Enhanced assessment, intervention and repair of civil engineering infrastructure (RIA)
HORIZON Research and Innovation Actions
Basic Information
- Identifier
- HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12
- Programme
- TWIN GREEN AND DIGITAL TRANSITION 2024 TWO STAGE
- Programme Period
- 2021 - 2027
- Status
- Closed (31094503)
- Opening Date
- September 18, 2023
- Deadline
- February 6, 2024
- Deadline Model
- two-stage
- Budget
- €12,000,000
- Min Grant Amount
- €5,000,000
- Max Grant Amount
- €6,000,000
- Expected Number of Grants
- 2
- Keywords
- HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-TWO-STAGECivil engineeringOther engineering and technologies
Description
- Extension of the service life of civil engineering infrastructure, which reduces the need to replace infrastructure, and ultimately in an overall lower CO-2 footprint for such infrastructure
- Faster and more accurate detection and analysis of maintenance and repair needs in existing infrastructure
- Reduction in time between the occurrence of infrastructure maintenance and repair-related problems and the on-site intervention
- Reduced risks to health and safety of workers in carrying out tasks linked to infrastructure maintenance and repair
- Cost savings in terms of both operational costs and deferred or avoided capital investment costs
Regular maintenance and repair of civil engineering infrastructure extends their service life, which in turn reduces the need for their demolition and replacement and the related negative economic, environmental and climate impacts. However, it can be difficult and cumbersome to identify and address maintenance or repair needs, especially in locations that are difficult to access such as large or tall structures, deep shafts, or where elements are hidden from view. Intervention for maintenance and repair can also involve unnecessary risks to health and safety of workers.
Proposals should:
- Develop new technologies and solutions that facilitate timely identification of maintenance and repair issues in existing civil engineering infrastructure. Examples may include structural weaknesses, unacceptable deformation and fatigue, issues related to moisture including mould growth and corrosion, the effects of weathering and of weather-related events, faults in technical systems, leaks of water or chemicals, or other issues.
- Develop new solutions to monitor and to quickly and accurately analyse and assess the need for intervention, for example via digital twin and simulation technology
- Develop solutions that would intelligently recommend and prioritise relevant and timely action to address the identified maintenance and repair issues. This should include a risk assessment and application of state-of-the-art quality controls and documentation.
- Develop solutions that would carry out rapid, cost effective and safe intervention for maintenance and repair of infrastructure, for example using automated or remotely operated tools, or next generation egocentric AR solutions
- Address ways to reduce the risks involved with maintenance and repair, including the health and safety of workers
- Address ways to digitally record and continually update the maintenance and repair status of infrastructure assets and their component parts
- Build on existing standards or contribute to standardisation. Interoperability for data sharing should be addressed.
- Present a strategy for skills development, associating social partners where relevant, integrating SSH aspects and including relevant tools such as MOOCs (massive open online courses).
- Build on or seek collaboration with existing projects or solutions and develop synergies with other relevant European, national or regional initiatives, funding programmes and platforms, such as the New European Bauhaus.
- Seek to integrate insights from social sciences and humanities to maximise economic and social impact, including considering how workers carry out tasks and respond to safety issues.
Destination & Scope
This destination will directly support the following Key Strategic Orientations (KSOs), as outlined in the Strategic Plan:[1]
- KSO C, ‘Making Europe the first digitally led circular, climate-neutral and sustainable economy through the transformation of its mobility, energy, construction and production systems.’
- KSO A, ‘Promoting an open strategic autonomy by leading the development of key digital, enabling and emerging technologies, sectors and value chains to accelerate and steer the digital and green transitions through human-centred technologies and innovations.’
- KSO D, ‘Creating a more resilient, inclusive and democratic European society, prepared and responsive to threats and disasters, addressing inequalities and providing high-quality health care, and empowering all citizens to act in the green and digital transitions.’
Proposals for topics under this Destination should set out a credible pathway to the following expected impact of Cluster 4:
Global leadership in clean, climate-neutral and resilient industrial value chains, circular economy and climate-neutral and human-centric digital systems and infrastructures, through innovative production and manufacturing processes and their digitisation, new business models, sustainable-by-design advanced materials and technologies enabling the switch to decarbonisation in all major emitting industrial sectors, including green digital technologies.
