Report on second round of multiplier events

2 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 NOVASOIL INNOVATIVE BUSINESS MODELS FOR SOIL HEALTH Grant agreement ID: 101091268 Report on second round of multiplier event Project NOVASOIL Project title INNOVATIVE BUSINESS MODELS FOR SOIL HEALTH Work Package 5 Building a Community of Practice and dissemination strategy Deliverable 5.4 Period covered 28/02/2023-30/09/2025 Publication date 31/10/2025 Dissemination level PU Organisation name of lead beneficiary for this report EVENOR Authors Blanco-Velázquez FJ, Bravo-García J, González-Peñaloza F and Anaya-Romero M Contributors ALL Ref. Ares(2025)9374422 - 31/10/2025 3 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 4 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES This document has been reviewed by the NOVASOIL consortium according to the national reports and comments received TABLE REVISION HISTORY DELIVERABLE Ro w Version Date Reviewers Description 1 V1.0 24/03/2025 EVENOR Guideline approved and templates 2 V1.1 27/09/2023 ALL Version updated based on inputs received 3 V2.0 30/10/2025 EVENOR Final version with minor changes from previous version 5 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 Project Consortium Nº Participant organisation name Countr y 1 EVENOR TECH SLU ES 2 LEIBNIZ-ZENTRUM FUER AGRARLANDSCHAFTSFORSCHUNG GE 3 ZEMNIEKU SAEIMA LV 4 NEW BULGARIAN UNIVERSITY BU 5 CENTRE NATIONAL DE LA RECHERCHE SCIENTIFIQUE CNRS FR 6 KOBENHAVNS UNIVERSITET DK 7 TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITAET MUENCHEN GE 8 ASSEMBLEE DES REGIONS EUROPEENNES FRUITIERES LEGUMIERES ET HORTICOLES FR 9 ISTITUTO DELTA ECOLOGIA APPLICATA SRL IT 10 UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI FERRARA IT 11 WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY NL 12 CENTRE OF ESTONIAN RURAL RESEARCH AND KNOWLEDGE EE 13 UNIVERSIDAD POLITECNICA DE MADRID ES 14 UNIVERSITA DI PISA IT 15 ASOCIACION AGRARIA JOVENES AGRICULTORES DE SEVILLA ES 16 UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS GB 6 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 Table of contents 1 List of Abbreviations 7 2 Executive summary 7 3 Introduction 8 4. Multiplier Event Guideline 8 4.1 Bulgaria 10 4.3 Estonia 12 4.4 France 15 4.5 Germany 18 4.6 Italy 20 4.8 Netherlands 23 4.9 Spain 24 5. Cross-Event Analysis 26 6 Lessons Learned for Future Multi-Actor Engagement and Dissemination Strategies 32 Lessons Learned in Strategic Stakeholder Engagement and Audience Segmentation 32 Lessons Learned in Tool Dissemination and Utility Optimisation 34 Lessons Learned in Methodology and Systemic Barrier Mitigation 36 7 Conclusions 37 7 Acknowledgment 39 Annex. Guideline 40 Report 43 7 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 1 List of Abbreviations WP Work Package ME Multiplier event NGO Non-governmental organisation CoP Community of Practice SDGS30 Sustainable Development Goals 2030 EU European Union CS Case Study DoA Description of Action ES Ecosystem Services DST Decision Support Tool CN Carbon Neutral 2 Executive summary This document reports on activities carried out under task 5.4 (Multiplier events) in the framework of WP5 (Building a Community of Practice and dissemination strategy) of the NOVASOIL project. The deliverable provides an overview of the second and final series of multiplier events organised by NOVASOIL partners during 2025. These events followed the initial round held in 2023 and aimed to consolidate stakeholder engagement, validate project results, and collect final feedback on NOVASOIL’s business models, tools, and policy recommendations. Compared to the first round, the second series focused more strongly on testing the applicability and usability of NOVASOIL outputs, including the Knowledge-Hub, Decision Support Tool (DST), Incentive Evaluation Tool, and the policy briefs developed in previous WPs. The events integrated into this report involved over 100 participants across research, farming, seed production, advisory services, and policy sectors. Their feedback confirms the relevance, usability, and strategic value of NOVASOIL’s results, while identifying technical and logistical improvements needed to maximise long-term impact and replication potential. This updated deliverable includes a section “Recommendations and Improvements for Future Replication”, summarising key insights and actionable proposals for enhancing the design, dissemination, and replication of multiplier events in future Horizon Europe actions. 8 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 3 Introduction In the initial phase of the NOVASOIL project, a total of 10 multiplier events were held, engaging over 100 stakeholders across Europe. The primary goal of this first round was to introduce the project's objectives and invite participants to get involved in key co-design activities. These activities included developing innovative business models, understanding incentives and barriers to their implementation, and inviting them to participate in future toolbox testing. These events had a significant impact, not only during their execution but also afterward on social media, fostering collaboration and interconnection among various categories of stakeholders from different regions. Furthermore, the proposed methodology allowed for flexibility in execution for both organizers and participants, enabling events to be held either inperson, hybrid, or entirely online. Now, in this new and final round of multiplier events, the objectives have shifted, but we anticipate reaching a similar or even larger audience. To this end, in early 2025, a new guide was co-designed for the development of new easy, interactive, and flexible multiplier events. This was aimed at enabling the organization of joint events with other work packages or events together with other initiatives. 4. Multiplier Event Guideline The objective of this multiplier event, unlike the initial ones organized at the beginning of the project, is to present the project's results firsthand. This way, during the event's development, it will serve to increase the impact of the project's results, but also to determine if the sector's needs and demands are being met, allowing for the identification of required next steps and specific activities or sectors. The aim of this multiplier event, unlike the earlier ones organized at the start of the project, is to directly showcase the project's results. By doing so, the event will not only boost the impact of the project's outcomes but also help us understand if the sector's needs and demands are being met. This will, in turn, allow us to identify what further steps are necessary and in which specific activities or sectors. This event is open to the general public, with a clear focus on land managers, farmers, policy-makers, NGOs, researchers, and, of course, investors, all falling under the same stakeholder categories. All project partners are contributing to this task, meaning a multiplier event must be organized in each consortium country. We expect to reach a minimum attendance of 10 people at each. The one exception is AREFLH (BEN8); due to their corporate structure, their event will be entirely online and will include participants from various countries. 