Improve the capacity to monitor and reduce air pollution from agriculture

Expected outcomes

• Projects should contribute to all of the expected outcomes.
• For each outcome (EO1 to EO4), 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:. assess and improve the accuracy, cost, efficiency and user-friendliness of MRV methodologies and tools (including AI, IoT, etc.) for air pollutants (other than greenhouse gases) in agriculture at farm level through analysis, field experiments, and demonstration activities, reducing uncertainties and enabling use of higher tiers for the estimation of emissions and for reporting;. consolidate, extend and improve knowledge on…”
• “Proposals must implement the multi-actor approach, with a consortium based on a balanced mix of actors with complementary knowledge, including farmers, researchers, advisors and businesses.”
• “Concrete efforts should be made to ensure that the data and methodologies produced in the context of the funded projects follow the FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Re-usable).”
• “Proposals should include a dedicated task and resources for cooperation with the other project(s) funded under this topic and with other relevant ongoing and forthcoming Horizon Europe project(s), including topic HORIZON-CL6-2025-02-CLIMATE-04: Monitoring, reporting, verification and mitigation of non-CO 2 greenhouse gas emissions and related air pollutants from agriculture, especially to understand the combined effects of air pollutants.”

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.
• 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.”
• Other Eligible Conditions: “Due to the scope of this topic, relevant international organisations with headquarters in a Member State or Horizon Europe Associated Country are exceptionally eligible for funding.”
• Other Eligible Conditions: “The following additional eligibility criteria apply: The proposals must apply the multi-actor approach. See definition of the multi-actor approach in this work programme part.”

Impact pathway and traps

• 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.
• 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.