This Destination will contribute to putting the European Union and Associated Countries on track for achieving climate neutrality of the industrial sector by 2050, while also reducing other polluting emissions, and for speeding up Europe’s independence from Russian fossil fuels, in line with the REPowerEU Plan, by means of cleaner, more efficient and more sustainable industrial processes.
The speed and scale of the twin green and digital transitions has accelerated, and significant opportunities lie ahead to position the European Union and Associated Countries as a technological and industrial leader of this transition, building on their world class R&I capacities and industrial base. Industrial ecosystems will not only need to develop, but also deploy technologies and reshape their goods and services towards a new reality, ensuring that industry can become the accelerator and enabler of the twin green and digital transition. It will also enhance the Union’s open strategic autonomy with regard to the underlying technologies. To achieve these goals, the activities in this Destination are complementary to those in Destination ‘Increased Autonomy in Key Strategic Value Chains for Resilient Industry’.
The most relevant policies of the European Commission on this front are:
- The European Industrial Strategy of March 2020, and in particular the Update of May 2021: there is now a renewed momentum in the EU to tackle its strategic dependencies as well as to boost its resilience across key strategic areas. The Covid-19 crisis revealed the importance of improving production response and preparedness of EU industry, in support of its long-term competitiveness.
- The Digital Decade of March 2021, where the Commission presented a vision, targets and avenues for a successful digital transformation of Europe by 2030.
- The Circular Economy Action Plan of March 2020 announced initiatives along the entire life cycle of products. It targets how products are designed, promotes circular economy processes, encourages sustainable consumption, and aims to ensure that waste is prevented and the resources used are kept in the EU economy for as long as possible.
- The Fit for 55 Package of July 2021, delivering the EU's 2030 Climate Target on the way to climate neutrality, given the process industries’ 20% share of global greenhouse gas emissions.
- The Zero Pollution Action Plan of May 2021 addresses both pollution and waste, where research needs could be tackled and is particularly relevant to advanced materials and the process industries, as well as to the manufacturing industry.
The topics serving the objectives of this destination are structured as follows:
- Manufacturing Industry
The implementation of the Green Deal has major repercussions for manufacturing. Products and related value chains need to be made circular, carbon-neutral and regenerative – in other words, industry has to make positive contributions to the environment and to society, and offer a negative carbon footprint for future products. Manufacturing is expected to be a key driver in this transformation of industry. Current challenges addressed in this work programme include bio-intelligent manufacturing; high-precision and complex-product manufacturing; circularity and remanufacturing; collaborative distributed manufacturing and business models close to the customers, including Manufacturing as a Service, to enable the evolution from the ‘smart factory’ to the ‘smart value network’.
This industrial revolution should not be to the detriment of workers. The lack of appropriate skills in manufacturing is becoming a concern in many sectors, opening the opportunity for the use of breakthrough innovative technologies to make manufacturing jobs more attractive; and more broadly to ensure that manufacturing provides prosperity beyond jobs, while respecting planetary boundaries.
To complement the support for the manufacturing industry, it is envisaged to support a call under the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, to help deploy advanced manufacturing technologies developed under Factories of the Future and Made in Europe partnerships, with particular emphasis on contributions relevant to net-zero industries.
- A new way to build, accelerating disruptive change in construction
The construction industry needs to improve its productivity and competitiveness, and upskill its workforce. Its transition pathway depends on greater digitalisation, resilience and resource efficiency across the board. This need has been heightened by recent rising demand following the pandemic, pressure to maintain and repair works and to address hazardous substances.
- Energy efficient and climate neutral process industries
From the R&I perspective, climate neutrality by 2050 should be the starting point for any action paving the way to a regenerative industrial transformation. The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on climate mitigation, released in April 2022,[2] points out that the goal of net-zero GHG emissions for industry is challenging but possible. It will need coordinated action throughout value chains to promote all mitigation options, including energy and materials efficiency, circular material flows, as well as abatement technologies and transformational changes in production processes.
In this context, the process industries' climate neutrality goal is strongly related to the objectives of becoming independent on fossil fuel and fossil fuel imports. To reach these objectives, production processes need to be energy efficient, implying advanced digitisation; renewable energies need to be integrated via electrifications or use of hydrogen; and abatement technologies including CCU for processes that are hard to decarbonise need to be further developed.
