Horizon Europe and Open Science
Open Science is an integral part of Horizon Europe, from proposal preparation and evaluation to project implementation, reporting and the long-term reuse of research outputs.
Horizon Europe beneficiaries must provide open access to peer-reviewed scientific publications and manage research data responsibly according to the FAIR principles.
Projects must also explain how Open Science practices are integrated into their methodology, responsibilities, research workflows and plans for disseminating and exploiting results.
Page information
Topic: Horizon Europe Open Science requirements
Coverage: Proposal preparation, open access, research data management, FAIR data, repositories, licences, intellectual property and project reporting
Primary audience: Researchers, project coordinators, research managers, data stewards, repository managers, legal and innovation-support staff
Primary sources: Horizon Europe Model Grant Agreement, Programme Guide, Data Management Plan template and call-specific documentation
Last reviewed: August 2026
Open Science in Horizon Europe
Horizon Europe treats Open Science as a way of organising research rather than as a final publication activity.
Relevant practices should be integrated into research design, project methodology, data management, collaboration, validation, dissemination and communication.
Proposal
Describe how mandatory and appropriate recommended Open Science practices will strengthen the project methodology.
Implementation
Assign responsibilities, prepare the DMP and integrate data and output management into the work plan.
Publication
Deposit publications and research data in suitable trusted repositories under the applicable access conditions.
Reporting and reuse
Report outputs, preserve evidence of compliance and maintain reusable metadata and research objects.
Mandatory and recommended practices
| Practice category | Status | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Open access to scientific publications | Mandatory | Repository deposit, immediate open access and an appropriate open licence |
| Research data management | Mandatory | FAIR data management, a living DMP, repository deposit and documented access conditions |
| Validation information | Mandatory where applicable | Information about data, software, methods, instruments and other resources needed to validate conclusions |
| Early sharing | Recommended unless required by the call | Preprints, preregistration, registered reports and early data sharing |
| Outputs beyond publications and data | Recommended unless required by the call | Open software, models, algorithms, protocols, notebooks and workflows |
| Open peer review | Recommended | Transparent review reports, identities or review histories where appropriate |
| Societal engagement | Recommended where appropriate | Citizen science, co-creation and involvement of users, civil society and other knowledge actors |
Open Science in the proposal
The proposal should explain how Open Science practices are adapted to the project’s discipline, research methods, expected outputs and legitimate restrictions.
Research outputs
Identify expected publications, datasets, software, models, workflows, protocols and other digital results.
Open Science methods
Explain which mandatory and recommended practices will be integrated into the research methodology.
Data management approach
Summarise how data will be made FAIR, documented, protected, deposited and made accessible.
Consortium capacity
Demonstrate that the consortium has the expertise and resources required to implement the proposed practices.
What to address in the methodology
Expected outputs: identify the types of research outputs that will be generated or reused.
Early sharing: explain whether preprints, preregistration, protocols or preliminary outputs will be shared.
FAIR data management: summarise metadata, repositories, formats, identifiers, documentation and access conditions.
Reproducibility: describe measures for preserving software, parameters, workflows, methods and validation materials.
Restrictions: identify expected ethical, legal, security, confidentiality or exploitation constraints.
Responsibilities: indicate which partners or roles will coordinate data and research output management.
Resources: allocate staff time, repository costs, storage, curation and preservation resources.
How Open Science affects evaluation
Relevance
Practices should be appropriate to the scientific discipline, methods, expected results and users.
Specificity
The proposal should name concrete outputs, repositories, processes and responsibilities rather than provide generic commitments.
Feasibility
Planned practices must be supported by sufficient expertise, infrastructure, time and budget.
Methodological value
Explain how openness, transparency and reproducibility improve the quality and impact of the research.
Open access to scientific publications
Deposit: at the latest at publication, deposit the published version or the final peer-reviewed manuscript in a trusted repository.
Immediate access: provide open access through the repository without an embargo.
Licence: use the latest available CC BY licence or another licence providing equivalent rights.
Long-form publications: monographs and other long-text formats may use licences that restrict commercial use or derivative works.
Rights retention: retain sufficient intellectual property rights to comply with the repository and licensing obligations.
Validation: provide information about outputs, tools and instruments needed to validate the publication’s conclusions.
Publication compliance workflow
1. Check rights
Confirm that the publishing agreement allows immediate repository deposit and the required licence.
2. Select a repository
Prefer an appropriate disciplinary or institutional trusted repository.
