Loading…
Strategic Analysis
A winning proposal must operationalize the Multi-Actor Approach (MAA) across diverse European biogeographical regions, balancing predator and wildlife conservation (e.g., large carnivores, ungulates) with the economic resilience of outdoor livestock systems. The core strategy should combine real-time non-lethal deterrent/monitoring digital technologies with socially anchored multi-stakeholder governance models and robust cost-benefit/compensation frameworks to ensure long-term, landscape-level coexistence.
TRL 2 → 6
Based on programme defaults
Review of current wildlife management approaches in agro-pastoral/outdoor production systems in the different EU Member States and Associated Countries and assessment of the effectiveness of different prevention measures
Map the most common types of damages caused and the positive externalities created by wild animals with respect to livestock and crops in Europe. Create an inventory of good practices and infrastructures at farms and regional levels, within a wider wildlife management approach.
Improve or develop tools/technologies for (real time) data collection and analysis to assess, monitor and control (wild) animal behaviour and damages
Cost/benefit analysis of current and new farming strategies that preserve, protect and valorise wildlife and pastoralism in different regions and ecosystems. Socio-economic, environmental, cultural and political aspects should be considered.
Assess stakeholders’ (farmers, hunters, conservationists, general public, policy makers…) perspectives and needs (participatory approach) and improve or develop effective instruments to reduce conflicts between livestock farming and wildlife. Identify the most effective measures to mitigate damages and the most common (monetary, non-monetary) compensation mechanisms across Europe.
Innovative and sustainable practices and tools at landscape level to prevent and control negative consequences of interactions between livestock and wild animals to protect wildlife and pastoral/outdoor production systems
Recommendations/policy advice on optimal management at EU level of wildlife and agro-pastoral systems
Decision-making process on wildlife management and land planning participated by relevant stakeholders
Improved coordination across Europe in terms of wildlife management, surveillance and data collection systems
enable sustainable farming systems that i) provide consumers with affordable, safe, healthy and sustainable food, ii) increase the provision of ecosystem services, iii) restore and strengthen biodiversity, iv) minimise pollution and pressure on ecosystems and greenhouse gas emissions, v) foster plant, animal and public health, vi) improve animal welfare, and vii) generate fair economic returns for farmers;
enable sustainable fisheries and aquaculture, in marine and inland waters , increasing aquatic multi-trophic biomass production in a way compatible with the protection of aquatic ecosystems and biodiversity, and the diversification of fisheries and aquaculture products, for fair, healthy, climate-resilient and environment-friendly food systems with a lower impact on aquatic ecosystems and improved animal welfare;
accelerate the transition to sustainable, healthy and inclusive food systems, delivering co-benefits for climate change mitigation and adaptation, environmental sustainability and circularity, sustainable healthy diets and nutrition, food poverty reduction, empowered citizens and communities, and flourishing food businesses, while ensuring food safety and the economic sustainability of EU food systems during the transition.
Farm to Fork Strategy
highThe Farm to Fork Strategy is a key component of the European Green Deal, aiming to make food systems fair, healthy, and environmentally friendly. It includes targets for reducing the environmental footprint of food production, improving animal welfare, and ensuring food security.
Proposals should show how they will contribute to the Farm to Fork Strategy's goals, particularly in terms of sustainable fisheries, reducing pollution, and ensuring safe and healthy seafood for consumers. Evaluators will look for solutions that enhance the resilience and sustainability of food systems.
EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030
highAs a key pillar of the European Green Deal, the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 aims to put Europe's biodiversity on a path to recovery by 2030. It sets ambitious targets for expanding protected areas, restoring degraded ecosystems, reducing pesticide use, and tackling other drivers of biodiversity loss.
Proposals should demonstrate how they contribute to halting and reversing biodiversity loss, restoring ecosystems, and enhancing ecological resilience, especially in the context of forest ecosystems and soil health. Specific attention to how living labs can support biodiversity monitoring and restoration in forests and natural lands is crucial.
European Green Deal
highThe European Green Deal is the EU's overarching growth strategy to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. It aims to transform the EU into a modern, resource-efficient, and competitive economy, ensuring no net emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050 and decoupling economic growth from resource use. It encompasses various policy areas, including climate, energy, transport, industry, agriculture, and biodiversity.
