expect clearer justification of destination choices, budgets are under pressure, and expectations around sustainability, inclusion, and legacy are rising. When subvention is seen only as a cash injection, associations miss a large part of its potential. When it is approached as a strategic partnership, it becomes a tool to strengthen the event, align with destination priorities, and create value that extends beyond the conference itself.

The guide therefore encourages associations to engage destinations early and to look beyond funding alone. At the same time, this shift only works if destinations are transparent about what they support, why, and under which conditions. When both sides are clear, subvention becomes a partnership tool rather than a negotiation exercise.

2) One of the strongest findings behind this guide is the lack of clarity associations face when looking for destination support. Why do so many associations still struggle to understand what support exists, where to find it, and how to access it? How does this guide aim to close that gap in practical terms?

The lack of clarity is not caused by a lack of support, but by a lack of structure and visibility. The research behind the guide shows that 77% of destinations offer some form of subvention, while 91% of associations say they struggle to find clear information about it.

In practice, destination support information is fragmented. It sits across different websites, is written in policy language, varies per city or country, or only becomes visible once direct contact is established. On top of that, support is not always labelled as “subvention.” Associations may receive venue discounts, marketing support, letters of support, or sustainability services without recognising these as part of a broader destination support offer. This creates uncertainty at exactly the moment when associations need clarity most: early in destination selection and bid preparation.

The guide addresses this gap by translating destination support into a practical, structured framework. It explains what subvention actually is, outlines the different types of support available, clarifies who to approach and when, and breaks the process into clear, manageable steps. To complement the guide, this knowledge is now embedded directly into the Conferli platform through a new destination support filter within the matching tool. This allows associations to easily identify which cities offer subvention or other forms of destination support during the destination selection process.

Once a destination is explored in more detail, this information is presented in a dedicated Destination Support tile on each city profile. Here, the available support is explained more extensively, including the type of support, eligibility, and practical considerations around access and timing. Together, the guide, the filter, and the Destination Support tile reduce guesswork and make destination support more transparent and easier to compare and discuss early in the decision-making process.
 

"Many destinations recognise the potential of subvention as a tool to drive sustainability, inclusion, and long-term impact."

3) The guide places strong emphasis on in-kind support, often seen as secondary to cash funding. Why should associations rethink the value of in-kind subvention? How can it sometimes deliver greater impact than direct financial support?

Many associations still instinctively equate subvention with cash. The guide challenges that assumption very deliberately. It shows that in-kind support is not secondary, but often one of the most valuable and effective forms of destination support available.

In-kind subvention includes tangible support such as venue discounts, public transport passes, marketing and PR support, access to city-owned venues, sustainability services, volunteer programmes, or connections to universities and local networks. All of these have a clear financial value, even if no money changes hands.

In practice, in-kind support can deliver greater impact than direct funding for several reasons. First, it often removes fixed costs rather than adding complexity to the budget. A venue discount, free transport, or city-funded marketing can immediately reduce risk and improve accessibility for delegates. Second, it is often easier and faster to access than cash funding, with fewer administrative restrictions. And third, it is frequently more closely linked to the quality and reach of the event itself.

The guide also shows that in-kind support plays a crucial role in sustainability and legacy. Support such as carbon measurement tools, access to circular suppliers, local engagement programmes, or university partnerships enables associations to embed impact into their event design rather than treating it as an add-on.

The key message for associations is not to choose between cash and in-kind support, but to understand the full value of what is being offered. When quantified properly, in-kind contributions can significantly increase the overall support package and strengthen both the event and the partnership with the destination.

4) Destinations are increasingly selective about the events they support. How can associations better align their long-term mission and member value with a destination’s strategic priorities? What role does early engagement play in securing meaningful support?

Destinations support association conferences because they create value for the city, not only through delegate spend, but also through knowledge transfer, reputation building, and alignment with public priorities such as health, climate, mobility, or innovation.