3. Deposit at publication
Deposit a machine-readable copy of the publication no later than its publication date.
4. Complete the record
Add funding, project, licence, identifier and related-output information to the repository metadata.
Publication licences and eligible costs
| Publication type | Required or permitted licence | Cost consideration |
|---|---|---|
| Journal article | CC BY or a licence with equivalent rights | Publication fees are eligible only for fully open-access venues. |
| Conference paper | CC BY or equivalent where it is a peer-reviewed scientific publication | Check the venue and the project’s eligible-cost conditions. |
| Monograph | CC BY; CC BY-NC or CC BY-ND may also be permitted | Check the applicable agreement and publication model. |
| Other long-text format | May exclude commercial reuse or derivative works | The repository-deposit obligation still applies. |
Metadata for deposited publications
Metadata should be openly available under CC0 or an equivalent public domain dedication and should be machine-actionable.
| Metadata group | Minimum information |
|---|---|
| Publication | Authors, title, publication date and publication venue |
| Funding | Horizon Europe funding and the relevant funding organisation |
| Project | Project name, acronym and grant number |
| Rights | Licence and access information |
| Identifiers | Persistent identifiers for the publication and participating authors |
| Organisations and grant | Persistent identifiers where available |
| Related resources | Identifiers for data, software, tools or instruments needed to validate the conclusions |
Research data management
Beneficiaries must manage digital research data generated during the project responsibly and in accordance with the FAIR principles.
Plan
Establish and regularly update a Data Management Plan covering the relevant data lifecycle.
Deposit
Deposit data in a trusted repository as soon as possible and within the deadlines defined in the DMP.
Provide access
Make data openly accessible under an appropriate licence unless a justified restriction applies.
Enable reuse
Provide metadata, documentation, software and other information needed to validate or reuse the data.
The Data Management Plan
The DMP is a living project document that describes how data and related research outputs will be handled during and after the project.
Not a one-time form: update the plan when datasets, methods, responsibilities, risks or repository decisions change.
Not required in full at normal proposal submission: the proposal provides a concise research data management approach.
Project deliverable: the applicable deadline and update schedule should follow the Grant Agreement, Annex 1 and project deliverable table.
Operational document: connect the DMP with work packages, repositories, ethics, security, intellectual property and exploitation planning.
Main DMP sections
| DMP section | Questions to address |
|---|---|
| Data summary | What data will be generated or reused, in which formats, volumes and scientific contexts? |
| Findability | Which metadata, persistent identifiers, naming rules and discovery services will be used? |
| Accessibility | Where will data be deposited, when will access be provided and which restrictions may apply? |
| Interoperability | Which formats, schemas, vocabularies, ontologies and unit systems will support exchange and integration? |
| Reusability | Which licences, documentation, provenance and quality controls will enable future use? |
| Resources | Who is responsible and what staffing, storage, repository and curation costs are required? |
| Data security | How will data be protected, backed up, transferred and preserved? |
| Ethics and legal issues | How will personal data, consent, confidentiality, intellectual property and other restrictions be managed? |
| Other procedures | Which institutional, funder, domain or infrastructure requirements also apply? |
FAIR data and open access
Findable
Data and metadata can be discovered through identifiers, catalogues and searchable descriptions.
Accessible
Access conditions and procedures are explicit, even where the data themselves cannot be openly released.
Interoperable
Data and metadata use appropriate formats, schemas, vocabularies and qualified relationships.
Reusable
Data include licences, provenance, documentation and sufficient scientific context.
As open as possible, as closed as necessary
Open access is the default objective, but access may be restricted when openness conflicts with legitimate interests or binding obligations.
Personal data and privacy
Confidential information and trade secrets
Security requirements or classified information
Intellectual property and planned commercial exploitation
Contractual or third-party restrictions
Ethics approvals and informed-consent conditions
EU competitive or strategic interests
Protection of endangered locations, species or communities
How to document a data restriction
| Element | Information to record |
|---|---|
| Affected data | Identify the dataset, file group, variables or project stage covered by the restriction. |
| Legal or operational basis | State the privacy, ethics, security, contractual, IP or exploitation reason. |
| Access status | Define whether access is embargoed, restricted, controlled or metadata only. |
| Access procedure | Explain how eligible users may request access and who approves it. |
| Duration | Record whether the restriction is temporary, reviewable or permanent. |
| Accessible metadata | Publish the metadata that can safely remain openly discoverable. |
| Mitigation | Consider anonymisation, aggregation, secure access, embargo or publication of a reduced dataset. |
Licensing research data
| Legal tool | General use in Horizon Europe data sharing |
|---|---|
| CC0 | Maximises reuse by waiving applicable copyright and database rights to the extent legally possible. |
| CC BY | Permits broad reuse while requiring attribution under the licence. |
| Equivalent open licence | May be used where it grants rights equivalent to those required by the Grant Agreement. |
| Data Use Agreement | May define controlled reuse of restricted data but does not replace the required access and metadata documentation. |
Metadata for deposited research data
Metadata should normally remain open under CC0 or an equivalent dedication, including where access to the underlying data is restricted, provided legitimate interests and other constraints are safeguarded.