Proposals should clearly demonstrate how their solutions contribute to the broader objectives of the European Green Deal, particularly in areas relevant to food systems, such as reducing environmental impact, fostering sustainability, enhancing resource efficiency, and contributing to climate neutrality. Specific links to relevant Green Deal strategies (e.g., Farm to Fork, Biodiversity) are expected.
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
highCommon Agricultural Policy supports sustainable agriculture. Less relevant unless the proposal involves bio-based materials or food processing.
Only relevant for proposals with agricultural or bio-based components.
Fit for 55 package
mediumThe Fit for 55 Package is a set of legislative proposals to align EU climate, energy, and transport policies with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030. It includes measures to decarbonize the economy and promote renewable energy.
Proposals must demonstrate how their solutions will contribute to the Fit for 55 targets, particularly in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from fisheries operations. Evaluators will look for innovative technologies and strategies that improve energy efficiency and promote circularity.
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
mediumThe SDGs provide a global framework for addressing challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and sustainable food systems. Relevant SDGs for this call include SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger).
Evaluators will expect proposals to explicitly link their objectives and impacts to relevant SDGs, particularly SDG 13, SDG 14, and SDG 2. Proposals should demonstrate how they will contribute to these global goals through their activities and outcomes.
">
1. Admissibility conditions: described in Annex A and Annex E of the Horizon Europe Work Programme General Annexes
Proposal page limits and layout: described in Part B of the Application Form available in the Submission System
2. Eligible countries: described in Annex B of the Work Programme General Annexes
A number of non-EU/non-Associated Countries that are not automatically eligible for funding have made specific provisions for making funding available for their participants in Horizon Europe projects. See the information in the Horizon Europe Programme Guide.
The following additional eligibility criteria apply: the proposals must apply the multi-actor approach. See definition of the multi-actor approach in the introduction to this work programme part.
3. Other eligibility conditions: described in Annex B of the Work Programme General Annexes
4. Financial and operational capacity and exclusion: described in Annex C of the Work Programme General Annexes
Award criteria, scoring and thresholds are described in Annex D of the Work Programme General Annexes
Submission and evaluation processes are described in Annex F of the Work Programme General Annexes and the Online Manual
Indicative timeline for evaluation and grant agreement: described in Annex F of the Work Programme General Annexes
Eligible costs will take the form of a lump sum as defined in the Decision of 7 July 2021 authorising the use of lump sum contributions under the Horizon Europe Programme – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2021-2027) – and in actions under the Research and Training Programme of the European Atomic Energy Community (2021-2025). [[This decision is available on the Funding and Tenders Portal, in the reference documents section for Horizon Europe, under ‘Simplified costs decisions’ or through this link: https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/horizon/guidance/ls-decision_he_en.pdf]].
6. Legal and financial set-up of the grants: described in Annex G of the Work Programme General Annexes
7. Specific conditions: described in the specific topic of the Work Programme
Call documents:
Standard application form — call-specific application form is available in the Submission System
Standard application form (HE RIA, IA)
Standard evaluation form — will be used with the necessary adaptations
Standard evaluation form (HE RIA, IA)
MGA
Call-specific instructions
Guidance: "Lump sum funding: what do I need to know?"
HE Main Work Programme 2023–2024 – 1. General Introduction
HE Main Work Programme 2023–2024 – 13. General Annexes
HE Framework Programme and Rules for Participation Regulation 2021/695
HE Specific Programme Decision 2021/764
Rules for Legal Entity Validation, LEAR Appointment and Financial Capacity Assessment
EU Grants AGA — Annotated Model Grant Agreement
Funding & Tenders Portal Online Manual
Evaluators will critically check for genuine compliance with the mandatory Multi-Actor Approach, verifying that pastoralist organizations, hunters, conservation NGOs, and local authorities act as co-design partners rather than passive recipients. They will closely scrutinize whether proposed monitoring technologies and damage mitigation practices are validated across varied agro-ecological contexts under a credible Lump Sum budget structure (up to €5.0M, Part B limit of 45 pages), paying particular attention to the operational feasibility of compensation schemes and EU-wide policy roadmaps.
Everything the call asks for, seen from the call's point of view. Each line shows what answers it, and which partner carries it.
