Nordic Innovation: Promoting cross-border trade and innovation

Captured cycle: This page is retained for historical guidance. Confirm whether the program has reopened before planning an application.

Nordic Innovation: Promoting cross-border trade and innovation

This page explains Nordic Innovation’s full project proposal call for a Green and Competitive Nordic Region. The official call page is titled “Call for project proposals: Green and Competitive Nordic Region.” It sits under two Nordic Innovation programs: Innovative Solutions for 2030 and Nordic Forward: Resilience and Competitiveness for 2050. The published round is now marked closed on the official page, with a deadline of 11 February 2026 at 13:00 CET. Treat the details below as a practical guide to the published call and as preparation material if Nordic Innovation opens a similar round later.

In plain English, this was not a small travel grant, a single-country business subsidy, or a general research call. It was a larger Nordic consortium grant for projects that can show why cooperation across Nordic borders makes the idea stronger. A good application needed more than a promising technology or a well-written concept note. It needed a real cross-border partnership, a clear industry or market reason for the work, a budget that could be matched with at least 50% co-funding, and a credible plan for what happens after the funded project ends.

The official URL originally tracked for this opportunity pointed to the earlier project-outline step. That page is still useful background, but the better official URL for the 11 February 2026 deadline and up to NOK 6,000,000 funding level is the full project proposal page. The metadata on this page now points there.

Overview

Nordic Innovation used this call to invite larger project proposals within a two-program framework:

• Innovative Solutions for 2030 supports projects that help speed up the green transition and can demonstrate measurable effects by 2030. The official call highlights commercialization, market introduction, new or strengthened value chains, circular economy, and green transition in sectors with high climate or environmental impact.
• Nordic Forward: Resilience and Competitiveness for 2050 supports longer-horizon work on competitiveness, resilience, enabling technologies, deep tech, data-driven ecosystems, strategic collaboration structures, and cross-border value chains.

Both tracks are broad, but they are not vague. Applicants were expected to connect their idea to Nordic Innovation’s mission and to the joint Nordic Vision of making the Nordic region the most sustainable and integrated region in the world by 2030. That means reviewers were looking for projects that are practical, connected to real actors, and useful beyond one organization.

The call was the second step in a two-step process, but Nordic Innovation made clear that applicants did not have to participate in the earlier project-outline call to apply for the full proposal round. This matters for teams that discovered the opportunity late: the full proposal call was open to eligible applicants even without step 1 funding. The tradeoff is that applicants still had to arrive with a complete consortium and a mature proposal.

At a glance

What it offers

The full proposal call offered project grants from NOK 2,000,000 to NOK 6,000,000. The grant had to be matched by co-funding at least equal to the Nordic Innovation contribution. For example, a project requesting NOK 3,000,000 from Nordic Innovation needed at least NOK 3,000,000 in co-funding, creating a total project budget of at least NOK 6,000,000.

The co-funding rule applied to the project as a whole, not as an identical percentage for every partner. However, Nordic Innovation’s Q&A said it expects all partners to show some level of commitment. Cash and eligible in-kind working hours could count, but the contribution had to be demonstrated in the proposal. In-kind was not a free label for anything the consortium already does. It needed to be directly connected to project work and calculated according to Nordic Innovation’s personnel cost method.

The grant could cover working hours, external services, equipment and material, travel and meeting costs, and communication. That list is important because the official Q&A also warns against moving ordinary running costs into another category. If a cost is really overhead, general administration, or normal operations, do not disguise it as project equipment or services. Reviewers tend to read budgets as evidence of whether the team understands the program.

The best way to think about the grant is as implementation funding for a serious Nordic collaboration. It can support demonstration, market uptake work, applied technology activity, business model testing, policy learning, circular economy approaches, data-driven ecosystems, and similar work where the partners can show measurable benefit for Nordic stakeholders. It is less suitable for basic research, routine consultancy, one-country expansion, or open-ended networking without a defined implementation plan.

Who this is for (and who can use it well)

This call is for organizations that can build and manage a cross-border Nordic project. The official call lists possible project partners as companies, clusters, cluster organizations, ecosystems, public sector bodies, business networks, innovation institutions, and consultancies. The Q&A confirms that academic institutions, research institutes, start-ups, SMEs, and NGOs can participate if they are based in the Nordic countries and meet the consortium requirement. There were no published restrictions on what type of eligible entity could be the lead, but capacity matters: a new organization can apply only if it can credibly carry out the project.

