HORIZON-CL6-2027-02-FARM2FORK-06: Unleashing the potential of sustainable small-scale aquatic food… — expected outcomes, evaluation and traps

Topic	HORIZON-CL6-2027-02-FARM2FORK-06
Status	Forthcoming
Call	HORIZON-CL6-2027-02 — Call 02 - single stage (2027)
Destination	Fair, healthy and environment-friendly food systems from primary production to consumption (2026-27)
Type of action	Innovation Actions · lump sum
Opening	20 April 2027
Deadline	23 September 2027
Budget	around EUR 5 million per project · 2 projects expected · EUR 10 million in total
TRL at the end	TRL 6–7
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: “In line with the EU Common Fisheries Policy and the revised EU Fisheries Control Regulation, the European Ocean Pact, the Vision for Fisheries and Aquaculture with a 2040 perspective, the strategic guidelines for sustainable and competitive aquaculture, the EU algae initiative, Farm to Fork Strategy, the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 and the Food 2030 policy framework, project results are…”

EO1 economic prosperity is fostered in coastal, rural and urban communities through improved business models, value chain integration and market access for small scale producers that can contribute offering attractive jobs.
EO2 consumers benefit from the availability of locally produced, nutritious, and safe aquatic food following high environmental and social standards.
EO3 more resilient and empowered communities at local and regional levels by fostering innovation in aquatic food value chain and addressing challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and resource management.
EO4 a more competitive and sustainable aquatic food sector by advancing ecosystem-based management practices, digitalization and technological innovation based on the latest scientific research.

Expected impacts named in the destination

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

EI1 agriculture and food systems contribute to ensuring a secure, safe, sustainable, nutritious, and affordable supply of healthy food in Europe and beyond by fostering its long-term competitiveness, resilience, scalability and sustainability within the boundaries of our planet with the One Health approach.
EI2 farmers are empowered to ensure the competitiveness, resilience and sustainability of the farming sector, through increasing knowledge, tools, innovative solutions, and advice that allow efficient productivity, working for and with nature, preserving and restoring biodiversity within agricultural ecosystems and helping to decarbonise the EU economy.
EI3 sustainable fisheries and aquaculture (in marine, brackish and freshwater) contribute to fair, healthy, resilient and environment-friendly food systems in healthy aquatic ecosystems with thriving diversity of species and habitats providing ecosystem and climate services and triggering growth and jobs’ creation in coastal and rural areas.
EI4 tools are provided so that citizens and communities are empowered to make the sustainable food choices and move towards safe, healthy, nutritious, accessible, affordable and sustainable diets. Insights and advances in life science and digital & data technologies are valorised to deploy solutions in practice across the EU.
EI5 food businesses, including food processing industries and SMEs, are supported to increase their resilience and competitiveness, while ensuring resource efficiency and sustainability, and human, animal and ecosystem health is preserved.

What evaluators will look for in this topic

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.

“Selected proposals should advance knowledge and develop tools, including Nature-based Solutions, for managing and further developing small-scale aquatic food production.”
“They should include, where relevant, both aspects of natural science and technical know-how to improve small-scale aquatic food production as well as issues related to social sciences and humanities (SSH) disciplines, to produce meaningful and significant effects enhancing the societal impact of the related innovation activities.”
“Selected proposals should develop innovative methodologies to assess environmental and socio-economic contributions of relevant small-scale actors to the prosperity of local communities within the broader aquatic food system, taking into account a gender sensitive approach and the specific needs of groups in vulnerable situations.”
“The effects of climate change on small-scale aquatic food production should be addressed as well as the potential contribution of small-scale aquatic food production to climate change mitigation and adaptation.”
“Additionally, the potential for environmental services provision and of improvements of ecological footprint should be explored.”
“Aquatic animal welfare issues should be considered, where relevant.”
“Selected proposals should include from their design throughout their development and implementation relevant stakeholders and end-users and produce outputs that can be readily applicable by them.”
“Special attention should be given to knowledge transfer, training, and capacity-building activities to ensure the practical implementation of research findings and innovations by small-scale actors and policymakers.”

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 6–7 by the end of the project. State where you start and the evidence for it.
Innovation action: evaluators expect a plausible path to commercialisation and named first users or customers.

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.
Market uptake is part of the scope. Evaluators look for a credible route to market with named first adopters.
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

Small-scale aquatic food production includes small-scale fisheries, recreational fisheries and aquaculture farms that are classified as SMEs. In 2021, small-scale fisheries contributed to 49% of employment in EU fisheries. Together with other maritime activities, small-scale fisheries play a vital role in local economies, particularly in the Mediterranean, where over half of the sector is concentrated. Recreational fisheries are non-commercial fishing activities exploiting marine biological resources for recreation, tourism or sport. While the marketing or sale of catches from recreational fisheries is prohibited, if properly monitored and managed they can contribute to conservation efforts and support community development. According to the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, the aquaculture sector in the EU consists primarily of small and family-owned enterprises- especially in the case of mollusk farms. However, small-scale actors often face difficulties in developing and adopting innovative technologies. Selected proposals should advance knowledge and develop tools, including Nature-based Solutions, for managing and further developing small-scale aquatic food production. They should include, where relevant, both aspects of natural science and technical know-how to improve small-scale aquatic food production as well as issues related to social sciences and humanities (SSH) disciplines, to produce meaningful and significant effects enhancing the societal impact of the related innovation activities. In the frame of SSH, cultural elements such as local traditions related to aquatic food production and consumption could be included. The scope of the topic includes fisheries and aquaculture activities taking place in fresh, brackish and marine waters, such as small-scale fisheries, small-scale mollusk, seaweed and fish farms, recreational fisheries, urban aquaculture and aquaponics. Selected proposals should develop innovative methodologies to assess environmental and socio-economic contributions of relevant small-scale actors to the prosperity of local communities within the broader aquatic food system, taking into account a gender sensitive approach and the specific needs of groups in vulnerable situations. This could, for example, include diverse data sources (e.g. citizen science, social media) and advance data processing, validation, and interoperability solutions using for example AI, machine learning, and big data analytics to provide actionable insights. The effects of climate change on small-scale aquatic food production should be addressed as well as the potential contribution of small-scale aquatic food production to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Additionally, the potential for environmental services provision and of improvements of ecological footprint should be explored. Aquatic animal welfare issues should be considered, where relevant. Selected proposals should include from their design throughout their development and implementation relevant stakeholders and end-users and produce outputs that can be readily applicable by them. Special attention should be given to knowledge transfer, training, and capacity-building activities to ensure the practical implementation of research findings and innovations by small-scale actors and policymakers.

Technology readiness, as published

Activities are expected to achieve TRL 6-7 by the end of the project – see General Annex B. Activities may start at any TRL.

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.

Unleashing the potential of sustainable small-scale aquatic food production and recreational fisheries for prosperous local communities

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-CL6-2027-02

Source and attribution