This Work Programme refers to the operational objectives of the Processes4Planet partnership, found in the respective Memorandum of Understanding.[3]
- Circularity and Zero Pollution in process industries
Energy-intensive industries need to embrace the circular economy and restorative feedback loops, not as an afterthought but as a key pillar of the design of entire value chains. In this context the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability, which aims to better protect citizens and the environment whilst boosting the innovation for safe and sustainable chemicals, and its related Strategic Research and innovation agenda are also key. Energy-intensive industries need to commit to engage in Hubs for Circularity and to adopt new collaborative circular business models. There is also a clear space to increase the circularity of industrial wastewater, in symbiosis with urban wastewater, recycling a much higher share of the water, including from the municipal sector to industry and valorising more components in the wastewater.
The Hubs for Circularity (H4C) will be a key instrument to advance the research and innovation agenda of European industries towards the Green Deal’s objectives. The H4Cs will implement a collection of industrial -urban symbiosis and circularity technologies at scale, which will lead to first-of-a-kind, lighthouse demonstrator plants of (near) commercial size implementing industrial symbiosis and/or urban industrial symbiosis. Starting from existing industry cluster or heavy industrialized urban areas, their aim is to collectively achieve and demonstrate at scale a leap towards circularity and carbon neutrality in the use of resources (feedstock, energy and water) in a profitable way involving all stakeholders (Industry, SMEs, local authorities, educational institutions and civil society). It is a new way to re-imagine the whole value chain in a cross-sectorial and collaborative way exploiting synergies and anchoring in the local ecosystem to optimize the incoming resources including investments. It is about building on creativity, digital tools, AI, and breakthrough technologies for implementing cost-optimal pathways and new value chains for the engineering of a net-zero circular economy.
Projects outcomes will enable achievement of the objectives of Processes4Planet partnership by demonstrating hubs for circularity (H4Cs) concepts[4], fostering circularity within and beyond process industries and driving the partnership’s innovation portfolio towards “First of a kind” demonstrators to de-risk investment for subsequent roll-out. (P4Planet operational objectives 8 and 9).
- Clean Steel
Related to the objectives for energy-intensive industries in general, the steel industry will be enabled to reduce its GHG emissions to the Fit for 55 targets, in particular contributing to fulfilling the new obligations foreseen in the revised ETS Directive to prepare for transition to climate neutrality and to take new pathways towards Circular Economy concepts.
Business cases and exploitation strategies for industrialisation: This section applies only to those topics in this Destination, for which proposals should demonstrate the expected impact by including a business case and exploitation strategy for industrialisation.
The business case should demonstrate the expected impact of the proposal in terms of enhanced market opportunities for the participants and deployment in the EU, in the short to medium term. It should describe the targeted market(s); estimated market size in the EU and globally; user and customer needs; and demonstrate that the solutions will match the market and user needs in a cost-effective manner; and describe the expected market position and competitive advantage.
The exploitation strategy should identify obstacles, requirements and necessary actions involved in reaching higher TRLs (Technology Readiness Levels), for example: matching value chains, enhancing product robustness; securing industrial integrators; and user acceptance.
For TRL 7, a credible strategy to achieve future full-scale deployment in the EU is expected, indicating the commitments of the industrial partners after the end of the project.
Where relevant, in the context of skills, it is recommended to develop training material to endow workers with the right skillset in order to support the uptake and deployment of new innovative products, services, and processes developed in the different projects. This material should be tested and be scalable, and can potentially be up-scaled through the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+). This will help the European labour force to close the skill gaps in the relevant sectors and occupational groups and improve employment and social levels across the EU and associated countries.
In order to achieve the expected outcomes, for particular topics international cooperation is not mandatory but advised with some regions or countries, to get internationally connected and add additional specific expertise and value to the activities.
To achieve wider effects activities beyond R&I investments will be needed. Three co-programmed partnerships will enhance dissemination, community building and foster spillover effects: Made in Europe for the manufacturing industries; and Processes4Planet and Clean Steel for the energy-intensive industries. Wider activities include the further development of skills and competencies (also via the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, in particular EIT Manufacturing, EIT Digital and EIT Climate-KIC); and the use of financial products under the InvestEU Fund for further commercialisation of R&I outcomes. For the energy-intensive industries in particular, links with the Innovation Fund are important.
