Replacing hazardous substances in biocidal products

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:. develop innovative and Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) bio-based substances to effectively replace hazardous active substances used in biocidal products covered by Biocidal products regulation and, specifically, at least in one of the following applications as listed below: hazardous active substances used in wood preservatives biocidal products.”
• “Developed solutions/substances should aim to limit the development of resistance or cross-resistance to harmful organisms, such as Aspergillus species, and in particular Aspergillus fumigatus;. hazardous active substances used in insecticides biocidal products to control mosquitos.”
• “Developed solutions/substances should be sufficiently effective to control larvae or adults of mosquitoes responsible for diseases transmitted to humans or animals;. the developed substances can include active substances derived from plants, microbes and other natural sources, and bio-based substances;. include a review at international level of the hazardous active substances in the scope (wood preservatives and insecticides to control…”
• “Projects should include social sciences and humanities (SSH) in testing the safety of the developed substances on humans, especially including the analysis of groups in vulnerable situations, and the diversity in terms of sex, disability, age, race or ethnicity, religion or belief, gender, etc.”
• “International cooperation is encouraged, for the review of substances in scope.”
• “Participation of SMEs in the consortium is encouraged.”

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.
• TRL: the topic expects TRL 4–5 by the end of the project. State where you start and the evidence for it.
• 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 60 000.”

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.
• The scope expects pilots or demonstration. Name the sites, the partners who run them and what is measured there.
• International cooperation is part of the scope. Explain what the non-EU partners add and how the cooperation is organised.
• The gender dimension is named in the topic. Show how sex and gender analysis enters the research content, not only team balance.
• Life-cycle or safe-and-sustainable-by-design assessment is expected. Name the method and where in the work plan it runs.
• 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.