That is why many destinations are becoming more selective: they want to invest in events that clearly fit their strategic focus and deliver shared outcomes. For associations, alignment starts with doing the homework early. The guide is very practical here: it encourages associations to look beyond venues and logistics and understand the destination context. What the city is trying to strengthen, which sectors it prioritises, and which local universities, clusters, or institutions connect naturally to the event’s theme.

When an association can show that connection clearly, the event becomes more relevant, easier to support, and more likely to unlock meaningful help. Early engagement is the difference-maker. The guide states it clearly: subvention starts with a conversation, not an application form.

When associations engage early, while a city is still on the shortlist, they can:

• understand criteria and timelines before deadlines close;
• explore the full mix of cash, in-kind, and strategic support;
• shape the event narrative so it matches what the destination is looking for;
• avoid generic requests and instead build a real partnership case.

And importantly: early contact reduces risk for both sides. The destination can assess fit, and the association can plan realistically.
 

Conferli Introduces New Tools to Bring Clarity to Conference Subvention
 

5) Sustainability, inclusion, and legacy now appear repeatedly as eligibility and award criteria. From your research, how are destinations concretely rewarding associations that embed sustainability and social impact into their events? What practical steps can associations take to respond to this shift?

The research behind the guide shows that sustainability, inclusion, and legacy are no longer abstract ambitions; they are increasingly translated into concrete eligibility and award criteria.

Destinations are moving beyond statements of intent and are rewarding associations that can demonstrate real actions and outcomes. In practice, this happens in several tangible ways. Some destinations now offer:

• Dedicated sustainability or legacy bonuses, either as additional funding or enhanced in-kind support;
• Free or subsidised services, such as carbon footprint measurement, waste management support, or access to circular suppliers;
• Higher evaluation scores for events that include concrete inclusion measures, local engagement, or knowledge-transfer activities;
• Targeted in-kind support, such as help organising community outreach, student programmes, or partnerships with local universities, NGOs, or research hubs

These mechanisms show that sustainability and impact are no longer “nice extras,” but factors that influence whether support is granted and at what level. For associations, responding to this shift does not require reinventing the event. The guide is very clear that what matters is making choices visible and measurable. Practical steps include:

• Defining sustainability, inclusion, or legacy actions early in the event design
• Describing concrete measures rather than general ambitions
• Linking these actions to the destination’s own priorities or SDGs
• Planning basic measurement and reporting from the start, so outcomes can be demonstrated after the event

Associations that do this are better positioned to access a wider range of support and to build longer-term credibility with destinations. At the same time, the research highlights a responsibility on the destination side. If sustainability and impact are part of the criteria, destinations need to be clear about how they are assessed and rewarded. Transparency helps associations design better events and leads to stronger alignment on both sides.
 

6) A key message in the guide is that many associations “fail not because they don’t deserve funding, but because they don’t explain their value clearly.” What are the most common mistakes associations make when building a subvention case? What are the essential elements of a strong, compelling application?

The guide is very explicit on this point: most unsuccessful applications do not fail on content, but on clarity and focus. Associations often underestimate how differently destinations assess value compared to internal association logic.

The most common mistakes include:

• Generic applications that could be sent to any city, without explaining why this destination is a good fit
• Overemphasis on delegate numbers while underplaying non-economic value such as knowledge exchange, local engagement, or legacy
• Unclear use of support, asking for funding without explaining how it will strengthen the event
• Late engagement, submitting an application without prior conversation or understanding of criteria
• Ignoring in-kind support, focusing only on cash while overlooking high-value practical support

The guide reframes a strong subvention application as a mini business case for the conference. It highlights five essential building blocks:

1. The event story: what the conference is about and who it serves;
2. The match: why this destination fits the event’s theme, timing, and ecosystem;
3. The value: economic and non-economic benefits for the destination;
4. The legacy: what remains after the event (knowledge, partnerships, impact);
5. The ask: what support is requested and how it will be used responsibly.

