Tackling specific requirements in CBE JU project proposals

The Circular Bio-based Europe Joint Undertaking (CBE JU) is a partnership between the European Union and the Bio-based Industries Consortium (BIC) that aims to promote a competitive European circular bio-based industry. In line with this objective, CBE JU offers funding opportunities for projects developing innovative and sustainable bio-based solutions.

CBE JU project proposals follow the rules and procedures of Horizon Europe (HE), the EU’s research and innovation programme. However, there are some specific requirements to this call, further described in the work programme. Although these requirements may vary slightly between different calls, most of them have been consistent across the CBE JU calls (2022, 2023 and 2024). In this blog post, we will analyse those specific requirements which are exclusive of CBE JU Research and Innovation Actions (RIAs), Innovation Actions (IAs), and Flagships (FLAGs) and explain how to address them in your CBE JU project proposal.

Feedstock eligibility and BIC membership

CBE JU RIA, IA and FLAG proposals include a mandatory section at the beginning of the document with questions on feedstock sourcing and sustainability as well as on the participation of BIC members.

To be eligible for funding, project target feedstocks must comply with the requirements stated in this section, and thus the answer to feedstock sourcing and sustainability questions should be “Yes”.

There is also a question asking if there are BIC members in the consortium. Although this is not a mandatory requirement for RIAs, IAs and FLAGs demand a 15 and 20% level of in-kind contribution to operational activities (IKOP) respectively, that can only be achieved by including industry BIC members in the consortium. It is also recommended that proposals include as many BIC members with a valid BIC membership certificate as possible. Thus, the answer to this question should be “Yes” for IAs and FLAGs, and preferably also for RIAs.

Description of feedstock

Project target feedstocks should be described in a dedicated subsection in Part B – Section 1.2. Methodology. The description should include how they are sourced and ensure they comply with the list of eligible feedstocks in CBE JU SRIA Annex V, which mostly includes 2^nd (bio-based feedstocks not suitable for human consumption) and 3^rd (biomass derived from algae) generation bio-based feedstocks. This subsection also needs to explain, in an additional point, how target feedstocks comply with the “food first” (not using feedstocks which are fit for human consumption) and “cascading use” (the efficient utilisation of resources – e.g., residues, recycled materials – to extend total biomass availability) principles.

Environmental performance – Ex-ante assessment

CBE JU Proposals (RIAs, IAs and FLAGs) should include a subsection in Part B – Section 1.2. Methodology where an ex-ante (prior to actual results) assessment of the environmental performance of the project is described. This assessment should include:

• Identification and description of environmental critical issues related to the project and how the project addresses them (e.g., more efficient use of resources as a solution to resource depletion, reduced energy consumption or specific environmental impacts).
• Ex-ante estimation of the environmental sustainability performance of the project: this point should explicitly describe and quantify the project processes or products contribution to climate neutrality, resource efficiency, zero pollution (addressing impacts on air, water and soil quality if relevant) and circularity, compared to best performing available solutions. A good way to address this point is a table where existing solutions are compared to project solutions (including quantifications).
• Carbon removal potential: a detailed description (e.g., a bullet point list) of how the project processes and/or products contribute to eliminate or divert carbon from the atmosphere, describing specifically if they contribute to carbon capture and storage (CCS – processes in which CO₂ from industrial installations is separated and stored long-term) and/or carbon capture and use (CCU – when separated CO₂ is used directly for other processes).

Environmental sustainability and circularity – Ex-post assessment

Proposals also need to include the planning and description of an ex-post (based on actual project results) assessment of the environmental sustainability and circularity of all the processes/products resulting from the project and how they compare with the most effective available alternatives. This assessment should be described in the Work plan, as part of Part B – Section 3.1 Work plan and resources. The specific requirements are different for each type of action:

• RIAs should include a specific task where project results will be analysed to identify potential advances in the environmental performance of processes and products developed in the project, quantified and compared to available options. The scope, assumptions and limits of the assessment should be clearly described.
• IAs should include a work package (WP) or task where a life-cycle assessment (LCA) on the environmental performance of the project products/processes will be conducted. The LCA should be based on standardised methodologies, Commission recommendations and EU norms, and particularly, the standards developed by CEN/TC 411 for bio-based products.
• FLAGs should also include a WP or task where a full assessment of the impacts and circularity of the project’s processes/products will be conducted. This assessment should be based on life-cycle-sustainability assessment (LCSA) methodologies and be also aligned with recognised standards, certifications, Commission recommendations and norms.

Both LCAs and LCSAs should apply cradle-to-grave (an assessment that considers impacts at all stages of a product’s life cycle, from the extraction of natural resources to its ultimate disposal) or cradle-to-cradle (a design in which products can be reused or recycled at the end of their initial useful life) designs and justify why. These details should be explicitly described in the proposal, in the work plan subsection, and preferably also in in Part B – Section 1.2. Methodology.

The outputs of the LCA or LCSA assessments should be published in line with the principles of Open science (FAIR data) and uploaded to the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC). Additional ways of publishing the results like technical publications or sharing with the European Knowledge Centre for Bioeconomy should also be considered. Being part of the Open Science strategy of the project, this information should be clearly displayed in the dedicated Open Science subsection in Part B – Section 1.2. Methodology.

Economic aspects

CBE JU Proposals (RIAs, IAs and FLAGs) should include an economic assessment which will require a different level of detail and contents depending on the type of action.

In RIAs, Section 2.2. Measures to maximise impact – Dissemination, exploitation and communication should include an economic viability assessment of the products/processes to be developed in the project. This assessment consists in a simplified business case/model including:

• Market analysis: description of the potential market, market size, trends, market value and projections.
• Value chain analysis: description of the foreseen value chains for the products/processes, including necessary actors and the foreseen role of involved project partners.
• Financial projections on production costs, revenues, profit of the project’s products/processes. A table with a 5-year forecast since the expected beginning of commercialisation can be a good option to tackle this. This table should be completed with a description of the assumptions.

For IAs and FLAGs, a more detailed description of the business case and model is required, also in Section 2.2. This business case and model should include at least:

• Explanation of the technical, economic, social, environmental and regulatory aspects of the project: this information can be tackled for example through a detailed PESTLE – political (P), economic (E), social (S), technological (T), legal (L), and environmental (E) factors – analysis.
• Assessment of the risks, costs and benefits versus alternatives: description of competitors, with limitations and advantages of the project processes/products.
• Detailed description of the actors involved in the value chain and the relationships among them.
• Financial forecast, similar to the one described for RIAs but providing more detail.

FLAGs also need to include as an annex, a preliminary business plan, describing in detail how the business will be developed. This business plan should include the expected cost structure, funding, and projected revenues, outlining the planned actions, their schedules, and the individuals involved. It should also consider technical, economic, market, social, environmental, and regulatory factors using data and assumptions where necessary. Risks and mitigation/contingency measures should also be identified and described. There is no restriction on the length of this annex, however it is recommended to keep it as concise and comprehensive as possible.