| Topic | HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-DEMOCRACY-04 |
|---|---|
| Status | Forthcoming |
| Call | HORIZON-CL2-2027-01 — Culture, Creativity and Inclusive Society - 2027 |
| Destination | Innovative Research on Democracy and Governance (2026-27) |
| Type of action | Research and Innovation Actions · lump sum |
| Opening | 13 May 2027 |
| Deadline | 23 September 2027 |
| Budget | EUR 3.5 million to EUR 4 million per project · 5 projects expected · EUR 20 million in total |
| Part B page limit | 45 pages (standard application form; check your call) |
| Template | Work Programme 2026–2027 application form |
Expected outcomes
Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes. The topic says: “Projects should contribute to all of the following expected outcomes:”
- EO1 Enhanced understanding of the impact of AI-driven technologies, including AI-generated deepfakes and automated content generation on equality, political participation, democratic processes, public trust, and social cohesion, with evidence-based insights into their role in mitigating or exacerbating disparities.
- EO2 Uptake of evidence-based policy frameworks for responsible, trustworthy, and transparent AI governance, integrating ethical, legal, and societal considerations to safeguard fundamental rights, mitigate risks of disinformation, and ensure fair and safe AI deployment, in line with the obligations set out in the EU Regulation on artificial intelligence.
- EO3 Increased public awareness and media literacy to empower citizens to identify and critically assess disinformation, use of deepfakes for malicious purpose, and online harm, alongside the uptake of evidence-based tools for preventing, detecting, and mitigating these harms.
- EO4 Strengthened capacity of academic institutions to conduct societally relevant AI research and drive the development of trustworthy, ethical AI models, enabled by increased academia-industry collaboration and better access to e.g., computing infrastructure, high-quality datasets, collaborative tools, and funding.
Expected impacts named in the destination
The wider, long-term effects the destination seeks. Your outcomes feed them; they are not project deliverables.
- EI1 Reinvigorating democratic governance by improving the independence, accountability, transparency, effectiveness and trustworthiness of institutions and policies based on rule of law, and through the expansion of active and inclusive citizens’ participation and engagement empowered by the safeguarding of fundamental rights.
What evaluators will look for in this topic
Expected outcomes
- Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes.
- For each outcome (EO1 to EO4), name who will use or adopt your results (a specific group, not “industry” or “society”), how they get them, and the indicator that shows the change, with baseline, target and date.
- Use the topic's own words for each outcome, so the evaluator can tick it off.
What the scope asks for
Evaluators check the proposal against these sentences of the scope. Answer each one visibly, in the call's own words.
- “Proposals should explore how AI-driven technologies and their use may either exacerbate or mitigate inequalities and discriminations based on sex, gender, sexual orientation, racial or ethnic background, religion or belief, age, and disability, particularly in access to information, decision-making, and representation.”
- “The research should also explore the risks these technologies pose to democratic integrity, particularly through the manipulation of public opinion, electoral processes, and governance systems.”
- “Addressing these concerns requires a comprehensive understanding of how AI may be (mis)used to shape political campaigns, media narratives, public engagement, and the spread and dissemination of (gendered) disinformation.”
- “Proposals are encouraged to examine how AI-generated content across media, including entertainment media, influence public opinion, social narratives, gender stereotypes and norms, and civic engagement.”
- “Furthermore, proposals should look into how cyberviolence, including online harassment, cyberbullying, threats, and gender-based violence, is exacerbated by sharing manipulated content like deepfakes, deep nudes and AI-driven sextortion on online platforms through manipulated content like deepfakes, deep nudes and AI-driven sextortion.”
- “Research should identify how AI may be used to amplify and upscale harm, what the nature of the AI-powered output is, and which groups are disproportionately affected by it, looking particularly at women and minorities, and explore interventions to prevent and mitigate these risks.”
- “Proposals should research on policy and concrete practices that can effectively address the challenges posed by AI technologies, taking into consideration the EU Regulation on artificial intelligence and subsequent guidance being developed to support its implementation.”