Applications that clearly address these elements help destinations understand not just what the association is asking for, but why the event matters to the city. This also highlights a shared responsibility. Associations need to articulate their value more clearly, but destinations can support better applications by being transparent about criteria, timelines, and expectations.
 

"The key message for associations is not to choose between cash and in-kind support, but to understand the full value of what is being offered." 

7) Looking ahead, the guide suggests that destination support models will continue to evolve. What do you see as the next major shift in subvention and destination support over the next five years? How should associations prepare today to remain credible and competitive partners?

What the guide and the underlying research make clear is that destination support is at a crossroads. Many destinations recognise the potential of subvention as a tool to drive sustainability, inclusion, and long-term impact. In practice, however, only a small minority currently translate that ambition into concrete funding or support mechanisms (roughly 6% offer subvention models that explicitly reward impact or sustainability outcomes).

This gap exists largely because subvention is still a political decision. In many cities, public funding for events must be justified primarily on economic impact: room nights, delegate spend, and short-term return. Even destinations that want to support broader societal goals often operate within political frameworks that still prioritise these traditional metrics.

Over the next five years, the major shift will not be a sudden replacement of economic criteria, but a gradual broadening of what “value” means. Economic impact will remain important, but it will increasingly be complemented by additional layers: contribution to knowledge ecosystems, alignment with public policy goals, sustainability performance, and social legacy. Destinations that manage to operationalise this broader value framework will gain a clear competitive advantage.

For associations, this creates both an opportunity and a responsibility. The guide encourages associations to prepare by:

• continuing to demonstrate economic value clearly and credibly
• while also articulating non-economic value in concrete, measurable terms
• aligning event themes and activities with destination priorities
• and being realistic about what can be delivered within political and funding constraints

Associations that can speak both languages, economic return and societal value, will be best positioned to work with destinations as this transition unfolds.

At the same time, the research sends a clear signal to destinations. If many want subvention to do more than boost hotel nights, they need to make that ambition tangible. That means clearer criteria, pilot programmes, and transparency about what is rewarded and why.

8) Finally, the guide stresses that reporting and accountability are no longer optional. How does transparent reporting strengthen long-term relationships with destinations? How can associations turn post-event reporting into a strategic asset rather than an administrative burden?

The guide is very clear on this point: reporting is no longer a formality. It has become a core part of the partnership between associations and destinations.

From a destination perspective, subvention is public money or publicly funded support. That means destinations must justify their decisions, often to politicians, auditors, and funding bodies, and they increasingly need evidence that support delivered real value. Transparent reporting is what enables that accountability.

For associations, this changes the role of reporting entirely. When reporting is done well, it builds trust and credibility. It shows that the association is reliable, professional, and serious about the commitments it made. Destinations consistently reward this reliability, not necessarily with more funding immediately, but with smoother future processes, earlier engagement, and stronger long-term relationships.

The guide also makes an important point: reporting expectations are expanding beyond pure economics. While room nights and delegate spend remain important, destinations increasingly ask for insight into sustainability actions, inclusion measures, and legacy outcomes. Associations that can provide this information clearly are better aligned with how destinations themselves are being evaluated.

Turning reporting into a strategic asset starts with timing and mindset. The guide encourages associations to:

• plan reporting requirements from the start of the event, not after it;
• agree on key indicators early, ideally together with the destination;
• collect data as part of normal event operations;
• use simple visuals, summaries, and outcomes rather than long narrative reports.

When reporting is integrated into event planning, it stops being an administrative burden and becomes a storytelling tool. It helps associations demonstrate value to destinations, communicate impact to members, and strengthen future bids.

There is also a responsibility on the destination side. If reporting is expected, requirements need to be clear, proportionate, and meaningful. Transparency works both ways.
 

---

Published by Meeting Media Company, the publisher of Headquarters Magazine (HQ) – a leading international publication based in Brussels, serving the global MICE industry and association community.