As Horizon Europe enters its mature phase, encompassing the years 2025 through 2027, the programme is undergoing a fundamental transformation that is far more significant than a routine mid-term adjustment. Whether you're adapting an existing Horizon Europe proposal template or building a new application from scratch, understanding these strategic shifts is essential for competitive success. The adoption of the Second Strategic Plan 2025-2027 has recalibrated the European Union's massive €95.5 billion research engine to align with a radically altered geopolitical and economic landscape. This evolution represents a significant departure from its predecessor, H2020, with a renewed focus on strategic autonomy and competitive resilience.
For researchers, innovators, and grant strategists targeting the 2026 work programmes, understanding this shift is not merely a matter of compliance; it is the prerequisite for competitiveness. The initial optimism of the "Green Deal" launch in 2021 has been complicated by the stark realities of industrial competitiveness, supply chain fragility, and security threats.
Consequently, the 2026 work programmes are less about broad exploration and more about strategic autonomy, deployment, and dual-use resilience. This "competitiveness" logic now permeates every cluster, shifting the evaluation focus from purely scientific excellence to tangible, scalable impact pathways that bolster Europe's economic security.
The New Horizon Europe Strategic Orientations: Navigating the 2025-2027 Plan
The architecture of Horizon Europe is governed by its Strategic Plan, which dictates the "Impact Logic" that evaluators use to score proposals. A critical error made by applicants is recycling proposal narratives from the 2021-2024 period or using outdated grant proposal templates. The "Key Strategic Orientations" (KSOs) have changed, effectively rewriting the "expected impacts" that every proposal must address.
From Four to Three: The Consolidation of Priorities
The most visible structural change is the reduction of the KSOs from four to three. This is not a simplification of ambition, but a consolidation of focus intended to reduce the fragmentation of research efforts.
Research must now demonstrate deployment pathways for climate neutrality. The 10% biodiversity spending target is binding, requiring "nature-positive" elements in energy and industrial proposals.
The focus shifts from "digitalization" to "technological sovereignty." Proposals must address dependencies in critical tech (AI, Quantum, Semiconductors) to secure EU supply chains.
This new "super-pillar" merges civil security, health resilience, and democratic governance. It signals that social stability and industrial competitiveness are now viewed as indivisible security assets.
The Biodiversity and Competitiveness Mandates
The 2026 work programmes operate under strict budgetary constraints designed to force alignment with EU policy. The most significant of these is the binding commitment to dedicate 10% of the total Horizon Europe budget to biodiversity-related topics in the 2026-2027 period. This is a sharp increase from the previous period and has profound implications for proposal writing.
Simultaneously, the concept of "Open Strategic Autonomy" has evolved into a hard criterion for eligibility in certain calls, particularly in Cluster 4 (Digital, Industry, Space). The 2026 drafts reveal an increase in topics that may restrict participation to entities established in Member States or associated countries that share specific security agreements.
The Mechanics of Evaluation: Blind Pilots and Lump Sums
While the thematic priorities have shifted, the administrative machinery of Horizon Europe has also undergone a revolution. The 2026 cycle sees the mainstreaming of two experimental mechanisms: Blind Evaluations and Lump Sum Funding. These are not merely administrative details; they fundamentally alter the strategy for proposal writing and consortium building.
Blind Evaluation Warning
In the first stage of blind evaluation calls, any direct or indirect reference to participating organizations or personnel results in the proposal being declared inadmissible. You must convey capability without identity.
Lump Sum Funding: The New Default
Lump Sum funding has graduated from a pilot phase to become the standard model for a vast number of calls in 2026. This shift is driven by the Commission's desire to reduce financial error rates and shift the focus from "cost reporting" to "technical delivery" (see official guidance). However, for the applicant, it front-loads the administrative burden.
In a Lump Sum proposal, the budget must be defined in granular detail before submission. Once the Grant Agreement is signed, this budget is fixed. There is no flexibility to shift funds between partners or budget categories without an amendment, and payments are binary: they are released only upon the completion of a Work Package (WP).
Pillar II Deep Dive: 2026 Work Programme Priorities
The core of Horizon Europe's budget lies in Pillar II, which is organized into six clusters. The 2026-2027 draft work programmes reveal specific thematic shifts that align with the new KSOs.
- Cluster 1 (Health): The days of purely biological research are fading; the winning proposals now almost always integrate a digital or data-driven component. Virtual Human Twins (VHTs) and Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) are key priorities.
- Cluster 2 (Culture, Creativity, and Inclusive Society): This cluster has evolved from a "soft science" niche to a critical instrument for defending democratic institutions. Major funding lines address the "Crisis of Trust" and the intersection of heritage and climate change.