9 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 With the same flexibility granted at the project's outset, we recommend that the event doesn't last longer than 3 hours. This allows us to prioritize presenting the results and discussing them with the audience. The event should kick off with a brief overview of the project and its objectives, serving as a reminder, and then primarily focus on the following key results: -Preliminary DCE Results: During the Ferrara plenary session, DCE managers presented preliminary results from various case studies. Depending on your audience's interests, you can concentrate on a specific type or country, or discuss them more broadly. Remember to briefly mention the methodology used. -Toolbox Prototypes: We currently have three digital tools within the toolbox. These can be demonstrated and evaluated with the audience, letting them actively participate in understanding how they work. This information is incredibly valuable for identifying areas that need strengthening, and we can include these insights in our conclusions to guide future developments or benefit sister projects. -Policy Implications: The NOVASOIL project has assessed the main policies related to soil health, and several policy briefs have been published on this topic. The key conclusions reached can be a great starting point for discussion during your event. You might want to prepare a template with these main conclusions to facilitate an open discussion with your audience. Additional recommendations for organisers were provided: To promote discussion and interaction, the audience should ideally be provided with the main questions to be addressed beforehand. Various tools, both digital and paper-based, are available to assist with this. Options include using a platform like Miro or simply gathering comments on paper with sticky notes, similar to the method employed during the participatory activity organized by UNIFE at the plenary session in Seville. For events with more than 20 people, forming small groups of 6-7 individuals is recommended. Each group should be assigned a moderator to facilitate the discussion. The main conclusions from each group should then be summarized and presented to the other groups. Given the project's nearing completion, it is a key time to encourage attendees to follow the project on social media. Creating an event hashtag is advisable. The EVENOR communication team is available to offer support with this. Platforms promoted by the European Commission can also be utilized for communicating and disseminating these types of events. This may be a useful tool when a smaller audience is anticipated, though an attendance of 10–15 people from various categories is generally sufficient. 10 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 4.1 Bulgaria The 2nd Mutiplier Event organised by the New Bulgarian University (NBU) took place on 19th June 2025 from 12:30-17:00, at the Institute of Fruit Growing Plovdiv (Yuzhen, Остромила 12, 4004 Plovdiv, Bulgaria). The event was organised around three main project results (NOVASOIL conceptual framework , Tool-Box and Current Incentive Analysis for soil health practices in the EU) and one additional point focus on the interests’ audience (What Drives Winegrowers to choose Soil Health? Evidence from a Choice Experiment on Agri-Environmental Measures in Bulgaria. A total of 35 representatives from target groups participated. The gender distribution among respondents was relatively balanced, with 20 women and 15 men. The participant profile showed a strong presence from research entities (85.71% or 30 respondents), followed by private business (11.43% or 4 respondents) and public institutions (2.86% or 1 respondent). Survey results indicated a high level of relevance, with 88% of participants giving the highest score (5) on how well the results met their sector's needs. All participants found the presentation of results clear and understandable. Participants were asked to assess three key tools developed under the project: Knowledge Hub: This tool received the highest level of support, with 41.14%. This clearly positions it as the most valuable and widely applicable resource among those evaluated. Respondents highlighted its importance for providing structured access to information, facilitating knowledge sharing, and supporting professional collaboration. Decision Support Tool: Ranked second in overall assessment, this tool received support with 30.25%. The results indicate strong recognition of its value in strategic planning and resource management. Participants noted that the tool is especially helpful for analysing alternatives and making informed decisions in complex organizational settings. 17 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 The discussion on policy issues, delivered by Alexandra Langlais (CNRS), was informed by the results of Political Innovation Laboratories established in ten countries. EU Legal Framework Gap: The analysis highlighted that while the proposed EU Directive on Soil Monitoring and Resilience is positive in aligning soils with legal frameworks for air and water, it critically "falls short". It is limited to monitoring and does not provide the real legal protection originally envisioned in the 2021 EU Soil Strategy. Institutional Shortcomings: Institutional analysis conducted with project partners revealed a critical lack of coordination across governance levels, leading to fragmented and inconsistent policy approaches. This structural weakness is compounded by the fact that soil health is often addressed indirectly, as a secondary aspect of broader policy frameworks. Recommendations for Reform: Based on these findings, the project recommends targeted reforms to ensure more effective soil governance, including: reshaping Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) instruments to deliver soil-specific outcomes ; reinforcing advisory and support systems ; and promoting territorial and participatory governance to give local actors a central decision-making role. Participant feedback on the relevance and utility of the project results was overwhelmingly positive, with many noting the presentation of practical solutions and actionable insights directly applicable to the fruit and vegetable sector. The strong interest in testing the NOVASOIL Toolbox and engaging with the project's policy recommendations confirmed the audience's growing recognition of soil health as a priority, emphasizing the importance of continued engagement and cross-sector collaboration as the project nears its final stages. 