Synergies:
For advanced manufacturing in general, synergies are necessary between the Made in Europe Partnership and the Digital Europe Programme, primarily Industrial Data Spaces, Cybersecurity Centres and European Digital Innovation Hubs.
Related to the construction activities, Cluster 5 addresses the energy performance of buildings, under the destination ‘Efficient, sustainable and inclusive energy use’, as well as the Built4People co-programmed partnership for a ‘people-centric sustainable built environment’.
For the energy-intensive industries, there are synergies for energy efficiency and the management of thermal energy in industry in Cluster 5, under ‘Industries in energy transition’; and with the Clean Hydrogen partnership.
As some necessary activities of the energy-intensive industries, such as first-of-a-kind plants, involve deployment beyond TRL 7, synergies with other EU programmes are essential in this context, in particular with the Innovation Fund, with the Life Plus Programme, and with the activities of the EIB. International cooperation in process industries will be strengthened through Mission Innovation 2.0 ‘Net zero Industries’.
Innovation Actions — Legal entities established in China are not eligible to participate in Innovation Actions in any capacity. Please refer to the Annex B of the General Annexes of this Work Programme for further details.
[1] Whilst Cluster 4 addresses KSOs A, C and D, in addition KSO B is becoming increasingly important, given the role of the industry highlighted in the zero-pollution action plan.
[2] IPCC report “Mitigation of Climate Change’, April 2022
[4] The website will be updated shortly with much more detailed info and examples https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/research-area/industrial-research-and-innovation/key-enabling-technologies/advanced-manufacturing_en#hubs-for-circularity-h4c
Eligibility & Conditions
General conditions
Applicants submitting a proposal under the blind evaluation pilot (see General Annex F) must not disclose their organisation names, acronyms, logos, nor names of personnel in Part B of their first stage application (see General Annex E).
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.
If projects use satellite-based earth observation, positioning, navigation and/or related timing data and services, beneficiaries must make use of Copernicus and/or Galileo/EGNOS (other data and services may additionally be used).
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.
This topic is part of the blind evaluation pilot under which first stage proposals will be evaluated blindly.
-
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.
Specific conditions
7. Specific conditions: described in the specific topic of the Work Programme.
Documents
Call documents:
Standard application form (HE RIA, IA) — call-specific application form is available in the Submission System
Standard application form (HE RIA IA Stage 1) — call-specific application form is available in the Submission System
Standard evaluation form (HE RIA, IA) — will be used with the necessary adaptations
Standard evaluation form (HE RIA, IA and CSA Stage 1) — will be used with the necessary adaptations
Lump Sum MGA v1.0 — MGA
Additional documents:
HE Main Work Programme 2023–2024 – 1. General Introduction
HE Main Work Programme 2023–2024 – 7. Digital, Industry and Space
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
Support & Resources
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 Services help you find a partner organisation for your proposal.
Latest Updates
CALL UPDATE: FLASH EVALUATION RESULTS
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-TWO-STAGE
EVALUATION results, STAGE 2
Published: 07.12.2022
Deadline stage 1: 07.02.2024, Deadline stage 2: 24.09.2024
Available call budget: EUR 37,000,000
The results of the evaluation for each topic are as follows:
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-01 | HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12 | |
Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls) | 19 | 9 |
Number of inadmissible proposals | 0 | 0 |
Number of ineligible proposals | 0 | 0 |
Number of above-threshold proposals | 19 | 8 |
Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals, EUR | 94,989,235.52 € | 47,906,892.51 € |
Number of proposals retained for funding | 5 | 2 |
Number of proposals in the reserve list | 2 | 2 |
Funding threshold 1 | 13.5 | 13.5 |
Ranking distribution (above-threshold proposals): | ||
Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 15 and higher or equal to 14 | 3 | 1 |
Number of proposals with scores lower than 14 and higher or equal to 13 | 4 | 2 |
Number of proposals with scores lower than 13 and higher or equal to 10 | 12 | 5 |
1 Proposals with the same score were ranked according to the priority order procedure set out in the call conditions (for HE, in the General Annexes to the Work Programme or specific arrangements in the specific call/topic conditions).
