GrantWise
HORIZON EUROPE TOPIC · Cluster 6 · Food, Bioeconomy, Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment

Science-policy support to the implementation of EU and global biodiversity policies and strategies

HORIZON-CL6-2027-01-BIODIV-02 — 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 ↓

ForthcomingCSA · lump sumDeadline 22 September 2027around EUR 7 million per project

GrantWise › Horizon Europe topics › HORIZON-CL6-2027-01-BIODIV-02

TopicHORIZON-CL6-2027-01-BIODIV-02
StatusForthcoming
CallHORIZON-CL6-2027-01 — Call 01 - single stage (2027)
DestinationBiodiversity and Ecosystem Services (2026-27)
Type of actionCoordination and Support Actions · lump sum
Opening20 April 2027
Deadline22 September 2027
Budgetaround EUR 7 million per project · 1 project expected · EUR 7 million in total
Part B page limit28 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 the following expected outcomes:”

  1. EO1 effective scientific support is provided by the Science Service for Biodiversity to all levels of policymaking related to biodiversity, through the European Commission’s Knowledge Centre for Biodiversity (KCBD); in particular, the coordination of answering ad hoc policy requests related to biodiversity through the mobilisation of the EU-funded scientific community, in collaboration with the KCBD, is expected.
  2. EO2 enhanced science-policy support and knowledge transfer from EU-funded R&I projects to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) are ensured.
  3. EO3 a strengthened, multi-stakeholder knowledge and dialogue platform promotes biodiversity knowledge and the uptake and scaling of nature-based solutions (NbS) including for nature protection and restoration across the EU and beyond, through active engagement with practitioners, developers, and decision-makers from science, policy, business, and civil society - at local, national, and international levels.

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 Knowledge on biodiversity status and trends and drivers of biodiversity loss is improved.
  2. EI2 Innovations, methods, pathways, models and tools are available and used to protect healthy and resilient ecosystems and to restore degraded ones, ensuring the continuous provision of ecosystem services, including for adaptation and/or mitigation to climate change.
  3. EI3 The ongoing biodiversity crisis and its consequences, notably on ecosystem functioning and their services, and the need to monitor, protect, restore and sustainably use biodiversity are better understood to better benefit the whole society in an inclusive way.
  4. EI4 Policymakers and stakeholders, all relevant economic sectors and society are aware and well informed of relevant challenges and opportunities of biodiversity protection, restoration and sustainable use, leading to better implementation of the biodiversity legislation and better valuation of ecosystem services, leading to transformative change towards a nature positive economy.
  5. EI5 Farmers, foresters, land and sea managers, fishers and aquaculture producers have access to key information, and test and implement biodiversity-friendly management practices, while safeguarding food and water security and fostering competitiveness, demonstrating the long-term sustainability of these sectors.
  6. EI6 Progress towards international commitments worldwide on biodiversity is made.

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.

  • “Proposals should:. support the provision of a functional Science Service for Biodiversity, in close collaboration with the KCBD, acting as a one-stop-shop – a single-entry point for providing the overall support on evidence-based services (answering knowledge requests, tools, coordination, capacity building) that enable policymakers, other decision makers and stakeholders in Europe and beyond to ensure the protection, restoration and…”
  • “Successful proposals should: provide high-quality evidence-based responses to biodiversity-related policy requests submitted to the KCBD, by involving relevant researchers, particularly those from EU-funded projects.”
  • “Proposals are expected to provide financial support to third parties (FSTP) to, for instance, involve relevant experts;. maintain and extend active knowledge exchange networks, including through capacity building, to strengthen the bridge between policy, science and society;. maintain, enrich and expand a set of Science Service tools, enabling all relevant actors to use and benefit from the best available biodiversity knowledge;. strengthen the…”
  • “Successful proposals should: provide scientific and back-office support to negotiators involved in these processes;. facilitate and support the engagement of researchers from the EU and Associated Countries in these processes.”
  • “Proposals are expected to provide financial support to third parties (FSTP) to, for instance, involve relevant experts;. facilitate technical and scientific cooperation, knowledge transfer and networking between researchers, stakeholders, policymakers and other decision makers to enhance awareness and application of IPBES deliverables on various topics, for instance on pollinators;. support the KCBD in its tasks as a European TSC mobilising…”
  • “Successful proposals should also: ensure a multi-stakeholder dialogue platform on NbS serves to bridge science, policy, practice, and business, fostering the co-creation, dissemination, and uptake of research-based knowledge.”
  • “This platform should play a key role in promoting policy coherence, encouraging collaborative action, and building capacity among Member States and Associated Countries, communities, and actors at all levels.”
  • “Successful proposals should support the new Commission policy priorities for 2024-2029 with a focus on “Sustaining our quality of life: food security, water and nature”.”
  • “This requires interactions with IPBES, the CBD Secretariat, and the EC via the KCBD.”
  • “Proposals should build on existing knowledge and the results of past and on-going projects, and foresee close collaboration with, and tailored support to the KCBD and its Science Service.”
  • “Proposals should also foresee cooperation with the European Biodiversity Partnership (Biodiversa+) and its funded projects.”
  • “Proposal aspects addressing the Science Service should build upon the foundations and outcomes of the BioAgora project.”