The strongest fit is a consortium where the partners need each other. A proposal led by a company in one country, with passive supporting names from two other countries, will usually be weaker than a proposal where each partner owns a meaningful work package, brings a different market or technical capability, and has a reason to stay involved after the grant. Nordic Innovation explicitly evaluates industry involvement and benefit for companies in the Nordic region, so a purely institutional or academic proposal needs to show how companies, users, technology owners, problem owners, or value-chain actors are actively involved.

Good applicant profiles include:

• A circular economy project that needs suppliers, customers, infrastructure owners, and policy actors from several Nordic countries to test a common model.
• A technology or data project where the core value comes from cross-border use cases, shared datasets, common operating models, or Nordic-scale market access.
• A climate or resource-efficiency initiative that can show measurable impact in sectors with significant environmental footprint.
• A regulatory, market, or business model project where Nordic coordination is essential to adoption.
• A value-chain project where companies in different Nordic countries need to coordinate to commercialize or scale a new solution.

Weak fits include projects that could be done just as well by one organization in one country, proposals that mainly ask for funding to keep existing operations running, early-stage research without a clear path to demonstration or market uptake, and consortia assembled only to satisfy the country rule.

Eligibility in practical terms

For the full proposal call, the hard partnership rule was partners from at least three Nordic countries at the time of application. Nordic Innovation said it prefers as many Nordic countries as possible, but three is the minimum for this round. Only Nordic partners count toward that requirement. A non-Nordic university, company, port, association, investor, or expert may join the consortium, but it cannot receive Nordic Innovation funding and it will not help meet the three-country minimum.

The three-country rule should be treated as more than an administrative threshold. A serious application should explain why these particular countries, partners, markets, and value-chain roles belong together. If Denmark, Finland, and Sweden are named, what does each contribute that the others cannot? If Iceland or Norway is included, what specific role does that partner play? If one partner has offices in several countries, make sure the relevant country office is actually participating and documented. The earlier outline-call FAQ gave an example where a partner with a Danish office could count as Danish if the Danish office participates; the full proposal round requires each partner to sign a letter of intent as part of the application process.

State aid and de minimis rules can also matter. The official page notes that an undertaking may receive up to EUR 300,000 in state aid over a three-year period under de minimis rules, and that because Nordic Innovation is financed by the five Nordic governments, only 20% of a grant counts toward the de minimis limit for any one country. Applicants should still check their own de minimis position rather than assuming the rule is irrelevant. Public actors may be treated differently where they are not operating in a commercial market, but mixed consortia should handle this carefully.

Application process

Applications were submitted through Nordic Innovation’s application portal, linked from the official call page. The official page says the portal opened on 1 October 2025 and that applicants would need to submit by the stated February 2026 deadline. It also says length restrictions apply throughout the application form and that applicants would be asked to attach an activity plan and short CVs for the main participants.

The practical process looked like this:

1. Confirm that your project fits one of the two program tracks.
2. Build a consortium with eligible partners from at least three Nordic countries.
3. Decide which partner will act as project owner and contracting partner.
4. Agree the project scope, work packages, budget, co-funding, and decision rights before entering the portal.
5. Prepare the required attachments, including the activity plan and short CVs.
6. Collect partner letters of intent and any internal approvals needed to commit co-funding.
7. Submit through the official portal before the deadline.
8. Wait for review after the deadline; the official Q&A says applications are reviewed after submission closes, not as they arrive.

Nordic Innovation enters into a grant agreement with the project owner. According to the Q&A, Nordic Innovation disburses the full grant to that project owner, which is then responsible for managing the money and transferring agreed shares to project partners under the consortium agreement and approved budget. That means the lead partner is not just a symbolic coordinator. The lead needs financial controls, partner trust, and a clear way to handle reporting.

Timeline and deadline

The published full proposal round used this timeline:

As of this page update, the official call page marks the round as closed. If you are reading this after the deadline, the next useful step is not to prepare a late application for this round. Instead, use the call text to assess fit, build a better Nordic consortium, and watch Nordic Innovation’s funding pages for later calls under the same or related programs.

Required materials and preparation

The official page specifically mentions an activity plan and short CVs for main participants. The portal may have required additional structured fields and length-limited responses. Since applicants could not rely on a long narrative attachment alone, the core material needed to be concise and consistent across the form, attachments, budget, and letters of intent.