Summary of observer report:
The Independent Observer concludes that consensus meetings and panel meetings, and in overall evaluation procedures were carried with transparency, efficiency, fairness, consistency, impartiality, by applying homogenous criteria in compliance with the applicable evaluation rules for each phase of the selection exercise (individual evaluation reports, consensus reports, proposal cross-reading, panel ranking). The evaluation process was carried out in full accordance with the Horizon Europe documents on proposal evaluation.
IT systems SEP and CIRCABC worked very well, and they were clear and useful for the evaluation procedures and provided supporting documents to help the expert’s work. Webex IT tool was used for the meetings, and it worked very well permitting a good interaction level for the experts during their discussion about each evaluated proposal.
In this way, all the procedures to select the best proposals were very adequate to define the final ranking in order to select the best projects to be funded according to the call indication.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
We recently informed the applicants about the evaluation results for their proposals.
For questions, please contact the Research Enquiry Service.
CALL UPDATE: PROPOSAL NUMBERS
PROPOSAL NUMBERS
Call HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-TWO-STAGE (stage 2) has closed on the 24/09/2024.
28 proposals have been submitted.
The breakdown per topic is:
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-01: 19 proposals
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12: 9 proposals
Evaluation results are expected to be communicated in 3rd week of December 2024.
General reminder:
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.
Proposal part B page limit:
The title, list of participants and sections 1, 2 and 3, together, should not be longer than 50 pages. All tables, figures, references and any other element pertaining to these sections must be included as an integral part of these sections and are thus counted against this page limit.
The page limit will be applied automatically. At the end of this document you can see the structure of the actual proposal that you need to submit, please remove all instruction pages that are watermarked.
If you attempt to upload a proposal longer than the specified limit before the deadline, you will receive an automatic warning and will be advised to shorten and re-upload the proposal. After the deadline, excess pages (in over-long proposals/applications) will be automatically made invisible, and will not be taken into consideration by the experts. The proposal is a self-contained document. Experts will be instructed to ignore hyperlinks to information that is specifically designed to expand the proposal, thus circumventing the page limit.
Please, do not consider the page limit as a target! It is in your interest to keep your text as concise as possible, since experts rarely view unnecessarily long proposals in a positive light.
Proposal part B formatting conditions:
The following formatting conditions apply.
The reference font for the body text of proposals is Times New Roman (Windows platforms), Times/Times New Roman (Apple platforms) or Nimbus Roman No. 9 L (Linux distributions).
The use of a different font for the body text is not advised and is subject to the cumulative conditions that the font is legible and that its use does not significantly shorten the representation of the proposal in number of pages compared to using the reference font (for example with a view to bypass the page limit).
The minimum font size allowed is 11 points. Standard character spacing and a minimum of single line spacing is to be used. This applies to the body text, including text in tables.
Text elements other than the body text, such as headers, foot/end notes, captions, formula's, may deviate, but must be legible.
The page size is A4, and all margins (top, bottom, left, right) should be at least 15 mm (not including any footers or headers).
This document is tagged. Do not delete the tags; they are needed for our internal processing of information, mostly for statistical gathering. In that light, please do not move, delete, re-order, alter tags in any way, as they might create problems in our internal processing tools. Tags do not affect or influence the outcome of your application.
CORRIGENDUM
CALL UPDATE: FLASH EVALUATION RESULTS
Call
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-TWO-STAGE, 1 stage
TOPIC
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-01
EVALUATION results
The results of the evaluation are as follows:
|
|
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-01 |
|
Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls) |
37 |
|
Number of inadmissible proposals |
2 |
|
Number of ineligible proposals |
1 |
|
Number of above-threshold proposals |
19 |
|
Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals |
93,963,233 € |
|
Number of proposals in the reserve list |
N/A |
|
Ranking distribution: |
|
|
Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 10 and higher or equal to 9 |
6 |
|
Number of proposals with scores lower than 9 and higher or equal to 8 |
13 |
For questions, please contact the Research Enquiry Service.
GENERALISED FEEDBACK for successful applicants
after STAGE 1
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-TWO-STAGE, 1 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.