18 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 4.5 Germany The 2dn Multiplier Event in Germany was jointly organised by the Technische Universität München (TUM) and the Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Agrarlandschaftsforschung (ZALF). The event was held virtually via Zoom on September 22, 2025 with 11 participants from research and private business, focusing on presenting the project’s final results and gathering targeted feedback from stakeholders. The event's agenda was structured to maximize the presentation of actionable results and facilitate discussion, particularly concerning innovative financing and market mechanisms for soil health. The program focused on the following key outcomes: 55% 45% Researcher Private Business 19 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) Results: Detailed results were presented from the DCE analyses, covering two distinct areas critical to soil health business models: Carbon Faring and Private Market for Ecosystem Services. Toolbox and Policy Implications: The session included an overview of the developing NOVASOIL Toolbox prototypes and the project’s key policy implications. Practice Report: A critical practice report from the CO2-Land initiative was presented, sharing real-world experiences and challenges encountered in the implementation of carbon farming. Overall, participants found the project results to be presented in a clear, understandable, and well-structured manner. The most relevant and applicable results identified by the audience were the DCE insights concerning the preferences of consumers/private individuals and farmers, as well as the acceptance studies on the part of farmers and companies. However, the open discussion highlighted several critical barriers to implementation and areas of opportunity: Financial Constraints: The core challenge lies in the severe limitation of financial resources. Stakeholders noted that comprehensive ecological remediation payments are currently not conceivable either through state or strictly separated private financing, except for basic funding. Market Visibility and Demand: A challenge was identified regarding the insufficient visibility of market places and the demand side for ecosystem services and sustainable products. Communication Gap: Participants stressed the need for results and findings to be successfully communicated to key decision-makers to achieve positive policy effects. Practical Applicability: Concerns were raised that DCE findings are often theoretical and that current efforts for soil health should clearly go beyond what is already considered good agricultural practice (e.g., erosion control and winter greening are often standard). To enhance the utilization of the project’s outcomes, stakeholders recommended the following steps: Deeper Detail and Publication: The audience requested deeper details on the results and expressed a desire for a formal publication of the findings. Practical Application Support: Requests were made for direct help with product development, enhancing external visibility, and developing recommendations for communication and acquisition to successfully recruit more farmers and investors. Addressing Mixed Financing: It was suggested that better operational control of measures is required, especially in the context of mixed public/private financing (e.g., bundled public services in 3 stages). 20 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 4.6 Italy The ME organised by UNIPI, UNIFE and IDECO brought together 6 participants, reflecting a targeted composition of stakeholders. The multiplier event was structured as a final restitution of the main interesting results of the project. To do so, after a short introduction of the NOVASOIL project objectives and the policy context as explored by WP4, the presentations were divided in two slots. 21 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 The first one aimed at presenting tangible results emerged from three territorial case studies in terms of existing or potential business model solutions for soil health. Results mostly concerned the work done throughout T2.3 of discussing and testing solutions for territorial business model solutions for soil health. Participants could gain deeper insights on the features, opportunities and barriers to SBM in different territorial contexts. Space was left for clarifying doubts and discussing questions. The second part concerned a national overview of consumers’ and producers’ willingness to pay for and adopt certain soil management practices, sustainability labels and contractual solutions. Moreover, producers’ perspectives towards soil health were clustered in a final presentation. These results allowed to reflect more broadly on the topic of what barriers and leverages there are towards the actual implementation of SBM for soil health. Finally, take home messages from all the case studies were used to draw some lessons learned and find common themes for future research. Including: - Soil degradation is a common challenge that requires new tools and shared investment. - Healthy soil is not enough: to be sustainable, a regenerative model must integrate agriculture with the value of the land. - Competitiveness and reputation of companies through innovative certifications and regulations (SQNPI, regenerative organic agriculture) - Consumers and producers are two complementary levers for supporting sustainable practices. The most valuable project outputs identified by attendees were: -Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) Results: The DCE findings were highly relevant for understanding the acceptability, preferences, and risk aversion related to soil health measures and financing. This data is crucial for 68,75% 18,75% 12,50% Research Entities Public Institutions Private Sector 22 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 developing successful business models and distinguishing preferences between farmers and companies. -Policy Briefs: These documents were deemed critical for disseminating key findings and recommendations to policy-making institutions, ensuring the project's impact at regional and national levels. -The NOVASOIL Toolbox: The Decision Support Tool (DST) was acknowledged as promising but requires refinement. Barriers and needs: - Cooperation is not an option, it is a necessity. Small businesses can only overcome their limitations (costs, logistics, marketing) through collective investment and strong business networks. - Difficulties in communication and collaboration between different actors in the area - Local authorities lack the technical expertise to feel adequately equipped to manage local issues. - A hybrid and differentiated agricultural policy is needed to remove economic and technical barriers and enable farmers to adopt sustainable practices. - Innovative research projects are needed that consider socio-economic as well as agronomic aspects. - Public support should not only finance temporary projects, but also actively support long-term collaboration, helping local actors to manage networks and overcome conflicts. 