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

Understanding and avoiding maladaptation to climate change

HORIZON-CL5-2027-01-D1-10 — 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 ↓

ForthcomingRIADeadline 4 March 2027EUR 5 million to EUR 6 million per project

GrantWise › Horizon Europe topics › HORIZON-CL5-2027-01-D1-10

TopicHORIZON-CL5-2027-01-D1-10
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
Opening17 November 2026
Deadline4 March 2027
BudgetEUR 5 million to EUR 6 million per project · 3 projects expected · EUR 18 million in total
Part B page limit40 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 outcomes:”

  1. EO1 Existing evidence on maladaptation is retrieved comprehensively, and new knowledge is generated for incorporation into main EU repositories, such as Climate-ADAPT or the portal of the EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change.
  2. EO2 The risk and adaptation assessment frameworks are improved by better integrating the maladaptation dimension.
  3. EO3 Guidelines and tools for maladaptation prevention and correction strategies are made available to adaptation stakeholders at relevant scales and inform the design and implementation of adaptation strategies and plans of the EU and Member States.

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.

  • “There is a need to learn from the increasing evidence of maladaptation across sectors and regions, both in Europe and globally, to prevent maladaptation in policy design and implementation (e.g. of the EU Adaptation Strategy).”
  • “Actions should address all the following aspects:.”
  • “The analysis should be comprehensive and consider an integrated and systemic approach (including insights from Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) to maladaptation causes and drivers of very diverse nature, such as trade-offs and feedbacks with other priorities and sectors, poor decision making and implementation practices and the inherent uncertainty and other features of the adaptation process).”
  • “The analysis should also integrate the perspectives of public and private stakeholders and end-users, apply intersectional approach and include data disaggregated by gender, where relevant and feasible.”
  • “Case studies should be used for this purpose, for monitoring and evaluation of the adaptation measures, policies, and actions at a local, regional, and national scale, and from regions and sectors with diverse characteristics and environmental conditions.”
  • “Engagement of end-users is encouraged to ensure robust and realistic characterisation of maladaptation experiences.”
  • “Among other sources, integrating evidence from and for the EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change is encouraged.”
  • “Evidence and insights gained should be systematized and incorporated into main EU repositories.”
  • “Coordination and collaboration with most relevant on-going projects from Mission Adaptation, Cluster 5 Destination 1 “Climate Science and Responses" and from relevant Destinations from other Clusters is encouraged, especially for evidence retrieval, national scale assessment and methodological consistency.”
  • “Specific resources should be devoted to this purpose and project scientific boards should cross-fertilised.”
  • “Actions’ results should also contribute to future European Climate Risk Assessments.”

Conditions that shape the proposal

  • Part B, sections 1–3: 40 pages (standard application form). Text beyond the limit is not read; tables and figures count.

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.
  • 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

Recent climate records, showing unprecedented temperatures and extreme weather events, underscore the urgent need for rapid, systemic and comprehensive adaptation to address the escalating impacts of climate change on all natural and managed systems. However, while adaptation is essential, not fully informed measures can backfire, leading to severe unintended consequences or to short-term gains that are not sustainable. In this context, maladaptation refers to adaptation actions unintentionally leading to increased risk of adverse climate-related outcomes, including via increased greenhouse gas emissions or air pollutants, socio-economic, biodiversity and environmental trade-offs, increased or transferred vulnerability and greater social inequity. Most of the adaptation plans and implemented actions are relatively recent, so even if the cases of maladaptation are increasingly documented, the evidence is still scarce and sparse, as the latest IPCC reports confirm. There is a need to learn from the increasing evidence of maladaptation across sectors and regions, both in Europe and globally, to prevent maladaptation in policy design and implementation (e.g. of the EU Adaptation Strategy). Actions should address all the following aspects: Advance the understanding and identification of drivers that lead to maladaptation for a wide range of systems, socio-economic and environmental conditions. The analysis should be comprehensive and consider an integrated and systemic approach (including insights from Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) to maladaptation causes and drivers of very diverse nature, such as trade-offs and feedbacks with other priorities and sectors, poor decision making and implementation practices and the inherent uncertainty and other features of the adaptation process). The analysis should also integrate the perspectives of public and private stakeholders and end-users, apply intersectional approach and include data disaggregated by gender, where relevant and feasible. Map and analyse evidence to identify and validate effective adaptation practices that prevent maladaptation and help to identify maladaptive ones. Case studies should be used for this purpose, for monitoring and evaluation of the adaptation measures, policies, and actions at a local, regional, and national scale, and from regions and sectors with diverse characteristics and environmental conditions. Engagement of end-users is encouraged to ensure robust and realistic characterisation of maladaptation experiences. Among other sources, integrating evidence from and for the EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change is encouraged. Evidence and insights gained should be systematized and incorporated into main EU repositories. Strengthen the methodological and analytical toolbox for complex climate risk and adaptation assessments to increase public understanding and policy awareness of maladaptation risks, and to advance both qualitative and quantitative understanding of the most important complex risk feedbacks, particularly when they may result in significant constraints on options for climate action. Study and propose corrective responses for the identified maladaptation cases and provide systematised prevention guidelines and best practice examples to avoid maladaptive outcomes. Coordination and collaboration with most relevant on-going projects from Mission Adaptation, Cluster 5 Destination 1 “Climate Science and Responses" and from relevant Destinations from other Clusters is encouraged, especially for evidence retrieval, national scale assessment and methodological consistency. Specific resources should be devoted to this purpose and project scientific boards should cross-fertilised. Actions’ results should also contribute to future European Climate Risk Assessments.

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.