TOPIC HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-12
"ENHANCED ASSESSMENT, INTERVENTION AND REPAIR OF CIVIL ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE"
EXCELLENCE:
Clarity of project's objectives:
- For some of the objectives, the target values associated to the identified Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are not sufficiently presented.
Relation to other EU initiatives:
- The relevant research projects on which the proposal intends to build are not sufficiently identified.
- The development of synergies with other relevant European, national, or regional initiatives, funding programmes and platforms is not sufficiently considered.
- The way in which the work is building on relevant research outcomes of EU, national and regional research projects, initiatives and networks is insufficiently described / not explicitly presented.
Methodology:
- The application of the appropriate research methods is insufficiently described.
- The number and the type of pilot sites are not clearly provided.
- The conditions under which the proposed solutions will be demonstrated are not always determined.
- There is insufficient information regarding the material used for construction and repair so that all the variations among European countries are taken into account.
- The methodology used/proposed to perform inspections and repairs is insufficiently considered.
- Some of the damage, degradation categories do not explicitly indicate the type of deterioration mechanisms to be covered.
- There is insufficient information regarding the use of the proposed tools in specific conditions.
Technology Readiness Level (TRL):
- The targeted TRL at the end of the project is not explicitly indicated and not convincingly demonstrated for all the proposed solutions.
Open Science:
- The Open science practices are not sufficiently addressed.
Data management:
- The integration and processing of the data feedback and learnings from technician performing maintenance are not very well explained.
User group, stakeholder inputs:
- Stakeholder feedback to improve the project implementation is not very well explained.
IMPACT:
The credibility of the pathways to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts:
- The contribution to the outcome related to the cost savings (in terms of both operational costs and deferred or avoided capital costs) is not sufficiently demonstrated.
Wider Impacts:
- The contribution towards certain wider impacts, as specified in the respective destinations of the work program, is not sufficiently described.
Scale and significance of the project's contributions:
- Scale and significance of the project’s contribution to the expected outcomes and impacts are insufficiently quantified.
- Justification of achieving some of the KPIs is not convincingly described.
Barriers and mitigation measures:
- The barriers linked to infrastructure and investment are not well addressed.
- The mitigation measures linked to the usage of equipment or tools are not fully convincingly addressed.
Copernicus and/or Galileo/EGNOS:
Reminder: Whenever a proposal is using satellite-based earth observation, positioning, navigation and/or related timing data and services, beneficiaries must make use of Copernicus and/or Galileo/EGNOS (or other data and services may additionally be used).
In your stage 2 proposal, you have a chance to address or clarify these issues.
Please bear in mind the published FAQ (ID 31280): “What kinds of civil engineering infrastructure are included in the scope of topic HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12: Enhanced assessment, intervention and repair of civil engineering infrastructure (RIA)?”
“For the purpose of this topic, ‘civil engineering infrastructure’ means civil engineering works that may both be over or in the ground or water, including roads and runways, bridges, tunnels, pipelines, aqueducts, dams and reservoirs, ports, waterways, and installations which are the basis for rails of railways. The following are excluded: electricity generation installations, oil platforms or chemical plants, pylons and other facilities for transport of electricity, industry manufacturing installations, agricultural installations. Buildings are also excluded.”
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.
CALL UPDATE: FLASH EVALUATION RESULTS
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-TWO-STAGE, 1 stage
EVALUATION results
Published: 07.12.2022
Deadline: 07.02.2024
Available budget: EUR 37,000,000
In accordance with General Annex F of the Work Programme, the evaluation of the first-stage proposals was made looking only at the criteria ‘Excellence’ and ‘Impact’. The threshold for both criteria was 4. The overall threshold (applying to the sum of the two individual scores) was set for each topic/type of action with separate call-budget-split at a level that allowed the total requested budget of proposals admitted to stage 2 be as close as possible to 3 times the available budget (and not below 2.5 times the budget):
· HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-01 (Bio-intelligent manufacturing industries (Made in Europe Partnership)): 8 points
· HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12 (Enhanced assessment, intervention and repair of civil engineering infrastructure): 9.5 points
The results of the evaluation for each topic are as follows:
|
|
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-01 |
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12 |
|
Number of proposals submitted (including proposals transferred from or to other calls) |
37 |
70 |
|
Number of inadmissible proposals |
2 |
3 |
|
Number of ineligible proposals |
2 |
1 |
|
Number of above-threshold proposals |
18 |
9 |
|
Total budget requested for above-threshold proposals |
88,963,233 € |
53,639,044 € |
|
Number of proposals in the reserve list |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Ranking distribution: |
|
|
|
Number of proposals with scores lower or equal to 10 and higher or equal to 9 |
6 |
14 |
|
Number of proposals with scores lower than 9 and higher or equal to 8 |
12 |
19 |
Summary of observer report:
The Independent observer (IO) finds that the evaluation followed the applicable rules for the call, and that it was competently evaluated in a fair and equitable manner by both the experts and Agency staff. The IO did not observe any event or activity that gave rise to specific concern that might have jeopardised the fairness of the evaluation. The IO understands that the experts were comfortable with the process and the schedule, and many expressed support for the blind evaluation process, which would encourage new participation and reduce unintentional bias.