23 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 4.8 Netherlands Wageningen University (WU) was the responsible of the 2nd Multiplier Event in The Netherlands. The event took place on October 8, 2025, from 14:30 to 16:00, at the Ekoboerderij De Lingehof in Randwijk, a biodynamic arable farm that also serves as a partner in the sister project InBestSoil, facilitating a valuable clustering opportunity. The attendees primarily included farmers, employees, and the owners of the host farm. The discussions focused on findings related to WU's work, specifically the review of Business Models for soil health and the Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) results (WP2 and WP4). Regarding Voluntary Carbon Credit Markets (VCCM), the event confirmed that the willingness of farmers to participate in VCCMs, particularly those meeting the strict requirements of the CRCF Regulation, is very low. Consequently, this model is not deemed a viable business model for improving agricultural soil health. The consensus on this low potential was supported by several factors: low carbon credit prices; the difficulty for farmers to commit to long-term contracts due to high land rental rates, requiring landowner approval; and the high degree of uncertainty created by annual fluctuations in measured soil carbon content, which may not reflect the farmer's efforts. On the other hand, business models around Result-Based Payment, the project finding that farmers are reluctant to accept purely result-based payments for soil carbon storage (consistent with CRCF quantification guidelines) was generally agreed upon. This reinforces the need for additional incentives. Alternatives discussed included: - Public Payments (CAP Agri-environmental Schemes): These are mainly practice-based, offering compensation for effort even without 24 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 measured carbon content increase, thereby reducing uncertainty for the farmer. Practice monitoring is also generally less complex and costly than measuring actual soil carbon content. - Private Certification Schemes: The organic label is strong enough to guarantee a price premium, but other schemes (e.g., for bio-dynamic agriculture) are either underdeveloped or lack sufficient consumer recognition. Finally, regarding Payments Through the Value Chain, the project identified payments through the value chain as the most promising business model for supporting farmers' investments in soil health. However, this finding met with no general agreement among participants. Points of concern and discussion included: - Supermarket Responsibility: Supermarkets hold the key power to enable the transition to soil-friendly agriculture, by setting higher prices for products of higher standards or blocking sub-standard products. - Price Pass-Through and Transparency: It is essential to ensure that higher consumer prices effectively trickle down to higher rewards for farmers. This model must satisfy two key principles: "the polluter pays" and "Transparency throughout the chain". - Systemic Bottlenecks: Broader systemic barriers identified include a lack of independent advisory services (as many farmers receive advice from input companies with vested interests) and insufficient support from financial institutions for pioneering, non-conventional farming practices. The event confirmed that the Voluntary Carbon Credit Markets (VCCMs) regulated by the CRCF are currently not a viable business model for stimulating widespread soil health investment, primarily due to the high financial uncertainty for farmers and the practical limitations of long-term contracts on rented land. Stakeholders showed a clear preference for practicebased incentives (e.g., CAP Agri-environmental schemes) over purely resultbased payments, valuing the reduced risk and administrative complexity. While value chain payments were recognized as the most promising alternative, their success hinges on securing greater supermarket accountability and enforcing full transparency regarding price pass-through to farmers. Ultimately, achieving robust soil health requires overcoming critical systemic bottlenecks, including the lack of independent advisory services and insufficient financial support for non-conventional farming practices. 4.9 Spain Given the highly diverse nature of the stakeholders across the three Spanish case studies (Tamarguillo Urban, Vineyard under Integrated Production, and Olive Groves under Integrated Production), the national partners EVENOR, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM), and ASAJA Sevilla collectively determined that organizing a series of focused, small-scale interviews would 25 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 be more effective than a single event. These sessions, conducted between September and October, were specifically designed to gauge stakeholder perception regarding the viability and utility of the NOVASOIL project results. The interviews successfully engaged a total of 15 participants representing key groups, including farmers, NGOs, researchers, technical advisors, and policymakers. Each partner’s interview process included a common introductory section that provided a comprehensive overview of the project’s objectives and its core results. Crucially, the subsequent discussion was highly tailored to emphasize the project’s key deliverables and their potential for implementation, ensuring maximum relevance to the specific professional context and interests of the interviewee. The feedback gathered reflected the distinct nature of the three local case studies: - EVENOR (Tamarguillo Urban Case Study): Due to the urban and periurban focus, the results that garnered the most significant interest were the Digital Knowledge Hub (as a central resource for planning) and the Policy Briefs (for informing urban environmental governance). Conversely, the specific business models and the Decision Support Tool (DST) were considered less directly applicable given the nonagricultural land use. Nonetheless, stakeholders unanimously agreed that the project’s knowledge provides a significant incentive to explicitly integrate soil health considerations into sustainable urban development strategies. UPM (Vineyard under Integrated Production) & ASAJA (Olive Groves under Integrated Production): For the predominantly agricultural case studies, attention focused heavily on the practical application of the digital tools and economic models: - The Decision Support Tool (DST) was consistently identified by farmers and technical advisors as highly relevant for optimizing agricultural inputs and developing climate change resilience. This was particularly highlighted in intensive systems, such as the