Conditions that shape the proposal

  • Part B, sections 1–3: 28 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.
  • Coordination and support action: no research is funded. Evaluators look for coordination, networking, dissemination or policy support with a clear audience.
  • 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.”
  • Legal and financial set-up of the grants: “Beneficiaries may provide financial support to third parties. The support to third parties can only be provided in the form of grants. The maximum amount to be granted to each third party is EUR 120 000 as this support to third parties is one of the primary activities of the action and necessary to engage relevant…”

Impact pathway and traps

  • 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 scope expects pilots or demonstration. Name the sites, the partners who run them and what is measured there.
  • The Joint Research Centre may take part. Decide whether its involvement helps, and say so if you include it.
  • Open science or data practices are named. Make the data management plan concrete: which data, which repository, when.
  • 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 EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 includes a science-policy mechanism and greater efforts to support the implementation of biodiversity commitments at EU and global levels. The strategy also explicitly calls for the use of NbS as a central component in addressing both biodiversity loss and climate change. In line with the Commission’s priority 'A global Europe’, the EU is demonstrating leadership in this field, notably by enhancing its support to the multilateral processes and platforms addressing the biodiversity crisis. This topic covers essential functions of the Science Service for Biodiversity, broader science-policy support for multiple actors in relation to the global IPBES and CBD processes, as well as support to collaborations and knowledge exchange specifically on NbS. The Science Service, linked to the KCBD, plays a critical role in supporting evidence-based decision making within the EU. In addition, the KCBD acts as one of the European Technical and Scientific Support Centres (TSCs) established under the CBD, which support knowledge transfer and capacity building to help CBD Parties implement the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). Proposals should: support the provision of a functional Science Service for Biodiversity, in close collaboration with the KCBD, acting as a one-stop-shop – a single-entry point for providing the overall support on evidence-based services (answering knowledge requests, tools, coordination, capacity building) that enable policymakers, other decision makers and stakeholders in Europe and beyond to ensure the protection, restoration and sustainable use of biodiversity. Successful proposals should: provide high-quality evidence-based responses to biodiversity-related policy requests submitted to the KCBD, by involving relevant researchers, particularly those from EU-funded projects. Proposals are expected to provide financial support to third parties (FSTP) to, for instance, involve relevant experts; maintain and extend active knowledge exchange networks, including through capacity building, to strengthen the bridge between policy, science and society; maintain, enrich and expand a set of Science Service tools, enabling all relevant actors to use and benefit from the best available biodiversity knowledge; strengthen the capacity of researchers and negotiators from the EU and Associated Countries to engage in IPBES and CBD processes. Successful proposals should: provide scientific and back-office support to negotiators involved in these processes; facilitate and support the engagement of researchers from the EU and Associated Countries in these processes. Proposals are expected to provide financial support to third parties (FSTP) to, for instance, involve relevant experts; facilitate technical and scientific cooperation, knowledge transfer and networking between researchers, stakeholders, policymakers and other decision makers to enhance awareness and application of IPBES deliverables on various topics, for instance on pollinators; support the KCBD in its tasks as a European TSC mobilising and/or generating evidence and knowledge to implement the GBF. enhance and expand dynamic knowledge exchange mechanisms on NbS, coupled with targeted capacity-building initiatives, to reinforce the interface between policy, scientific research, business and societal engagement. Successful proposals should also: ensure a multi-stakeholder dialogue platform on NbS serves to bridge science, policy, practice, and business, fostering the co-creation, dissemination, and uptake of research-based knowledge. This platform should play a key role in promoting policy coherence, encouraging collaborative action, and building capacity among Member States and Associated Countries, communities, and actors at all levels. Successful proposals should support the new Commission policy priorities for 2024-2029 with a focus on “Sustaining our quality of life: food security, water and nature”. This implies support to the implementation of the goals of the European Green Deal, the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030, the GBF and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This requires interactions with IPBES, the CBD Secretariat, and the EC via the KCBD. Knowledge generated under this topic is also expected to inform deliberations on EU biodiversity policy after 2030. Proposals should build on existing knowledge and the results of past and on-going projects, and foresee close collaboration with, and tailored support to the KCBD and its Science Service. The possible participation of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) in the project would facilitate this collaboration and support. Proposals should also foresee cooperation with the European Biodiversity Partnership (Biodiversa+) and its funded projects. Proposal aspects addressing the Science Service should build upon the foundations and outcomes of the BioAgora project. Proposal aspects addressing the platform on NbS should build upon the foundations and outcomes of the NetworkNaturePLUS project. Proposals are strongly encouraged to provide financial support to third parties (FSTP) to, for instance, respond to biodiversity-related policy requests or engage relevant expertise in IPBES and CBD processes. A maximum of 30% of the EU funding should be allocated to this purpose. Consortia need to define a fair and transparent selection process for third parties, for which financial support may be granted. Proposals should clearly demonstrate how the project will support the engagement of leading researchers from the EU and Associated Countries in IPBES and CBD processes. The Plan for exploitation and dissemination should ensure the valorisation of available knowledge to policy makers, stakeholders and the public.

Other topics in HORIZON-CL6-2027-01

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.