We recently informed the applicants about the evaluation results for their proposals.
For questions, please contact the Research Enquiry Service.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
GENERALISED FEEDBACK for successful applicants
after STAGE 1
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-TWO-STAGE, 1 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.
TOPIC HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01
"BIO-INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES (MADE IN EUROPE PARTNERSHIP)"
EXCELLENCE:
Clarity of project's objectives:
- Proposed objectives are not sufficiently described, not measurable, not verifiable, or not achievable.
- Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are not clearly defined, or they are identified only in a generic manner.
- Insufficient description of how KPIs will be achieved, measured and validated.
Ambition, innovation:
- Innovation aspect is insufficiently described (e.g., results on demo cases; strategies for marketing, commercialisation, Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) management).
- Background and foreground IPR management is not sufficiently addressed.
Extent to which the proposed work is going beyond state-of-the-art:
- "State-of-the-art" (SoA) is insufficiently addressed (e.g., SoA is incomplete/lacking depth analysis; not sufficient references provided to relevant publications or already existing products/patents).
- Advantages over alternative methods proposed in the literature are not fully analysed.
Technology Readiness Level (TRL):
- The start and the final/target TRL at the end of the project are not clearly identified.
- Insufficient proof that the appropriate technologies have been validated in lab.
- Insufficient evidence to demonstrate the achievement and verification of the final TRL (e.g., no clear evidence of the steps to build on from the start TLR until the final/target TRL).
Relation to other EU initiatives:
- Previous research and innovation activities, including European projects and initiatives, are insufficiently addressed (e.g., they were only briefly mentioned).
Methodology:
- Proposed methodology is not clearly presented/described (also in relation to scalability, if relevant).
- Methods employed are not sufficiently detailed.
- Choice of the appropriate techniques is not fully supported by an adequate justification.
- Regulatory requirements and standards are not clearly addressed or insufficiently elaborated on; the contribution to new standards is not mentioned.
- Full interconnection of the technologies employed along the production chain is not clearly highlighted.
- Scalability of methodology not sufficiently explained.
- Important features < of the various components and materials employed or to be developed > are not adequately addressed.
- Social and ethical aspects are insufficiently addressed; the integration of social sciences and humanities is only generically addressed.
- Sustainable model for production and recycling of the products is not developed; the sustainability of the concept to use certain materials as a natural resource in Europe is unclear due to lack of information about their supply.
Artificial Intelligence (AI):
- Technical robustness of the AI-based systems is insufficiently discussed/addressed, including the use of AI in < specific process >.
- Impact of AI application to the environment is not considered.
Interdisciplinarity:
- Interdisciplinary character of a proposal is insufficiently addressed.
User groups, stakeholder inputs:
- Target groups are insufficiently analysed.
Gender dimension:
- Gender dimension aspect is not adequately addressed.
IMPACT:
The credibility of the pathways to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts:
- The specific contribution of the expected outcomes and impacts to the project is not clear. The long-term expected impacts are insufficiently outlined.
- KPIs/estimations for expected impacts are not provided or they are insufficiently (partly) quantified/detailed.
- It is not sufficiently clear if and how the proposal results will be tested in the industrial environment or whether they will be translated in materials or applications needed by the industry.
Wider Impacts:
- Wider societal and environmental benefits are insufficiently outlined.