| Metadata group | Required information |
|---|---|
| Dataset description | Title, content, purpose, methods and scope |
| Lifecycle information | Deposit date and applicable embargo |
| Creators | Authors or responsible contributors |
| Funding and project | Horizon Europe funding, project title, acronym and grant number |
| Rights | Access status and licensing terms |
| Persistent identifiers | Identifiers for the dataset and involved researchers |
| Organisations and grant | Persistent identifiers where possible |
| Related outputs | Identifiers for publications, software, workflows and other connected research products |
Selecting a trusted repository
Disciplinary repository
Prefer a recognised domain repository when it supports the relevant data types, standards and scientific community.
Institutional repository
Use a trusted institutional service when it provides appropriate preservation, metadata and access support.
General repository
Use a suitable general-purpose repository when no appropriate disciplinary or institutional option is available.
EOSC-federated repository
Use a repository federated in EOSC when this is explicitly required by the call conditions.
Repository selection criteria
Persistent identifiers for deposited objects
Structured and exportable metadata
Clearly documented access and licence fields
Long-term preservation arrangements
Support for versioning and related research objects
Appropriate security and controlled-access mechanisms
Machine-readable interfaces and catalogue exposure
Clear ownership, governance and user support
Compatibility with relevant disciplinary standards
Research outputs beyond publications and data
Software
Source code, libraries, scripts, executable environments and software releases.
Models and algorithms
Trained models, model cards, algorithm descriptions, parameters and evaluation results.
Protocols and workflows
Experimental procedures, computational workflows, notebooks and execution configurations.
Validation resources
Instruments, reference materials, environments and supporting objects required to validate conclusions.
Supporting reproducibility
Inputs: preserve source data, samples, parameters and required reference resources.
Methods: document experimental, computational and analytical procedures.
Software: record names, versions, dependencies, environments and licences.
Workflows: describe the sequence of activities, inputs, outputs and decision points.
Provenance: connect generated outputs to the activities and agents responsible for them.
Validation: provide tests, metrics, uncertainty information and negative or inconclusive results where relevant.
Identifiers: assign persistent identifiers to stable, independently reusable research objects.
Persistent identifiers and connected outputs
| Entity | Recommended identifier or link |
|---|---|
| Publication, dataset or software release | DOI or another recognised persistent identifier |
| Researcher | ORCID iD |
| Research organisation | ROR ID where available |
| Horizon Europe grant | Grant number and persistent grant identifier where available |
| Software source | Repository URL, release identifier and archived software PID |
| Physical sample | IGSN or another suitable sample identifier |
| Related research outputs | Typed relations connecting publications, datasets, software, workflows and projects |
Protection, exploitation and Open Science
Open Science does not require a project to release results before assessing whether they require intellectual-property protection or another legitimate restriction.
Identify results
Determine which project outputs may have scientific, commercial, societal or policy value.
Assess protection
Review patents, copyright, database rights, confidentiality and contractual obligations before disclosure.
Select an access model
Decide what can be open immediately, released after an embargo or accessed under controlled conditions.
Document the decision
Align the DMP, dissemination plan, exploitation plan and repository record.
