Topic updates

02 December 2025
GENERALISED FEEDBACK for successful applicants after STAGE 1

HORIZON-CL6-2025-01-BIODIV-01-two-stage

In order to best ensure equal treatment, successful stage 1 applicants do not receive the evaluation summary reports (ESRs) for their proposals, but this generalised feedback with information and tips for preparing the full proposal.

Information & tips

Main shortcomings found in the stage 1 evaluation :

-A list of targeted habitats is generally provided for Living Labs (LLs), but it is not clear how forestry and freshwater interaction will be addressed.

-While pressures and drivers are well detailed, the use of citizen science, restoration measures and monitoring protocols are not sound enough.

-Specific ecosystem condition thresholds are not fully defined, nor whether there is ambition to reach the good conservation status defined in the Habitats or Water Framework Directives.

-It is not entirely clear how the various knowledge generated across diverse contexts will be brought together in the co-evaluation stage.

-Disciplines related to forestry and freshwater ecosystems restoration are inadequately integrated and described.

-It is insufficiently described, how cross-fertilization across LLs and upscaling will work.

-A narrative on how the project results will evolve into a long-term impact is not clearly presented.

-Some target pathways are not completely clear.

-The gradient of pressures across LLs is not sufficiently clear.

-The credibility of some impact delivery in the wider/longer-term is not completely clear. For example, how proejct outputs would be sustained.

-There is a lack of detail regarding how the suggested mitigation efforts would be implemented and funded.

-In certain cases, without a clear identification of Living Lab sites, including scale, it is not possible to assess the actual spatial distribution, representativeness, or how well the experiments cover socio-economic gradients and cultural heritage.

-Practical tools for practitioners are not fully elaborated.

-A greater level of detail would be beneficial regarding restoration targets and EU-wide uptake.

-The innovative aspects to assess and monitor ecological conditions are insufficiently described.

-It is also not clear why ecological/environmental innovation monitoring is not standardised across LLs for transferability.

-The economic viability of the proposed innovative solutions for the end-users and appropriate business models and actions is not convincedly presented.

-The consortium has only broadly planned clustering and collaboration activities with the other projects and initiatives as requested in the call text, namely integration BioAgora for long-term monitoring and EC Knowledge Centre for Biodiversity.

-The use of social science and cultural expertise is not convincedly presented.

In your stage 2 proposal, you have a chance to address or clarify these issues.

Please bear in mind that your full proposal will now be evaluated more in-depth and possibly by a new group of outside experts.

Please make sure that your full proposal is consistent with your short outline proposal. It may NOT differ substantially. The project must stay the same.

02 December 2025

12 September 2025

11 June 2025
Please note that due to a technical issue, during the first days of publication of this call, the topic page did not display the description of the corresponding destination. This problem is now solved. In addition to the information published in the topic page, you can always find a full description of the 7 destinations (Biodiversity and ecosystem services; Fair, healthy and environment-friendly food systems from primary production to consumption; Circular economy and bioeconomy sectors; Clean environment and zero pollution; Land, ocean and water for climate action; Resilient, inclusive, healthy and green rural, coastal and urban communities; Innovative governance, environmental observations and digital solutions in support of the Green Deal) that are relevant for the call in the Work Programme 2025 part for “Food, Bioeconomy, Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment”. Please select from the work programme the destination relevant to your topic and take into account the description and expected impacts of that destination for the preparation of your proposal.

Living labs co-creating innovative solutions for forests and freshwater ecosystems restoration

TOPIC ID: HORIZON-CL6-2025-01-BIODIV-01-two-stage

Type of grant: Call for proposals

General information

Programme:

Call: Cluster 6 Call 01 - two stage (HORIZON-CL6-2025-01-two-stage)

Type of action: HORIZON-RIA HORIZON Research and Innovation Actions

Type of MGA: HORIZON Lump Sum Grant [HORIZON-AG-LS]

Status: Open for submission

Deadline model: two-stage

Opening Date: 06 May 2025

Deadline dates:
04 September 2025 17:00 (Brussels time)
18 February 2026 17:00 (Brussels time)

Topic description

Expected Outcome:

Successful proposals will contribute to the impacts of this destination by improving knowledge and developing innovations, methods, pathways and toolsto restore degraded ecosystems ensuring the provision of ecosystem services, including for adaptation and/or mitigation to climate change.

Project results are expected to contribute to all the following expected outcomes:

• The capacities of researchers, policymakers, practitioners and other stakeholders are enhanced, facilitating effective collaboration among research, practice, and policy to co-develop, test, refine and scale up solutions, methods and tools for ecosystem restoration and for their non-deterioration;
• Practice-oriented knowledge and tools are available to stakeholders having to restore ecosystems and to ensure their non-deterioration, and to provide advice, such as to public and private land managers, foresters or environmental NGOs;
• Competent authorities in charge of preparing and updating national restoration plans to implement the EU Nature Restoration Law and of national climate adaptation strategies and plans are aware of effective solutions, methods and tools for ecosystem restoration and they are able to propose appropriate restoration measures;
• Collaborations between actors across territories and sectors are strengthened and consideration of effective solutions for ecosystem restoration and for their non-deterioration in regions where living labs are operating is increased, and business models to finance them are developed;
• Social, economic and environmental co-benefits and trade-offs of nature restoration activities are demonstrated, including for climate mitigation and adaptation.