Scale and significance of the project's contributions:
- Scale and significance are not sufficiently detailed, or not fully estimated and quantified. Baselines and benchmarks are lacking clarity.
Barriers and mitigation measures:
- Potential barriers are insufficiently identified or only generically described.
- Potential barriers related to market entry/commercialisation, legal/regulatory aspects, need for industry partnerships, commercial and technical validation, variability in supply quality, logistics costs, health-related aspects, etc, are not properly outlined/ fully acknowledged.
- Potential barriers are not fully aligned with the expected outcomes and impacts.
- Mitigation measures are insufficiently addressed; The mitigation measures for the technical barriers are less convincing or they are missing.
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.
TOPIC HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-12
"ENHANCED ASSESSMENT, INTERVENTION AND REPAIR OF CIVIL ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE"
EXCELLENCE:
Clarity of project's objectives:
- For some of the objectives, the target values associated to the identified Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are not sufficiently presented.
Relation to other EU initiatives:
- The relevant research projects on which the proposal intends to build are not sufficiently identified.
- The development of synergies with other relevant European, national, or regional initiatives, funding programmes and platforms is not sufficiently considered.
- The way in which the work is building on relevant research outcomes of EU, national and regional research projects, initiatives and networks is insufficiently described / not explicitly presented.
Methodology:
- The application of the appropriate research methods is insufficiently described.
- The number and the type of pilot sites are not clearly provided.
- The conditions under which the proposed solutions will be demonstrated are not always determined.
- There is insufficient information regarding the material used for construction and repair so that all the variations among European countries are taken into account.
- The methodology used/proposed to perform inspections and repairs is insufficiently considered.
- Some of the damage, degradation categories do not explicitly indicate the type of deterioration mechanisms to be covered.
- There is insufficient information regarding the use of the proposed tools in specific conditions.
Technology Readiness Level (TRL):
- The targeted TRL at the end of the project is not explicitly indicated and not convincingly demonstrated for all the proposed solutions.
Open Science:
- The Open science practices are not sufficiently addressed.
Data management:
- The integration and processing of the data feedback and learnings from technician performing maintenance are not very well explained.
User group, stakeholder inputs:
- Stakeholder feedback to improve the project implementation is not very well explained.
IMPACT:
The credibility of the pathways to achieve the expected outcomes and impacts:
- The contribution to the outcome related to the cost savings (in terms of both operational costs and deferred or avoided capital costs) is not sufficiently demonstrated.
Wider Impacts:
- The contribution towards certain wider impacts, as specified in the respective destinations of the work program, is not sufficiently described.
Scale and significance of the project's contributions:
- Scale and significance of the project’s contribution to the expected outcomes and impacts are insufficiently quantified.
- Justification of achieving some of the KPIs is not convincingly described.
Barriers and mitigation measures:
- The barriers linked to infrastructure and investment are not well addressed.
- The mitigation measures linked to the usage of equipment or tools are not fully convincingly addressed.
Copernicus and/or Galileo/EGNOS:
Reminder: Whenever a proposal is using satellite-based earth observation, positioning, navigation and/or related timing data and services, beneficiaries must make use of Copernicus and/or Galileo/EGNOS (or other data and services may additionally be used).
In your stage 2 proposal, you have a chance to address or clarify these issues.
Please bear in mind the published FAQ (ID 31280): “What kinds of civil engineering infrastructure are included in the scope of topic HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12: Enhanced assessment, intervention and repair of civil engineering infrastructure (RIA)?”
“For the purpose of this topic, ‘civil engineering infrastructure’ means civil engineering works that may both be over or in the ground or water, including roads and runways, bridges, tunnels, pipelines, aqueducts, dams and reservoirs, ports, waterways, and installations which are the basis for rails of railways. The following are excluded: electricity generation installations, oil platforms or chemical plants, pylons and other facilities for transport of electricity, industry manufacturing installations, agricultural installations. Buildings are also excluded.”
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.
PROPOSAL SUBMISSION
Call HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-TWO-STAGE_stage1 was closed on 07/02/2024.
107 proposals have been submitted.
The breakdown per topic:
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-01: 37 proposals
HORIZON-CL4-2024-TWIN-TRANSITION-01-12: 70 proposals
Evaluation results are expected to be communicated in the 2nd half of June 2024.