- “Proposals should identify best practices and regulatory measures to ensure the ethical deployment of AI and AI literacy while safeguarding equality and democratic integrity.”
- “Proposals are encouraged to explore AI’s influence on legal and policy outcomes, including unintended consequences.”
- “Additionally, proposals should consider AI’s use and impact on young people.”
- “Research should investigate how AI systems influence these aspects, and the opportunities and risks associated, including the potential psychological effects of exposure to biased or harmful content.”
- “A key focus should be interdisciplinary research on AI’s role in societal resilience, countering misinformation and disinformation, enhancing civic engagement, and supporting marginalised communities.”
Conditions that shape the proposal
- Part B, sections 1–3: 45 pages (standard application form). Text beyond the limit is not read; tables and figures count.
- Lump sum: the budget is fixed per work package and paid when each work package is completed. Every work package needs activities and deliverables an evaluator can verify, and the effort must match the money.
- Other Eligible Conditions: “The Joint Research Centre (JRC) may participate as member of the consortium selected for funding as a beneficiary with zero funding, or as an associated partner. The JRC will not participate in the preparation and submission of the proposal - see General Annex B.”
- Other Eligible Conditions: “Subject to restrictions for the protection of European communication networks.”
Impact pathway and traps
- The topic asks for social sciences and humanities (SSH) expertise. Evaluators look for SSH partners with a real role in the methodology, not a token task.
- Users or citizens are part of the scope. Show how they take part in the design and testing, not only that they are informed.
- Open science or data practices are named. Make the data management plan concrete: which data, which repository, when.
- The gender dimension is named in the topic. Show how sex and gender analysis enters the research content, not only team balance.
- Policy or regulation is in scope. Name the policy owners you will reach and what you will give them.
- Keep outputs, outcomes and impacts apart: what you deliver, what changes when others use it, and the long-term effect.
- For each destination impact you claim, show which of your outcomes feeds it. Destination impacts are long-term effects, not project deliverables.
- Name the barriers outside the project (regulation, markets, user behaviour) that could block uptake, and what you will do if they do.
- Section 2.3 (the summary canvas) is optional on this call; the old split into scientific, economic and societal impact is no longer required.
The scope, as published
The rapid development and deployment of AI technologies, along with their malicious use such as the creation of artificially generated and manipulated content,, profoundly impacts democracy, equality, social inclusion, and knowledge production, and contributes to the rise of cyberviolence. Although AI can offer many opportunities, its misuse can facilitate/amplify inequalities and power imbalances, spread misinformation and cyberviolence against women, children and minorities, concentrate data control, and undermine democratic processes. Hence, this topic addresses both the malicious use of AI (e.g. AI-generated disinformation, deepfakes, cyberviolence) and its unintentional societal consequences (e.g. algorithmic opacity, amplification of bias). AI’s role in media influence and public trust demands urgent attention, as the rise of AI-generated or manipulated content, including deepfakes, threatens democratic processes and epistemic rights. A key area of concern is how AI and artificially generated content is impacting cyberviolence, and the effect it has on individuals or groups who distrust democracy, particularly where this distrust intersects with far-left and far-right populism and foreign interference. Proposals should explore how AI-driven technologies and their use may either exacerbate or mitigate inequalities and discriminations based on sex, gender, sexual orientation, racial or ethnic background, religion or belief, age, and disability, particularly in access to information, decision-making, and representation. A critical analysis is needed of how data - often reflecting existing social biases - can reinforce or challenge dominant social structures and safety, and how such technologies shape public perceptions and knowledge production. The research should also explore the risks these technologies pose to democratic integrity, particularly through the manipulation of public opinion, electoral processes, and governance systems. Deepfakes and AI-generated misinformation and disinformation can distort facts, spread false narratives, and undermine public trust. Addressing these concerns requires a comprehensive understanding of how AI may be (mis)used to shape political campaigns, media narratives, public engagement, and the spread and dissemination of (gendered) disinformation. Proposals are encouraged to examine how AI-generated content across media, including entertainment media, influence public opinion, social narratives, gender stereotypes and norms, and civic engagement. Furthermore, proposals