- Cluster 3 (Civil Security for Society): The security cluster is increasingly operational, supporting the EU's external border management and cyber-defence strategies. It has the highest barrier to entry due to the requirement for practitioner involvement.
- Cluster 4 (Digital, Industry, and Space): This is the financial heavyweight of the 2026-2027 period, serving as the engine of the "Clean Industrial Deal." The strategic goal is unequivocal: ending Europe's dependencies.
- Cluster 5 (Climate, Energy, and Mobility): A landmark shift in the 2026 draft is the inclusion of calls addressing the feasibility of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) for commercial shipping and district heating.
- Cluster 6 (Food, Bioeconomy, Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment): This cluster is the guardian of the 10% biodiversity target. In 2026, it moves aggressively against pollution and pesticide use.
The "Impact Pathway" Masterclass: Writing Section 2.1
The most significant evolution in proposal evaluation for 2026 is the rigorous enforcement of the Key Impact Pathways (KIPs). In the past, applicants could get by with vague promises of "potential future benefits." In 2026, reviewers are trained to assess proposals based on a structured, causal logic that links project results to destination-level impacts via specific indicators.
The Three Dimensions of Impact
Horizon Europe defines impact across three distinct dimensions. A successful 2026 proposal must address all three, utilizing the "Impact Canvas" logic.
- Scientific Impact: Create high-quality new knowledge and strengthen human capital. Simply publishing is insufficient. Proposals must demonstrate diffusion—how the knowledge will be actively transferred to other researchers.
- Societal Impact: Address EU policy priorities and global challenges. You must map your impact to the specific expected impacts listed in the Work Programme Destination.
- Economic/Technological Impact: Generate innovation-based growth and create jobs. For Innovation Actions (IA), this is the primary driver. Reviewers look for "bankability" and scale-up potential.
Structuring the Narrative: Results vs. Outcomes vs. Impacts
The confusion between these three terms is the most common reason for lower scores in the Impact section.
Success Rates and Strategizing: Who is Winning?
Winning in Horizon Europe requires understanding the competitive landscape. Data from the interim evaluation provides a clear picture of the current success dynamics.
The overall success rate for Horizon Europe has risen to approximately 15.9%, a significant improvement over H2020's ~12%. However, this average masks deep disparities. Cluster 3 (Security) has high success rates due to specialized eligibility requirements, while Cluster 1 (Health) and ERC grants remain heavily oversubscribed. For detailed guidance on ERC Starting Grant applications, understanding panel expectations is crucial.
The "Widening" measures (aimed at EU-13 countries) are working. The share of collaborative projects involving Widening partners has risen to 58%. Winning strategy: Consortia led by Western European institutions that actively integrate meaningful roles for Widening partners score higher on "Implementation" and "Impact."
Decision Tree: Choosing the Right Instrument
Selecting the correct instrument is as critical as the scientific idea. Using an RIA for a market-ready prototype will fail; using an IA for basic research will also fail. Before applying, use our ERC eligibility calculator to confirm your qualifications for competitive funding streams.
- TRL 1-4 (Lab to Validation): Early Stage Research. Are you a single PI with a ground-breaking idea? Consider the ERC Starting or Consolidator Grant. Are you a consortium solving a specific challenge? Look at Research and Innovation Action (RIA).
- TRL 5-8 (Demonstration to Market): Late Stage Innovation. Are you a consortium scaling up a prototype? Innovation Action (IA) is your best bet.
- No Technology (Networking/Coordination): Support & Networking. Do you want to coordinate policy, standards, or networks? Coordination and Support Action (CSA).
Beyond the mainstream instruments, Horizon Europe's hidden funding opportunities offer strategic advantages for researchers who understand where to look.
Conclusion: Succeeding in the Final Horizon Europe Phase
The timeline for the remaining Horizon Europe calls is compressing as the programme approaches its end. With the official adoption of the 2026-2027 Main Work Programme expected in December 2025, the window for preparation is narrowing.
For applicants, the message is clear: Technical excellence is no longer enough. Winning proposals in 2026 will be those that can master the narrative of the "Impact Pathway" and navigate the administrative minefield of blind evaluations and lump sums. The successful applicant will be a hybrid: part scientist, part policy analyst, and part industrial strategist.
With budget reallocations clarifying the EU's priorities, the opportunities for well-prepared consortia are substantial—but only for those who read the fine print. Whether you're adapting a Horizon Europe proposal template from previous cycles or starting fresh, understanding the strategic pivot is essential for competitive success in 2026 and beyond.