HORIZON-CL6-2027-01-BIODIV-07: Health of ecosystems and wild species, predictions and impacts on… — expected outcomes, evaluation and traps

Topic	HORIZON-CL6-2027-01-BIODIV-07
Status	Forthcoming
Call	HORIZON-CL6-2027-01 — Call 01 - single stage (2027)
Destination	Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (2026-27)
Type of action	Research and Innovation Actions · lump sum
Opening	20 April 2027
Deadline	22 September 2027
Budget	around EUR 7 million per project · 2 projects expected · EUR 14 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: “Project results are expected to contribute to all the following expected outcomes:”

EO1 transdisciplinary research communities work together to predict the health of ecosystems and wild species (including physiology, genetic diversity, population distribution and ecology) in the face of the existing and emerging stressors induced by the indirect and direct drivers of biodiversity loss (including but not restricted to climate change and pollution), through increased knowledge and monitoring.
EO2 policymakers, public authorities, stakeholders and citizens better understand the interlinkages between wild species and ecosystems health, domestic animal and plant health and human health. The progress of public authorities and policymakers towards a comprehensive One Health governance is assessed, thanks to the development of science-based indicators.

Expected impacts named in the destination

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

EI1 Knowledge on biodiversity status and trends and drivers of biodiversity loss is improved.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 EO2), 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 objectives and the implementation of the EU Green Deal, the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030, and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework as well as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Global Action Plan on Biodiversity and Health.”
“Proposals should seek the mainstreaming of the One Health approach, address the knowledge gaps identified by IPBES assessments, and provide policy recommendations.”
“Proposals should:. describe the current health status of the ecosystems and wild species most susceptible to interact with human health (including terrestrial, freshwater and marine ones, with no geographical restrictions).”
“This should include disability and intersectional aspects and the groups in the most vulnerable situations in society (e.g. low-income communities, youth, older people, persons with disabilities, LGBTIQ people, people with racial or religious minority background).”
“Proposals should foresee appropriate resources to ensure close cooperation with the EC Knowledge Centre for Biodiversity (KCBD) and its Science Service and ensure cooperation with the EU Biodiversa+ and Animal Health and Welfare partnerships.”
“Proposals should also build on the relevant previous Horizon Europe projects.”
“This topic requires the effective contribution of SSH discipline in order to produce meaningful and significant effects enhancing the societal impact of the related research activities. https://www.cbd.int/health/GAP.shtml.”

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.
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 One Health approach recognises the inherent connection between the health of ecosystems, wildlife, humans, domestic animals and plants. This approach is key to prevent, anticipate, detect and respond to health threats across sectors. It has the potential to reduce the impact and societal and economic costs of such threats and prevent their emergence, while also reducing pressures on the environment, contributing to food security and ensuring access to clean air and water. Proposals should support the objectives and the implementation of the EU Green Deal, the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030, and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework as well as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Global Action Plan on Biodiversity and Health. Proposals should seek the mainstreaming of the One Health approach, address the knowledge gaps identified by IPBES assessments, and provide policy recommendations. Proposals should: describe the current health status of the ecosystems and wild species most susceptible to interact with human health (including terrestrial, freshwater and marine ones, with no geographical restrictions). Describe the impact of the stressors induced by the drivers of biodiversity loss and changes in ecosystem dynamics on their health, meaning their physiology, genetic diversity, population distribution and ecology. Taking into consideration the most updated scientific scenarios (e.g. IPBES nexus assessment), predict the future health status of these ecosystems and wild species in the short, mid and long term; propose benchmark protocols to ensure comparability between research communities (including social sciences and humanities) and define common indicators describing the risks (e.g. loss of ecosystem services, exposure to pollutants and pathogens) and benefits (e.g. dilution effect, exposure to beneficial microorganisms, etc.) of the interlinkages of wild species and ecosystem health, domestic animal and plant health and human health. This includes the integration of ecosystem and wildlife health in the exposome approach; assess the impacts of the degradation of ecosystem and wildlife health on human health, including a cost-benefit analysis of nature restoration and conservation projects in terms of human health benefits and the costs of inaction. This should include disability and intersectional aspects and the groups in the most vulnerable situations in society (e.g. low-income communities, youth, older people, persons with disabilities, LGBTIQ people, people with racial or religious minority background). Based on this, provide actionable policy recommendations for policymakers and authorities in establishing a One Health policy framework. Proposals should foresee appropriate resources to ensure close cooperation with the EC Knowledge Centre for Biodiversity (KCBD) and its Science Service and ensure cooperation with the EU Biodiversa+ and Animal Health and Welfare partnerships. Proposals should also build on the relevant previous Horizon Europe projects. This topic requires the effective contribution of SSH discipline in order to produce meaningful and significant effects enhancing the societal impact of the related research activities. https://www.cbd.int/health/GAP.shtml European Partnership on Animal Health and Welfare

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.

Health of ecosystems and wild species, predictions and impacts on human health, in the face of existing and emerging stressors, from a One Health approach

Expected outcomes

Expected impacts named in the destination

What evaluators will look for in this topic

Expected outcomes

What the scope asks for

Conditions that shape the proposal

Impact pathway and traps

Other topics in HORIZON-CL6-2027-01

Source and attribution