should look into how cyberviolence, including online harassment, cyberbullying, threats, and gender-based violence, is exacerbated by sharing manipulated content like deepfakes, deep nudes and AI-driven sextortion on online platforms through manipulated content like deepfakes, deep nudes and AI-driven sextortion. Research should identify how AI may be used to amplify and upscale harm, what the nature of the AI-powered output is, and which groups are disproportionately affected by it, looking particularly at women and minorities, and explore interventions to prevent and mitigate these risks. This includes analysing not only the unintended reproduction of cyberviolence through biased outputs, but also the ways in which AI-powered platforms may be misused by users to generate and/or spread harmful, discriminatory or violent content. A comprehensive assessment of unregulated AI-induced risks of sexual exploitation, violence, and gender-based harm is largely missing for effective regulation, oversight, and prosecution. A multidisciplinary review is needed to evaluate AI-driven risks exposing children, young people, women, older persons and LGBTIQ people to such violence online and offline. Proposals should research on policy and concrete practices that can effectively address the challenges posed by AI technologies, taking into consideration the EU Regulation on artificial intelligence and subsequent guidance being developed to support its implementation. Proposals should identify best practices and regulatory measures to ensure the ethical deployment of AI and AI literacy while safeguarding equality and democratic integrity. A key aspect of this research is recognising AI’s growing role in shaping policy and judicial decisions. While its integration can improve efficiencies, concerns about bias and fairness persist. Proposals are encouraged to explore AI’s influence on legal and policy outcomes, including unintended consequences. Additionally, proposals should consider AI’s use and impact on young people. Although AI is not specifically designed for minors, youth are among its most active users. Biases within AI-generated or manipulated content, particularly related to sex gender, sexual orientation, ethnic and racial background, can shape young users’ perceptions, perpetuate stereotypes, affect engagement and mental and physical well-being. Research should investigate how AI systems influence these aspects, and the opportunities and risks associated, including the potential psychological effects of exposure to biased or harmful content. A key focus should be interdisciplinary research on AI’s role in societal resilience, countering misinformation and disinformation, enhancing civic engagement, and supporting marginalised communities. Proposals should explore inclusive and innovative tools and methodologies for detecting and mitigating deepfakes, disinformation, and cyberviolence facilitated through AI, designed for broad adoption by policymakers, technology developers, media organisations, and the general public. Effectively addressing these multifaceted challenges demands to combine data-driven analysis, drawing on expertise from a wide range of fields, including both academic disciplines (e.g., computer science, and SSH disciplines such as communication and media sciences, ethics, law, political science, sociology, psychology, and gender studies) and the applied perspectives of those…
Other topics in HORIZON-CL2-2027-01
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-DEMOCRACY-01 — Advisory support and network for countering and preventing radicalisation,…
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-DEMOCRACY-02 — Women’s, LGBTIQ and minority rights in a context of autocracy, conflict and…
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-DEMOCRACY-03 — Student and family engagement for developing a culture of democratic/civic…
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-DEMOCRACY-05 — Development aid and democratic governance
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-DEMOCRACY-08 — Global Human Rights and EU values
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-HERITAGE-01 — Towards a consolidated culture and creativity driven European innovation…
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-HERITAGE-02 — AI4Creatives Support Platform: embracing a fair AI revolution
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-HERITAGE-03 — Crafting routes to a circular economy
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-HERITAGE-04 — Culture, heritage and creative industries for health and well-being
- HORIZON-CL2-2027-01-HERITAGE-05 — Re-imagining the creative economy: the interplay between the cultural and…
Source and attribution
Topic text from the official topic page on the EU Funding & Tenders Portal, retrieved 19 October 2026. © European Union, reused under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (CC BY 4.0). Changes: the expected outcomes and impacts are split into numbered statements, long passages are shortened, and the evaluator checklist is GrantWise's own commentary. Your call and the Work Programme always win; check them before you submit. GrantWise is independent and not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of the European Commission.