super-intensive olive grove, where optimizing inputs and labour management is key. - The Knowledge Hub was valued for its ability to provide quick access to information on incentives, collaboration opportunities, and best soil management practices relevant to crops like vineyards and olive groves. The interviews revealed consistent challenges and defined clear actionable steps required for the successful application of the NOVASOIL results within the Spanish context: - Implementation Challenges: The primary barriers identified were the low profitability of agricultural activity (especially rain-fed farming) and the anticipated reduction in CAP subsidies, underscoring the necessity 26 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 for new financial incentives. A significant technical challenge noted by participants was the need for the project’s technical results to be simplified into more user-friendly formats, such as simple fact sheets or farmer-facing guidelines, to ensure comprehension and widespread adoption beyond technical advisors. - Opportunities and Incentives: Participants recognized the current trend of digitalization and increasing regulatory requirements as a major opportunity, positioning technical advisors and external experts as key agents for disseminating and applying the project’s results. Furthermore, the possibility of generating additional income through carbon credits and ecosystem service payments was seen as the necessary financial lever to mitigate falling agricultural profitability. - Recommended Next Steps: To ensure the practical exploitation of the project’s outcomes, stakeholders strongly recommended the implementation of pilot farms (particularly in integrated production systems like the olive grove and vineyard) to test the tools in real-world conditions. They also called for the organization of practical courses or seminars and the facilitation of direct cooperation between farmers and carbon sequestration project developers. 5. Cross-Event Analysis The second round of Multiplier Events (MEs) and targeted interview series served as a crucial validation stage, allowing the NOVASOIL consortium to expose its final key deliverables—the NOVASOIL Toolbox (comprising the Knowledge Hub, Incentive Analysis Tools, and Decision Support Tool/DST), Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) results, and Policy Briefs—to a diverse, cross-European audience. A comparative analysis of the feedback received from the Netherlands (WU), Germany (TUM/ZALF), Italy (UNIPI/UNIFE/IDECO), France (AREFLH/CNRS), Bulgaria (NBU), Estonia (METK), and Spain (EVENOR/UPM/ASAJA) reveals striking convergences in systemic challenges but significant divergences in the perceived utility of specific tools, which largely correlates with the local stakeholder composition and the primary land-use context of the case studies. The methodologies employed across the countries varied significantly, reflecting the need to adapt dissemination strategies to national contexts and target groups. This methodological difference fundamentally shaped the nature of the feedback received. Location Methodolo gy Primary Stakeholder Focus Key Implication for Feedback Bulgaria (NBU) Physical Event Research Entities (86%) Feedback prioritized academic rigor and theoretical application. 33 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 First recommendation: Mandatory Stakeholder Matrix Pre-Commitment. Before funding release for a multiplier event, the organising partner must submit a Stakeholder Commitment Matrix detailing: 1) the target number of attendees, 2) the expected percentage breakdown across the three key typology groups (Research, Public/Policy, Private Sector), and 3) the specific local organizations (names and contact types, e.g., Farmer Union Chair, Regional Policy Advisor) that have confirmed participation. This elevates audience engagement planning to the same level of rigour as technical work package planning. Second recommendation: Budgetary Allocation for Private Sector Incentives. Recognising that the private sector’s time is directly tied to profitability, future project budgets must allocate dedicated funds for non-academic incentives. This could include covering travel costs, offer small financial stipends, or provide exclusive, high-value, bespoke summaries of the project results directly applicable to their business case. The reliance on purely intellectual curiosity, while effective for the research community, proves insufficient to draw a high-volume, representative sample from the agricultural industry. A successful engagement model must recognize and compensate for the opportunity cost borne by commercial stakeholders. Mitigating the Content Accessibility and 'Technical Language Barrier' A recurring challenge noted across several reports (especially those involving direct interviews with farmers) was the perceived complexity of the technical results. While researchers value detailed methodology and scientific metrics, end-users require simplified, actionable guidance. The core scientific outputs of projects like NOVASOIL (e.g., the complex algorithms underpinning the DST, the detailed legal analysis of policy coherence) are often presented by the technical experts responsible for their creation. This often results in communication that is inherently too technical for an audience focused on immediate practical application and short-term economic returns. The lesson here is the necessity of a dedicated, nontechnical intermediary. This role is not simply translation; it is contextualisation and simplification. In future consortia, a dedicated Dissemination/Communication lead must be responsible for auditing all event presentation materials, enforcing a "3-point actionable summary" rule for every technical slide, and ensuring that all terminology is mapped to the local industry standard, not the scientific consensus. First Recommendation: The 'Advisory Layer' Content Design. Future project structures should mandate the creation of two distinct sets of dissemination materials for all core outputs: a) The Scientific/Technical Report (for Research/Policy stakeholders) and b) The Field Factsheet/Implementation Guide (for Private Sector stakeholders). The latter must be visually dominant, use case study examples, focus exclusively on the Return on Investment (ROI), and omit detailed methodologies. For instance, instead of presenting the formula for the Soil Health Index, the factsheet should present "If you 34 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 implement Practice X, your predicted yield increase is Y% and your net profit change is Z€/ha." Second Recommendation: Utilizing Local 'Translators of Science'. The most effective engagement occurred when the event was led or co-led by a local, trusted agricultural advisory service or farmer union (e.g., ASAJA in Spain). These organizations possess the indispensable