GrantWise
HORIZON EUROPE TOPIC · Cluster 5 · Climate, Energy and Mobility

Assessing the performance of policy instruments to inform climate change mitigation action

HORIZON-CL5-2027-01-D1-09 — the expected outcomes as checkable statements, what evaluators look for in this topic, and the conditions that shape the proposal.

Get the free Part B working draft for this topic ↓

ForthcomingRIA · lump sumDeadline 4 March 2027around EUR 3 million per project

GrantWise › Horizon Europe topics › HORIZON-CL5-2027-01-D1-09

TopicHORIZON-CL5-2027-01-D1-09
StatusForthcoming
CallHORIZON-CL5-2027-01 — CLIMATE
DestinationAdvancing science for a fair transition to a climate-neutral and resilient society (2026-27)
Type of actionResearch and Innovation Actions · lump sum
Opening17 November 2026
Deadline4 March 2027
Budgetaround EUR 3 million per project · 3 projects expected · EUR 9 million in total
Part B page limit45 pages (standard application form; check your call)
TemplateWork Programme 2026–2027 application form

Expected outcomes

Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes. The topic says: “Project results are expected to contribute to all of the following expected outcomes:”

  1. EO1 Enhanced knowledge of the effectiveness of policy instruments on EU and Member State level to inform mitigation action and policy improvements, ensuring a fair transition and social acceptability.
  2. EO2 Methodologies are developed and improved for ex-ante assessment and ex-post evaluation of greenhouse gas emission reductions from climate policies and measures.
  3. EO3 Strengthened collaboration and established networks between researchers, policy experts and government officials involved in designing and evaluating climate policies on EU and national level.

Expected impacts named in the destination

The wider, long-term effects the destination seeks. Your outcomes feed them; they are not project deliverables.

  1. EI1 Supporting climate action (both mitigation and adaptation) in Europe and globally, through advancing climate science and the knowledge base underpinning actionable solutions, to accelerate the transition to a climate-neutral, climate-resilient and prosperous society.
  2. EI2 Closing key knowledge gaps related to climate change, thereby contributing substantially to key European and international assessments such as IPCC, IPBES, EUCRA, and other initiatives such as the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) and the Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) under the World Climate Research Programme.
  3. EI3 Strengthening the European Research Area on climate change by boosting scientific excellence and capacity in an inclusive manner across the participating countries.
  4. EI4 Maximising synergies between mitigation and adaptation and with other policy priorities such as biodiversity and ecosystem preservation and restoration, disaster-preparedness, digitalisation, circular economy, prosperity and competitiveness, strategic autonomy, security and resilience, just transition, and the Sustainable Development Goals by exploring co-benefits, trade-offs and potential unintended consequences of climate strategies and policy interventions.

What evaluators will look for in this topic

Expected outcomes

  • Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes.
  • For each outcome (EO1 to EO3), 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.

  • “The implementation of the European Green Deal and climate legislation under the recent “Fit-for-55" package has further emphasised the need to better identify and quantify the impact of climate policies and measures both on EU and national level.”
  • “This topic is expected to assess the performance of EU policies and measures for reducing GHG emissions.”
  • “Actions should consider economic, social, distributional and other effects of mitigation action, including trade-offs and co-benefits such as vis-à-vis climate resilience.”
  • “Actions should go beyond traditional decomposition analysis and employ state-of-the-art econometric techniques.”
  • “They are expected to improve existing methodologies or develop new ones to help distinguish the contribution of GHG emission reductions between policy-driven effects and external drivers.”
  • “Actions should assess the impact of national policies on Member State level and how such policies interact with EU-wide policies and measures.”
  • “They should also identify and highlight examples of national policies and measures that have successfully reduced GHG emissions and brought other environmental, social and economic benefits.”
  • “Actions are expected to develop, test or improve methodologies and tools for ex-ante estimates of GHG emission reductions when designing policies and measures on EU and national level, including integrating climate objectives in other policies.”
  • “This should include economy-wide modelling which takes into account cross-sectoral feedbacks as well as price responsiveness and behavioural change by consumers.”
  • “Actions are encouraged to use available datasets on climate mitigation policies and measures, such as the OECD/CAPMF database, and the integrated national climate and energy policies and measures datahub hosted by the European Environment Agency (EEA).”
  • “This topic requires interdisciplinary collaboration between political scientists, economists and other relevant Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) disciplines.”

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.

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.
  • 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

As the EU and its Member States intensify efforts to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, understanding the effectiveness and acceptability of policy instruments becomes crucial. The implementation of the European Green Deal and climate legislation under the recent “Fit-for-55" package has further emphasised the need to better identify and quantify the impact of climate policies and measures both on EU and national level. Many policies are also subject to fast-changing political dynamics. Ex-post evaluation can help explain whether emission reductions occurred and explain why, while also identifying other benefits or trade-offs of climate mitigation. By 2023, the EU had achieved a 37% reduction in its GHG emissions compared to 1990 levels. However, even after almost two decades of EU climate policies, there is still limited understanding of the effectiveness of mitigation policies. The increasing complexity of the policy mix makes it difficult to clearly link individual policies or measures to specific emission reductions and other benefits in different sectors. The interaction with other thematic policies such as those on biodiversity, agriculture and trade is therefore also important. This topic is expected to assess the performance of EU policies and measures for reducing GHG emissions. The focus is on sectors not covered by the current EU Emission Trading System (ETS 1). This would include gaining insights into factors that influence behavioural change and acceptance of policies, taking into account gender-specific aspects. Actions should consider economic, social, distributional and other effects of mitigation action, including trade-offs and co-benefits such as vis-à-vis climate resilience. Actions should go beyond traditional decomposition analysis and employ state-of-the-art econometric techniques. They are expected to improve existing methodologies or develop new ones to help distinguish the contribution of GHG emission reductions between policy-driven effects and external drivers. Machine learning and other digital tools and methods could be applied to fill information gaps and gain additional insights. Actions should assess the impact of national policies on Member State level and how such policies interact with EU-wide policies and measures. They should also identify and highlight examples of national policies and measures that have successfully reduced GHG emissions and brought other environmental, social and economic benefits. Actions are expected to develop, test or improve methodologies and tools for ex-ante estimates of GHG emission reductions when designing policies and measures on EU and national level, including integrating climate objectives in other policies. This should include economy-wide modelling which takes into account cross-sectoral feedbacks as well as price responsiveness and behavioural change by consumers. Actions are encouraged to use available datasets on climate mitigation policies and measures, such as the OECD/CAPMF database, and the integrated national climate and energy policies and measures datahub hosted by the European Environment Agency (EEA). The use of additional activity data provided by EUROSTAT or national statistical sources may be necessary to provide a comprehensive understanding of policy impacts. All projects funded under this topic are strongly encouraged to connect, coordinate, and participate in networking and joint activities to foster cross-project cooperation and exchange, particularly to reinforce synergies between methodologies. This topic requires interdisciplinary collaboration between political scientists, economists and other relevant Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) disciplines. Actions are also strongly encouraged to include a process of mutual learning and co-creation with stakeholders (e.g., representatives of governments, public administrations, NGOs and academia) to meet end-user needs and support the uptake of results. Progress on climate action - European Commission https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets/scope-eu-ets_en https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/the-climate-actions-and-policies-measurement-framework_2caa60ce-en.html Integrated national climate and energy policies and measures; EEA database on greenhouse gas policies and measures in Europe — European Environment Agency https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Greenhouse_gas_emission_footprints

Other topics in HORIZON-CL5-2027-01

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.