Scope:

The EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 set the following targets for 2030: significant areas of degraded and carbon-rich ecosystems are restored; habitats and species show no deterioration in conservation trend and status, and at least 30% reach favourable conservation status or at least show a positive trend. The EU Nature Restoration Regulation establishes a framework within which Member States shall put in place effective and area-based restoration measures with the aim to jointly cover, as a Union target, at least 20 % of land areas and at least 20 % of sea areas by 2030, and all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050. The European Climate Law requires Member States to adopt and implement national adaptation strategies and plans in which they should promote nature-based solutions and ecosystem-based adaptation. It notably acknowledges that forests are carbon sinks, which contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, while ensuring that forests continue to grow and provide many other services.

Successful proposals are expected to set up living labs which will develop and widely deploy innovative solutions for restoring key ecosystems, which deliver multiple ecosystem functions and services relevant for climate action, including carbon sequestration, regulating water regimes, and other climate adaptation aspects. Proposals under this proposal are expected to combine research on forest and freshwater ecosystems.

Proposals should apply the three main principles of the living labs research concept: (a) co-creating innovative solutions in real-life sites focusing on end-users’ needs; (b) co-deciding / co-creating with end-users all along the project; (c) bringing together actors with complementary knowledge in a targeted combination as best suited to achieve the expected outcomes/objectives of the projects.

Living labs should correspond to the definition of the European Network of Living Labs and involve partners from different backgrounds, disciplines and/or sectors that are most relevant to achieve the project objectives and be composed of at least seven experimental sites. By working together in a living lab, the various partners involved in the different sites will be able to co-develop, experiment, test, replicate and benchmark innovative actions and solutions, compare results, exchange good practices, validate methodologies and benefit from cross-fertilisation within a local/regional setting.

More specifically, proposals should:

• set up at least three living labs to work together on ecosystem restoration, covering forests and freshwater ecosystems. The living labs are expected to be located in at least three different EU Member States and/or Associated Countries. Proposals should describe the rationale for cooperation across the various living labs and among the various stakeholders within the living labs;
• establish a detailed work plan of the activities to be undertaken in a transdisciplinary way, ensuring the co-design, co-development, and co-implementation of locally adapted innovative solutions
• conduct participatory and transdisciplinary research and innovation in living labs with the objective of finding practical solutions to ecosystem restoration, while considering relevant drivers of biodiversity loss, in particular climate change and invasive alien species, and related pressures. Challenges with scaling up and transferability of solutions should be addressed. Proposed strategies and solutions should be adapted to the different environmental, socio-economic and cultural contexts in which the living labs are operating and should consider the cultural and natural heritage. Sites should be selected along a gradient of anthropogenic pressure to evaluate restoration challenges in heterogeneous areas from highly disturbed to relatively intact areas. Action oriented and collaborative approach combining local expertise in economics, ecology and locally created sustainable innovations to capture the full range of knowledge in addition to scientific knowledge should be sought. Gender dimension should be integrated;
• establish for each living lab a satisfactory level for ecosystem condition, in order to allow for an accurate assessment of the conditions and changes and a clear monitoring of progress towards the objectives. Where relevant, the overall objective should be to reach the good conservation status defined in the Habitats or in the Water Framework Directives. Impacts of forestry and forestry practises on freshwater ecosystem health and how changes in forestry practises/management can support the restoration of freshwater ecosystems, including sediments, should be considered;
• monitor and carry out an assessment of the innovative practices for ecosystem restoration and their effectiveness, including the conditions for non-deterioration. This should include a demonstration of the economic viability of the proposed innovative solutions for the end-users and appropriate business models and actions possibly involving local authorities, business communities, SMEs, investors, entrepreneurs should be developed, including with co-funding schemes;
• document the newly developed solutions in an intuitive and accessible way and widely disseminate them in order to facilitate their uptake by practitioners and transmit the acquired knowledge to all relevant actors.

Proposals should foresee cooperation with the EC Knowledge Centre for Biodiversity and the Science Service project BioAgora. Nature-based solutions are relevant to this topic if they concern the restoration of ecosystems.

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.

Start submission

To access the Electronic Submission Service, please click on the submission-button next to the type of action and the type of model grant agreement that corresponds to your proposal. You will then be asked to confirm your choice, as it cannot be changed in the submission system. Upon confirmation, you will be linked to the correct entry point.

To access existing draft proposals for this topic, please login to the Funding & Tenders Portal and select the My Proposals page of the My Area section.

Get support

Please read carefully all provisions below before the preparation of your application.

Online Manual is your guide on the procedures from proposal submission to managing your grant.

Horizon Europe Programme Guide contains the detailed guidance to the structure, budget and political priorities of Horizon Europe.

Funding & Tenders Portal FAQ – find the answers to most frequently asked questions on submission of proposals, evaluation and grant management.

Research Enquiry Service – ask questions about any aspect of European research in general and the EU Research Framework Programmes in particular.

National Contact Points (NCPs) – get guidance, practical information and assistance on participation in Horizon Europe. There are also NCPs in many non-EU and non-associated countries (‘third-countries’).

Enterprise Europe Network – contact your EEN national contact for advice to businesses with special focus on SMEs. The support includes guidance on the EU research funding.

IT Helpdesk – contact the Funding & Tenders Portal IT helpdesk for questions such as forgotten passwords, access rights and roles, technical aspects of submission of proposals, etc.

European IPR Helpdesk assists you on intellectual property issues.

CEN-CENELEC Research Helpdesk and ETSI Research Helpdesk – the European Standards Organisations advise you how to tackle standardisation in your project proposal.

The European Charter for Researchers and the Code of Conduct for their recruitment – consult the general principles and requirements specifying the roles, responsibilities and entitlements of researchers, employers and funders of researchers.

Partner Search help you find a partner organisation for your proposal.