credibility required to bridge the gap between academic research and on-farm practice. Future consortia must strategically allocate budget lines to subcontract local advisory services for the specific purpose of content delivery and moderation, ensuring that the scientific information is presented through a prism of local trust, local dialect, and local agricultural reality. This investment in local social capital is more valuable than any amount spent on high-gloss corporate branding. Lessons Learned in Tool Dissemination and Utility Optimisation The cross-event data (Figure 2) highlighted a sharp dichotomy in tool relevance perception: operational tools (Decision Support Tool - DST) were highly prized by production-focused stakeholders (Spain, Germany), while strategic tools (Policy Briefs, Knowledge Hub) were prioritized by regulatory/policy stakeholders (Estonia, France, Italy). The lesson here is the need for a Dual-Track Dissemination Model that recognizes and validates both the operational and the strategic impact pathways. Implementing the Dual-Track Dissemination and Evaluation Model The project outputs cannot be treated as a monolithic "Toolbox." Their intrinsic value is perceived differently based on the user's function and influence sphere (field operations vs. legislative framework). Detailed Rationale and Implication: When a farmer (Private Sector) rates the DST highly (5/5 in Spain), it is because they see an immediate, tangible benefit in optimizing inputs and improving profitability. When a Public Administrator rates the Policy Briefs highly (5/5 in Estonia, France, Italy), it is because they need evidence-based arguments to support future legislative reform or budget allocation. Future projects must formalize this difference by: a) Segmenting the Dissemination Schedule: Events targeting policy actors should focus the majority of the agenda on the policy briefs and regulatory analysis, while events targeting farmers should focus 80% of the agenda on the practical application and ROI of the operational tools. b) Segmenting the Evaluation Metrics: The post-event survey (as used in NOVASOIL) must be designed to explicitly differentiate between the perceived utility of operational tools (measured by intent to use, frequency of use, and perceived economic benefit) and the perceived influence of strategic tools (measured by intent to reference in official documents, perceived capacity to influence policy dialogue, and perceived completeness of the legal analysis). Mixing these evaluation criteria leads to ambiguous conclusions regarding the project's overall effectiveness. 35 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 First Recommendation: Formalizing Tool Relevance Score Weighting. For project KPIs, the relevance scores must be weighted according to the audience. A high score for the DST from a farmer should be weighted higher than the same score from a researcher, as the farmer represents the primary intended end-user of that specific operational tool. This ensures that the final assessment of success is grounded in real-world utility rather than academic endorsement. The policy tools, conversely, should be weighted towards policy and public administration attendees. Second Recommendation: The 'Policy Window' Timing Protocol. Strategic outputs, particularly policy briefs and governance roadmaps, have a narrow window of relevance tied to legislative cycles (e.g., CAP reform, national policy adoption of EU directives). The lesson is that the final policy briefs must be launched immediately before a known legislative discussion or a public consultation phase, rather than simply at the end of the technical project phase. Future projects must include a dedicated task in the Dissemination WP to map and track these "Policy Windows" in all target countries, ensuring that strategic outputs are ready for surgical, maximum-impact deployment, rather than passive publication. The NOVASOIL experience indicated that Policy Briefs that were relevant to the evolving Soil Health Law debate received higher relevance scores. The Necessity of Practical Deployment and Hands-On Support A significant amount of qualitative feedback indicated a desire for physical, hands-on support (e.g., "Local visits in the field," "Training materials"). This reveals a fundamental gap between the digital project output (a tool, a platform) and its successful integration into complex, real-world farm management systems. Even the most intuitive Decision Support Tool (DST) requires user training, data input validation, and trust-building exercises to overcome inherent technological scepticism among traditional farming communities. The project-level multiplier events, while excellent for introducing the concepts, are insufficient for deep, individualised adoption. The key lesson is that the Dissemination and Exploitation strategy must include a Post-Event Adoption Support phase. This phase, which should span at least 6 to 12 months postproject, must involve funding follow-up activities executed by local partners, such as field training days, small-scale pilot demonstrations, and establishing a dedicated, localized helpdesk for data input issues. The initial positive perception of a tool rapidly degrades without dedicated technical support during the critical early adoption phase. The NOVASOIL project demonstrated that end-users, while impressed by the potential of the tools, frequently cite complexity and lack of detailed support as major challenges. First Recommendation: Structuring a 'Pilot Adoption Network'. Future projects should earmark specific funds within the exploitation work package to create a Pilot Adoption Network (PAN) of 5-10 farms per country. These farms would receive intensive, in-person training and their data would be actively used to test and validate the tools locally. These PAN farmers then 36 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 become powerful, credible local ambassadors for the technology, significantly increasing peer-to-peer adoption—a known best practice in agricultural innovation. The cost of this localized support is offset by the increased credibility and uptake achieved by the project overall. Second Recommendation: Mandatory Simplification and Abstraction of Results. The recurring feedback that results were "too much technique" or required "simple and easy to understand materials" highlights a failure to adequately simplify complex data. The lesson is not only about what is presented, but how. Future projects must enforce the creation of a "Tool/Result Abstraction Layer"—a dedicated component within the Knowledge Hub that presents the key output metrics (e.g., Soil Health Index, Carbon Sequestration Potential) using only visual indicators (e.g., traffic light system: Green/Good, Yellow/Caution, Red/Action Required) and clear, nontechnical language. This ensures accessibility for users with limited time or technical