This matrix lists everything the call asks for: outcomes, impacts, scope, the requirements buried in the call text, and policy alignment. Sign up free and GrantForge tracks each line against the concept you build.
| Requirement | Covered by | Carried | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope activities | |||
| SC1Review of current wildlife management approaches in agro-pastoral/outdoor production systems in the different EU Member States and Associated Countries and assessment of the effectiveness of different prevention measures | · | · | Sign up to track |
| SC2Map the most common types of damages caused and the positive externalities created by wild animals with respect to livestock and crops in Europe. Create an inventory of good practices and infrastructures at farms and regional levels, within a wider wildlife management approach. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| SC3Improve or develop tools/technologies for (real time) data collection and analysis to assess, monitor and control (wild) animal behaviour and damages | · | · | Sign up to track |
| SC4Cost/benefit analysis of current and new farming strategies that preserve, protect and valorise wildlife and pastoralism in different regions and ecosystems. Socio-economic, environmental, cultural and political aspects should be considered. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| SC5Assess stakeholders’ (farmers, hunters, conservationists, general public, policy makers…) perspectives and needs (participatory approach) and improve or develop effective instruments to reduce conflicts between livestock farming and wildlife. Identify the most effective measures to mitigate damages and the most common (monetary, non-monetary) compensation mechanisms across Europe. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| Expected outcomes | |||
| EO1Innovative and sustainable practices and tools at landscape level to prevent and control negative consequences of interactions between livestock and wild animals to protect wildlife and pastoral/outdoor production systems | · | · | Sign up to track |
| EO2Recommendations/policy advice on optimal management at EU level of wildlife and agro-pastoral systems | · | · | Sign up to track |
| EO3Decision-making process on wildlife management and land planning participated by relevant stakeholders | · | · | Sign up to track |
| EO4Improved coordination across Europe in terms of wildlife management, surveillance and data collection systems | · | · | Sign up to track |
| Other requirements | |||
| REQ1Implementation of the Multi-Actor Approach (MAA)Proposals must implement the multi-actor approach and ensure adequate involvement of key stakeholders, including farmers, hunters, game farmers and producers, agricultural advisory services, land managers, ecology and nature conservation experts, animal behaviour scientists, and social scientists. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| REQ2Contribution of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH)This topic should involve the effective contribution of social sciences and humanities (SSH) disciplines. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| REQ3Synergies with LIFE programme projectsThe proposal should take into account projects funded under the LIFE programme. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| REQ4Dialogue with the EU Platform on Coexistence between People and Large CarnivoresProposals are expected to interact and engage in a dialogue with relevant EU organizations, specifically the EU Platform on Coexistence between People and Large Carnivores. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| Expected impacts | |||
| EI1enable sustainable farming systems that i) provide consumers with affordable, safe, healthy and sustainable food, ii) increase the provision of ecosystem services, iii) restore and strengthen biodiversity, iv) minimise pollution and pressure on ecosystems and greenhouse gas emissions, v) foster plant, animal and public health, vi) improve animal welfare, and vii) generate fair economic returns for farmers; | · | · | Sign up to track |
| EI2enable sustainable fisheries and aquaculture, in marine and inland waters , increasing aquatic multi-trophic biomass production in a way compatible with the protection of aquatic ecosystems and biodiversity, and the diversification of fisheries and aquaculture products, for fair, healthy, climate-resilient and environment-friendly food systems with a lower impact on aquatic ecosystems and improved animal welfare; | · | · | Sign up to track |
| EI3accelerate the transition to sustainable, healthy and inclusive food systems, delivering co-benefits for climate change mitigation and adaptation, environmental sustainability and circularity, sustainable healthy diets and nutrition, food poverty reduction, empowered citizens and communities, and flourishing food businesses, while ensuring food safety and the economic sustainability of EU food systems during the transition. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| Underlying policies | |||
| POL1farm to fork strategyThe Farm to Fork Strategy is a key component of the European Green Deal, aiming to make food systems fair, healthy, and environmentally friendly. It includes targets for reducing the environmental footprint of food production, improving animal welfare, and ensuring food security. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| POL2eu biodiversity strategy for 2030As a key pillar of the European Green Deal, the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 aims to put Europe's biodiversity on a path to recovery by 2030. It sets ambitious targets for expanding protected areas, restoring degraded ecosystems, reducing pesticide use, and tackling other drivers of biodiversity loss. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| POL3european green dealThe European Green Deal is the EU's overarching growth strategy to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. It aims to transform the EU into a modern, resource-efficient, and competitive economy, ensuring no net emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050 and decoupling economic growth from resource use. It encompasses various policy areas, including climate, energy, transport, industry, agriculture, and biodiversity. | · | · | Sign up to track |
| POL4common agricultural policy (cap)Common Agricultural Policy supports sustainable agriculture. Less relevant unless the proposal involves bio-based materials or food processing. | · | · | Sign up to track |
The binding rules of this call. Items marked auto are verified by GrantForge from the call and the template. The others are yours to confirm.