Prepare these items before working in the portal:

• One-sentence project problem. Write the practical problem in a way a non-specialist can understand. Avoid starting with a technology if the real problem is market failure, lack of coordination, missing standards, resource waste, emissions, or slow adoption.
• Nordic added value statement. Explain why a Nordic project is better than a national project. This should be specific: shared value chain, common customer base, similar regulatory challenge, cross-border data, complementary infrastructure, or need for Nordic-scale market uptake.
• Partner role table. List every partner, country, role, work package, co-funding contribution, and expected benefit. Do this before the budget is finalized.
• Activity plan. Break the work into phases, milestones, deliverables, responsible partners, and decision points. The plan should be realistic enough that a reviewer can see how work starts after contract signing.
• Budget and co-funding evidence. Separate Nordic Innovation funding, partner cash, partner in-kind working hours, and any other non-public contributions. Make sure the total co-funding equals or exceeds the requested grant.
• Short CVs. Use CVs to prove capacity for the project, not to list every career detail. Emphasize relevant implementation, technical, commercial, regulatory, or consortium management experience.
• Letters of intent. Each required partner should be able to confirm participation. Do not leave letters until the final week.
• Exit strategy. The official evaluation criteria require applications to explain how results and impact will continue after the project period, such as market uptake, follow-on funding, an ownership or operating model, or policy integration.

The most useful preparation meeting is not a writing meeting. It is a commitment meeting. Before drafting final text, ask every partner to confirm what they will actually do, what costs they will carry, who signs on their behalf, what data or facilities they will make available, and what outcome would justify their involvement after the grant.

Evaluation and how to write for it

The official evaluation model is clear enough to structure the application around it.

Impact is 40%. This is the largest score area. Do not only say that the project is important. Show what will change, who benefits, and why the change can scale. Include benefits for Nordic companies, especially where SMEs, value chains, market opportunities, entrepreneurship, sustainable growth, or new business models are relevant. Tie the project to Nordic Vision 2030 and to the societal challenge being addressed. Include a realistic exit strategy rather than a vague promise to continue.

Quality and relevance is 25%. This is where the proposal must show fit with either Innovative Solutions for 2030 or Nordic Forward: Resilience and Competitiveness for 2050. Explain the program fit directly. If the project is about market-ready green solutions, circular economy, commercialization, or green transition in high-impact sectors, say so and show evidence. If it is about deep tech, data, strategic resilience, security of supply, or longer-term competitiveness, explain why the time horizon and technology pathway make sense. Where relevant, the official page says TRL should be 6 to 9, so basic research should not be the center of the proposal.

Implementation is 25%. This section should read like a project that can start. Include work packages, milestones, deliverables, dependencies, risks, mitigation actions, partner responsibilities, and governance. Avoid describing every partner as “supporting” or “contributing.” A serious consortium has accountable owners for major tasks.

Budget and value for money is 10%. The score is smaller, but a poor budget can damage confidence everywhere else. The cost structure should match the work plan. Large external service lines need justification. Equipment and material should be directly linked to project activities. Personnel costs should follow Nordic Innovation’s approved hourly rate method. The Q&A states an hourly rate cap of NOK 1,450 and a maximum of 1,850 working hours per year across projects for a participant.

Deciding whether it is worth your time

This call is worth serious effort if your project can pass four tests.

First, the Nordic test: the project must be better because it is Nordic. If the same results could be achieved with one national pilot and a dissemination event, the fit is weak.

Second, the consortium test: at least three Nordic partners must be ready at application time, and they should bring complementary strengths. If you are still looking for basic partners a few weeks before the deadline, your risk is high.

Third, the co-funding test: the team must be comfortable matching the requested grant with eligible co-funding. If the co-funding is mostly aspirational or buried in undocumented staff time, fix that before applying.

Fourth, the implementation test: the work should be mature enough for demonstration, market uptake, adoption, policy learning, value-chain coordination, or structured innovation activity. If the idea is still basic research, exploratory brainstorming, or early product discovery, it may not be ready for this call.

If you fail one of these tests, the best next step is not to write harder. It is to improve the project. Add the missing partner, narrow the scope, get a customer or problem owner involved, document the co-funding, or convert the idea into a work plan with measurable outputs.

Common mistakes

Treating Nordic added value as geography. Having partners in three countries is not the same as having Nordic added value. The application should show why cross-border cooperation changes the result.

Making industry involvement decorative. The official criteria ask how the project benefits companies and involves industry. A logo, advisory role, or general support letter is weaker than operational involvement in testing, adoption, commercialization, procurement, data, or value-chain work.

Underestimating co-funding. The 50% co-funding requirement is at project level, and all partners are expected to show some commitment. Do not wait until the budget is finished to ask partners what they can contribute.