education, significantly broadening the potential user base beyond academics and specialized consultants. Lessons Learned in Methodology and Systemic Barrier Mitigation The Pareto Chart analysis (Figure 3), which aggregated qualitative feedback across all events, clearly demonstrated that Financial Constraints/Profitability and Policy/Governance Gaps were the overwhelming and most frequently cited systemic barriers. The most important lesson learned from this convergence is that the project's technical solutions (DSTs, SHEM models) cannot exist in an economic or regulatory vacuum; they must be actively and overtly integrated with strategies to overcome these external, non-technical constraints. The Local Contextualization Imperative The most successful events (measured by private sector engagement and high relevance scores for operational tools) were those that were deeply rooted in the local agricultural context. The Spanish events and the German events, both showing high private sector attendance, successfully framed the project results around specific local crops, regional economic challenges, and relevant local agricultural policy. The core lesson here is that the consortium’s central technical team should act as content providers, but the local partner must have the autonomy and responsibility to radically localize the presentation. This includes adapting visual materials, translating case studies to local farm types (e.g., replacing a Bulgarian case study with an Andalusian olive grove case study), and tailoring the discussion to the regional regulatory nuances. The project should not aim for perfect uniformity in presentation, but for maximum relevance in delivery. The constraint of language (requiring all presentations to be given in the local language, as was the case) is only the first step; true contextualization requires cultural and agronomic adaptation. First Recommendation: Establishing a 'Local Adaptation Budget Contingency'. A small, flexible budget must be allocated to each local partner 37 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 specifically for adaptation purposes—e.g., hiring a local graphic designer to rapidly create localized infographics, contracting a local farmer to present their own data using the tool, or purchasing refreshments that align with local customs. This small investment reinforces the perception that the project is addressing local problems with locally relevant solutions, rather than imposing a pan-European technical solution. Second Recommendation: Fostering Peer-to-Peer Learning over Expert Lecture. The most valuable interactions noted were those that facilitated direct dialogue between stakeholders, rather than a top-down presentation of results. Future event methodologies must enforce a shift from 'presentation mode' to 'workshop/discussion mode', minimizing formal presentations to 2025% of the total event time. The remainder should be dedicated to structured breakout sessions where stakeholders use the tools collaboratively, facilitated by the local partner. This ensures that the primary knowledge transfer mechanism is one of peer-to-peer validation and collaborative problemsolving, which significantly accelerates trust and adoption among the private sector. 7 Conclusions The NOVASOIL project, through its rigorous multi-actor engagement strategy encapsulated by the second round of Multiplier Events (MEs) and targeted Spanish stakeholder interviews, has achieved its primary objectives of disseminating project results, validating the utility of its tools, and, most critically, gaining a deep, cross-European understanding of the systemic barriers to soil health adoption. This concluding section synthesizes the key achievements, discusses the verified utility of the project's outputs, and outlines the strategic implications for future research and policy efforts under the EU Soil Health Mission. The successful execution of the dissemination methodology across seven diverse European countries (as documented in the national reports) confirms the viability of a large-scale, multi-partner approach to knowledge transfer. The project successfully transitioned from merely presenting scientific findings to engaging in structured, two-way dialogue with end-users, policy makers, and researchers. One of NOVASOIL's most significant achievements lies in its demonstrated ability to bridge both geographic and sectoral divides. The cross-event analysis revealed stark differences in stakeholder profiles—from the researchdominated discourse in Bulgaria and Italy to the pragmatic, private-sector focus in the Netherlands and Spain. This heterogeneity, while presenting a dissemination challenge, simultaneously validated the project's core hypothesis: that the effective scaling of soil health solutions requires contextspecific adaptation. 38 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 The data confirms that the most successful engagement occurred when the local partners acted as cultural and technical translators, tailoring the presentation of the Decision Support Tool (DST) and the Knowledge Hub to regional farming practices (e.g., olive groves in Spain, fruit and vegetables in France, extensive farming in Germany). This adaptation, often mandated by the local language requirement, proved essential for achieving the observed high relevance scores from end-users, particularly for the operational DST. The project did not just transfer knowledge; it validated the process of localized, culturally competent knowledge transfer. The core of the NOVASOIL exploitable results is the integrated Tool-Box, comprising the DST, the Soil Health Economic Model (SHEM), the Policy Briefs, and the Knowledge Hub. The stakeholder feedback provided a clear verdict on the perceived utility of these components: • Operational Tools (DST): Consistently rated highly by the private sector and farmers, demonstrating a strong perceived utility for day-to-day farm management and input optimisation. The DST's focus on actionable, on-farm recommendations (e.g., in the face of climate change challenges noted in the Spanish interviews) resonated directly with the operational imperatives of profitability and sustainability. Its value lies in providing a data-driven basis for adopting soil health practices. • Strategic Tools (Policy Briefs, SHEM Insights): These elements demonstrated high relevance among the Public/Policy and Research segments. The high scores in countries like Estonia, France, and Italy underscore the immediate demand for evidence-based analysis to inform the rapidly evolving EU legislative landscape, particularly concerning the forthcoming Soil Health Law and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). These tools are instrumental for actors focused on systemic change and regulatory coherence. The conclusion here is that the project successfully developed a Dual-Purpose Solution Set, simultaneously addressing the micro-level needs of the farmer (via the DST) and the macro-level needs of the policy maker (via the Policy Briefs), validating the consortium's multi-disciplinary approach. The most frequently cited thematic challenge across all events was Financial Constraints / Profitability. This finding transcends national borders and crop types, confirming a fundamental market failure: the current structure of agricultural value chains and policy incentives does not adequately reward or de-risk the transition to soil-health-improving practices. Stakeholders consistently highlighted the high initial costs, the prolonged return-on-investment horizon, and the risk associated with adopting nonconventional techniques. For example, Spanish farmers specifically pointed to the difficulties in rentability for rainfed agriculture and the foreseen cuts in CAP subsidies as critical disincentives. 