Communication, dissemination, exploitation and Open Science
| Activity | Primary purpose | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Communication | Inform broad audiences about the project, its activities and benefits. | Website, news article, public event or social media |
| Dissemination | Make project results known to audiences that may use or build upon them. | Scientific publication, conference paper or technical report |
| Exploitation | Use results in further research, products, services, standards or policy. | Patent, licence, new service, standard or follow-up project |
| Open Science | Organise research so outputs, methods and evidence are transparent, FAIR and reusable where possible. | Repository deposit, DMP, open metadata, workflow or preprint |
Open Science roles in a project
| Role | Typical responsibility |
|---|---|
| Project Coordinator | Ensures consortium-level implementation, reporting and allocation of responsibilities. |
| Data Management Coordinator | Coordinates the DMP, dataset inventory, repository decisions and cross-partner procedures. |
| Data Steward or Curator | Supports metadata, documentation, FAIR packages, quality checks and deposit preparation. |
| Work Package Leaders | Identify outputs and ensure that data-management actions are implemented within work packages. |
| Repository or Infrastructure Specialist | Advises on deposit, identifiers, access, preservation and technical integration. |
| Legal and Innovation Support | Reviews ownership, licensing, protection, exploitation and consortium agreements. |
| Ethics or Data Protection Specialist | Supports consent, personal data, sensitive data and controlled access. |
| Researchers and Output Owners | Create accurate documentation and implement the agreed practices in their daily work. |
Open Science project workflow
1. Proposal and grant preparation
Identify outputs, practices, responsibilities, risks, infrastructures and required resources.
2. Project start
Establish governance, inventories, naming rules, storage and the first operational DMP.
3. Research implementation
Apply metadata, documentation, versioning, security, quality and provenance procedures.
4. Deposit and reporting
Deposit outputs, provide access, connect identifiers and report results and restrictions.
Evidence to retain
Current and earlier versions of the DMP
Repository records and persistent identifiers
Licence and access-right information
Publication agreements and rights-retention evidence
Metadata exports and validation results
Dataset, software and workflow inventories
Ethics approvals, consent and data-protection documentation
Decisions justifying embargoed or restricted access
Software versions, environments and provenance records
Links between outputs, grants, organisations and researchers
Evidence supporting reported project indicators
OpenAIRE and EOSC support
OpenAIRE EXPLORE
Supports discovery of connected publications, datasets, software, projects and organisations.
ARGOS
Supports the creation and maintenance of structured Data Management Plans.
Compatible repositories
Expose project outputs and funding links through interoperable metadata.
EOSC services
Provide access to repositories, computing, workflows, data and supporting research services.
Common implementation errors
Providing only a generic FAIR paragraph: evaluators cannot identify project-specific actions, responsibilities or resources.
Treating the DMP as a final report: data decisions are made too late to influence research workflows.
Uploading files only to the project website: the formal trusted-repository requirement is not met.
Confusing FAIR with fully open: legitimate restrictions are ignored or poorly documented.
Closing data without explanation: the DMP does not identify the affected data, reason or access procedure.
Publishing without retaining rights: the author cannot provide the required immediate open access and licence.
Paying a hybrid publication fee from the grant: the cost may be ineligible under the Horizon Europe rules.
Applying one licence to every project object: publications, data, software and third-party materials may require different legal tools.
Publishing data without reusable metadata: files are available but cannot be interpreted or connected reliably.
Ignoring software and workflows: the evidence required to validate or reproduce results remains incomplete.
Assigning Open Science to one partner only: work-package teams do not implement the agreed practices in daily work.
Horizon Europe Open Science checklist
Expected research outputs have been identified.
Mandatory and relevant recommended practices are described in the methodology.
Open Science expertise is represented in the consortium.
Data-management responsibilities have been assigned.
DMP preparation and updates are included in the work plan.
Suitable repositories have been identified.
Metadata schemas and persistent identifiers are planned.
Publication rights-retention procedures are defined.
Data and publication licences are distinguished.
Ethical, legal, security and exploitation restrictions have been assessed.
Restricted-data access procedures are documented.
Software, workflows and validation resources are covered.
Repository and curation costs are included in the budget.
Reporting evidence will be retained.
Call-specific and Grant Agreement requirements have been checked.
How to use this page
For proposal teams
Use the proposal and evaluation sections to design credible Open Science measures and responsibilities.
For project coordinators
Use the workflow and checklist to connect obligations with work packages, deliverables and reporting.
For researchers
Use the publication, data and reproducibility sections when preparing individual research outputs.
For data stewards
Use the DMP, metadata and repository sections to organise practical project support.
Explanatory status
This page provides general explanatory and implementation guidance on Open Science in Horizon Europe.
It does not replace the applicable work programme, call topic, Grant Agreement, Annex 1, deliverable table, ethics requirements or instructions in the Funding & Tenders Portal.
Individual calls may impose additional requirements concerning EOSC, public emergencies, validation materials, security, data sharing or other Open Science practices.
Projects should verify all obligations against their signed Grant Agreement and current official guidance before making publication, licensing, repository or access decisions.