Confusing in-kind with any internal cost. The Q&A treats eligible in-kind mainly as working hours directly linked to the project. Travel paid by a partner may count as financial contribution, but it is not the same as in-kind working hours. General operations and overhead should not be hidden in eligible cost categories.

Writing a work plan without owners. Each work package should have a responsible partner and a clear output. Shared responsibility is fine for collaboration, but someone must be accountable.

Ignoring exit strategy. Nordic Innovation asks how impact will continue after the project period. Include a practical route: commercial ownership, follow-on funding, policy adoption, ecosystem governance, shared service operation, or another credible continuation model.

Submitting a broad theme instead of a project. “Green transition,” “resilience,” “AI,” “circularity,” and “cross-border innovation” are not projects by themselves. Define the concrete challenge, intervention, users, outputs, and expected change.

FAQ

Is the call currently open?

The official full proposal page is marked closed for the published round. The listed deadline was 11 February 2026 at 13:00 CET. Check Nordic Innovation’s current funding pages before planning a new submission.

Is this the same as the earlier project-outline call?

No. The earlier project-outline call was step 1 and offered up to NOK 200,000 for short preparatory projects, with no co-funding required. The page edited here now focuses on the full proposal call, which was step 2 and offered NOK 2,000,000 to NOK 6,000,000 with at least 50% co-funding.

Did applicants need to participate in step 1 to apply for step 2?

No. Nordic Innovation stated that the full proposal call was open to eligible applicants even if they did not take part in the spring 2025 outline call.

How many Nordic countries were required?

The full proposal call required partners from at least three Nordic countries at the time of application. Non-Nordic partners could participate, but they did not count toward this requirement and could not receive Nordic Innovation funding.

Could public actors, universities, SMEs, start-ups, or NGOs participate?

Yes, the Q&A says these types of entities can participate and receive funding if they are based in the Nordic countries and the consortium meets the three-country requirement. New organizations can apply, but they must show the capacity and competence to carry out the project.

What costs were eligible?

The official call lists working hours, external services, equipment and material, travel and meeting costs, and communication. Regular operating costs were not eligible.

Can co-funding be in-kind?

Yes, co-funding can include direct funding and eligible in-kind working hours. The Q&A says working hours must be directly linked to the project and calculated using Nordic Innovation’s approved method. Other partner-paid costs, such as travel, may count as financial contribution if they are eligible project costs, but applicants should document them clearly.

Can one partner carry most of the work?

The division of labor is up to the consortium, but it must make sense for the scope, targets, and milestones. A proposal where one partner does nearly everything and the others have no meaningful role may be weaker on consortium quality and Nordic added value.

Are regulatory sandboxes or business model projects eligible?

The Q&A says projects addressing regulatory barriers or testing policy frameworks can be eligible if they contribute to innovation, market readiness, or Nordic policy learning. It also says innovative business or financing models can be eligible if they contribute to program objectives and create measurable Nordic impact.

Is technology development allowed?

Technology development can be included when closely linked to the project’s innovation and impact objectives. The Q&A says the main focus should be demonstration, implementation, and market uptake.

Can project activities happen outside the Nordic region?

The Q&A says activities outside the Nordic region may be eligible if they directly contribute to the Nordic objectives and benefits for Nordic stakeholders. This is assessed case by case, so applicants should explain the Nordic relevance very clearly.

Will Nordic Innovation review an early concept or meet applicants before submission?

The Q&A says the team did not have capacity to meet individual applicant teams for alignment discussions in this call. Applicants could submit concrete questions, but they needed to decide and argue fit themselves.

What to do next

If you are preparing for a future Nordic Innovation call with similar rules, start with the consortium and co-funding, not the prose. Build a one-page readiness pack that lists the problem, the Nordic added value, the three-country partner structure, the main work packages, expected outputs, total budget, requested grant, co-funding sources, and post-project continuation route. Use that pack to test commitment with every partner.

Then compare the project against the evaluation criteria. If impact is not measurable, if the Nordic reason is weak, if industry or problem-owner involvement is superficial, or if the budget depends on undocumented assumptions, fix those issues before filling in the portal. A polished application cannot compensate for a consortium that is not ready to execute.

Official links

• Call for project proposals: Green and Competitive Nordic Region
• Earlier call for project outlines: Green and Competitive Nordic Region
• Nordic Innovation funding page

Use the official call page as the source of truth for dates, portal links, contacts, Q&A, and any future corrections. Secondary summaries are useful for orientation, but they should not be used to make deadline, eligibility, or budget decisions.