39 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 The second most frequently cited barrier was Policy/Governance Gaps. This refers not just to the absence of supportive legislation, but to the complexity, incoherence, and frequent changes within existing regulatory frameworks (e.g., CAP). Feedback indicated a need for greater clarity and stability in long-term incentives. The current policy environment is often perceived as uncertain or even contradictory, discouraging the long-term investment required for true soil regeneration. For the policy-focused stakeholders, the high relevance rating of the Policy Briefs confirms that they are actively seeking evidencebased pathways to resolve this systemic incoherence. The NOVASOIL consortium concludes that successful implementation of the DST’s recommendations hinges on the parallel creation of an enabling policy environment that offers predictable, long-term rewards for ecosystem service delivery, reinforcing the "public goods" aspect of soil health. 7 Acknowledgment The authors would like to thank the EU for funding, in the frame of the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement GA 101091268. The document reflects only the author’s view. The Agency is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. 40 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 Annex. Guideline NOVASOIL INNOVATIVE BUSINESS MODELS FOR SOIL HEALTH Grant agreement ID: 101091268 Multiplier event guideline The objective of this multiplier event, unlike the initial ones organized at the beginning of the project, is to present the project's results firsthand. This way, during the event's development, it will serve to increase the impact of the project's results, but also to determine if the sector's needs and demands are being met, allowing for the identification of required next steps and specific activities or sectors. The aim of this multiplier event, unlike the earlier ones organized at the start of the project, is to directly showcase the project's results. By doing so, the event will not only boost the impact of the project's outcomes but also help us understand if the sector's needs and demands are being met. This will, in turn, allow us to identify what further steps are necessary and in which specific activities or sectors. This event is open to the general public, with a clear focus on land managers, farmers, policy-makers, NGOs, researchers, and, of course, investors, all falling under the same stakeholder categories. All project partners are contributing to this task, meaning a multiplier event must be organized in each consortium country. We expect to reach a minimum attendance of 10 people at each. The one exception is AREFLH (BEN8); due to their corporate structure, their event will be entirely online and will include participants from various countries. With the same flexibility granted at the project's outset, we recommend that the event doesn't last longer than 3 hours. This allows us to prioritize presenting the results and discussing them with the audience. The event should kick off with a brief overview of the project and its objectives, serving as a reminder, and then primarily focus on the following key results: - Preliminary DCE Results: During the Ferrara plenary session, DCE managers presented preliminary results from various case studies. Depending on your audience's interests, you can concentrate on a specific type or country, or discuss them more broadly. Remember to briefly mention the methodology used. 41 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268 - Toolbox Prototypes: We currently have three digital tools within the toolbox. These can be demonstrated and evaluated with the audience, letting them actively participate in understanding how they work. This information is incredibly valuable for identifying areas that need strengthening, and we can include these insights in our conclusions to guide future developments or benefit sister projects. - Policy Implications: The NOVASOIL project has assessed the main policies related to soil health, and several policy briefs have been published on this topic. The key conclusions reached can be a great starting point for discussion during your event. You might want to prepare a template with these main conclusions to facilitate an open discussion with your audience. Recommendations If you want to promote discussion and interaction, try to provide your audience with the main questions that will be addressed beforehand, if possible. There are various tools, both digital and paper-based, to help you do this. You could use a platform like Miro, or simply gather comments on paper with sticky notes, similar to how it was done during the participatory activity organized by UNIFE at the plenary session here in Seville. If your event has more than 20 people, consider forming small groups of 6-7 individuals, each with a moderator to facilitate discussion. Have each group summarize their main conclusions and then present them to the other groups. Remember, we're nearing the end of the project, so now is a great time to encourage attendees to follow the project on social media if they haven't already. Create a hashtag for the event! The EVENOR communication team can offer support with this. There are also platforms promoted by the European Commission that communicate and disseminate these kinds of events. This could be a good tool to use if you anticipate a smaller audience, though having 10-15 people from various categories should be sufficient. Within this document, you'll find the agenda template and the report that needs to be shared with the coordination team. Please remember that personal data should not be shared, and all personal information must be anonymized. P.S. Don't forget to take photos! It's always nice to have that kind of material for the final reports. 42 This project has received funding from the European Union’s HORIZON-AG - HORIZON Action Grant Budget-Based research and innovation programme under grant agreement GA 101091268