LMIC entities auto-eligible
Low/middle-income country entities are automatically eligible for funding.
EU space data infrastructures
If the project uses satellite-based Earth observation, positioning, navigation or timing data/services, beneficiaries must use Copernicus and/or Galileo/EGNOS. Other sources may be added but not substitute EU infrastructures.
Civil applications only
Horizon Europe funds exclusively civil applications. Research with exclusive military or dual-use application is excluded.
Gender Equality Plan
Having a Gender Equality Plan (GEP) is an eligibility criterion for public bodies, research organisations, and higher education institutions from Member States and Associated Countries.
Open Science
Mandatory open access to peer-reviewed scientific publications and responsible management of research data (FAIR principles, DMP required).
4 key insights you must internalise before writing. Each is grounded in the call text and tells you what evaluators will actually look for. Share these with your consortium before drafting.
Proposals will be rejected at the eligibility check if they fail to implement the Multi-Actor Approach (MAA). Evaluators are explicitly instructed to verify that pastoralist organizations, hunters, conservation NGOs, and local authorities are embedded as active co-design partners, rather than functioning merely as passive end-users or advisory board members.
Source: Eligibility rules
This call operates under a Lump Sum budget structure with a reduced Part B limit of 45 pages. Applicants must concisely prove the operational feasibility of their compensation schemes and EU-wide policy roadmaps, ensuring that major deliverable milestones are strategically aligned with validation phases across varied agro-ecological contexts to secure payment releases.
Source: Evaluation criteria (pre-award)
The scope explicitly lists five elements that should be incorporated, ranging from mapping damages and positive externalities to developing real-time data collection tools and conducting cost/benefit analyses. Evaluators will treat this list as a binding checklist; omitting any of these dimensions—especially the socio-economic assessment of compensation mechanisms—will severely penalize the proposal's excellence and impact scores.
Source: Scope
A winning strategy must bridge the gap between technology and governance by combining real-time non-lethal deterrents with socially anchored cost-benefit and compensation frameworks. Proposals that over-index on sensor technologies without addressing participatory dispute resolution and monetary compensation mechanisms will fail to achieve the required landscape-level coexistence.
Source: Overview
Talk to the Grant Coach to build your concept. There is no set order: start wherever your project starts. The sections below mirror what the conversation produces, and your coverage tracks the progress. You can refine everything once your project workspace is created.
The problems this call frames, and who they affect. Your concept and plan address them.
Pastoralists face significant livestock mortality, injury, and yield loss from wildlife interactions (e.g., large carnivores, wild ungulates), exacerbated by inadequate protective infrastructure and high capital costs for prevention measures.
Deep-seated distrust and conflicting priorities between pastoralists, hunters, conservationists, and authorities lead to gridlocked decision-making and ineffective local landscape management.
Existing compensation schemes suffer from delayed payouts, complex verification bureaucracy, and a lack of standardized, real-time cross-border wildlife tracking and damage assessment infrastructure.
Farmers, graziers, and pastoralist associations operating extensive or outdoor livestock production systems subject to wildlife interaction and predation pressure.
Nature conservation bodies, protected area park authorities, and hunting associations actively managing local wildlife populations and natural habitats.
Regional, national, and EU-level managing authorities responsible for CAP strategic plans, biodiversity conservation regulations, and wildlife compensation schemes.
Academic researchers and scientific institutes working on animal ethology, agroecology, biodiversity conservation, veterinary epidemiology, and rural socio-economics.
Citizens, eco-tourism operators, and local rural communities affected by wildlife presence, conservation debates, and landscape-level pastoral management.
The long-term impacts your project should drive, and the policies they serve.
Deployment of validated, cost-effective prevention tools and streamlined compensation models safeguards outdoor farming income while reducing livestock depredation rates.
Implementation of non-lethal deterrents and shared landscape corridors minimizes retaliatory killing and maintains favourable conservation status of protected wildlife species.
Participatory living lab decision-making tools and interoperable surveillance platforms feed into CAP and regional planning frameworks to de-escalate rural wildlife conflicts across Europe.