A free service by Scientific Network Management s-n-m.eu ↗
Funding Radar

Ensuring continuous effectiveness of protected areas in conserving habitats and species while facing intensifying drivers of biodiversity loss

eu HORIZON-CL6-2026-01-BIODIV-04 · Horizon Europe (HORIZON)

Statusopen
Opens17 Apr 2026
Deadline17 Sep 2026 — 21 days
ActionHORIZON Research and Innovation Actions
Official pagehttps://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunit…
Fetched2026-08-27 04:00:03+00:00

Scope

Expected Outcome: Project results are expected to contribute to all the following expected outcomes: the effectiveness of the protection of habitats and species in protected areas is maintained even under intensifying impacts of the drivers of biodiversity loss, including climate change, thanks to an improved understanding of how they affect the conservation status of the protected habitats and species, for the benefit of society; managers of protected areas are able to anticipate the future impacts of drivers of biodiversity loss and can take better informed decisions for the protection of terrestrial, freshwater and/or marine habitats and species. Scope: Protected areas are key to ensure the conservation of species and habitats. However, the intensification of the main drivers of biodiversity loss is raising questions on how their effectiveness will be maintained in the future. This topic is expected to support the EU commitment to legally protect a minimum of 30% of the EU’s land area and a minimum of 30% of the EU’s sea area of the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 (target 1) and the related legislation, and the corresponding target of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (target 3). Knowledge generated under this topic is also expected to inform deliberations on EU biodiversity policy after 2030 and the design and implementation of climate policies. Proposals should seek to address some knowledge gaps identified by the relevant IPBES assessments and if appropriate provide recommendations to policy makers. Proposals should: analyse trends over time of the effects of drivers of biodiversity loss and their possible cumulative impacts. Direct drivers (changing use of sea and land, direct exploitation of organisms, climate change, pollution and invasive alien species) and indirect drivers should be considered, including socio-economic related ones; develop predictive tools to anticipate how the intensity of impacts will develop in the medium and long terms, taking into account relevant possible cumulative impacts; assess expected future impacts on the conservation status of protected habitats and species in protected areas; assess whether novel adaptive approaches for protection are needed and if so, explore options, possibly building on results of relevant LIFE projects and on the experience of climate refugia (areas where ecosystems sustain stability and resilience despite climate change) and of bright spots (where targeted conservation actions, climate adaptation strategies, or natural resilience mechanisms mitigate biodiversity loss). A…

Found one worth pursuing?

Finding the call is the easy half. Scientific Network Management is the grant-writing practice behind this radar — 13 years of writing and managing EU-funded research projects, including two EuropeAid technical assistance contracts building biotechnology centres in Türkiye as Team Leader.

Proposal writingHorizon Europe, EU4Health, EuropeAid. Concept to submission, or a review of a draft you already have.
Consortium buildingFinding and approaching the partners a call requires, and holding the consortium together through drafting.
Project managementRunning the project after the award — reporting, deliverables, coordination, audits.

Talk to us What SNM does No obligation, and nothing here is conditional on using us — the radar stays free and complete either way.

What consortia for this call have looked like

2 projects have been funded under this line (HORIZON-CL6-BIODIV-04) in Horizon Europe and H2020. This is what they were made of — not a recommendation, just what the Commission signed.

22partners, typically
range 17–22
16countries per consortium
20 seen across all of them
39organisations in total
across those projects

The mix of organisations

15 research organisations
15 universities
6 companies
2 public bodies
1 other organisation

Who coordinated them

Coordinating an EU project is a demanding, specific job. These organisations have done it on this topic line before.

Aarhus Universitet · DK Kobenhavns Universitet · DK

This is the shape, not the consortium. It says how many partners these projects had and what kinds of organisation were in them. It does not know whether your idea needs the same mix, who is available, who is already committed elsewhere, or how the work and the budget should be divided. Those are judgement calls on a specific proposal, and no amount of public data answers them.

Building the actual consortium — finding the partners, agreeing the roles, and writing it so it survives an evaluation — is what Scientific Network Management does. Free either way; the radar does not change if you never ask.

Who else works on this

Tell us where you are based and this will show which institutions publish on this call's subject in countries that can take part, and whether you have already co-authored with any of them.

Nothing is stored about you — we log the institution searched for, never the visitor.