UK AHRC “Design Generators” Round Two Grants: Up to £200,000 for Green Transition Design Projects

UK AHRC “Design Generators” Round Two Grants: Up to £200,000 for Green Transition Design Projects

The Design Generators programme from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) is open for its second round. It supports design-led research that creates practical interventions within existing systems and contributes to the green transition. The programme is delivered through UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), with Future Observatory serving as the wider engagement hub in partnership with the Design Museum.

This is not the first-round call that closed in April. Round two is a new application opportunity with a different emphasis: applicants should work with communities, stakeholders, and system actors to identify points where design can improve the way an existing system works. The official scope names examples such as healthcare, food networks, governance structures, financial infrastructures, and other societal frameworks. A proposal should therefore explain both the system problem and the specific intervention that research will co-develop and test.

The round is open. Applications opened on 21 July 2026 and AHRC must receive them by 29 September 2026 at 4:00pm UK time. Awards must last between nine and 12 months, and projects must start by 1 February 2027. The closing date is the date in the official record; applicants should also allow time for their own research office and finance checks.

Design Generators round two at a glance

The award range is not a promise that every successful project receives the maximum. The application should request the amount needed for a credible nine-to-12-month programme. AHRC funds 80% of the FEC, while the host organisation remains responsible for the standard remaining 20% of FEC. The official guidance also says there is no additional matched-funding requirement beyond that standard FEC contribution. Contributions from third-party partners can be direct or in kind, but they should have a clear role and value.

What round two is looking for

The programme treats design as a way of working with users, customers, citizens, and communities to improve products, services, built environments, and systems. The research can be single-discipline, interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, or transdisciplinary, but the majority of the disciplinary focus must sit within the AHRC remit. Practice-based and practice-led research are supported.

Round two focuses on interventions within existing systems. That means a strong proposal will not stop at a broad statement about climate change or sustainable innovation. It will identify a real system, the people affected by it, the point where change may be possible, and the design and arts-and-humanities methods that will produce useful evidence. A project might examine how a local food network could become more circular, how a public service could support lower-carbon choices without worsening inequality, or how a community organisation could become more resilient while responding to environmental pressure. Those are examples of the type of system framing encouraged by the official call, not a prescribed list of projects.

The intervention must be grounded in research. The call specifically points to approaches including design research, ethnography, and visual arts, while also welcoming other relevant arts and humanities methods. The proposal should show how those methods will shape decisions, not merely appear in a dissemination section. For example, community research might reveal that a proposed green service creates an access barrier; participatory design could then change the service model; visual or practice-based work could help people examine alternatives; and evaluation could document what changed, for whom, and under which conditions.

AHRC is also looking for collaboration and a path to impact beyond the grant. Every project must include at least one non-academic co-lead. This role can be held by a relevant business, public-sector body, third-sector organisation, civil-society group, or community organisation that has the capacity to help deliver impact. A non-academic co-lead is different from a project partner: co-leads are part of the core team and can request eligible costs, while project partners normally contribute cash, equipment, staff time, facilities, data, or other support and do not claim grant funding through this opportunity.

The application should explain how decisions will be made with communities and stakeholders, how participation will be supported, and how the resulting intervention could be adapted to a larger population, another place, a related sector, or a policy setting. “Scalable” does not require a national rollout during the grant. It requires a defensible account of what can travel, what depends on local conditions, and what evidence another organisation would need before adapting the work.

Who can apply

The project lead must be actively engaged in postdoctoral research and be of postdoctoral standing. The official guidance says this can be demonstrated through a doctorate or equivalent research experience or training, together with the skills and experience appropriate to the proposed project. The project lead must either be employed by the research organisation submitting the application or have an existing formal arrangement that allows the research to be carried out as if they were an employee. Someone scheduled to move to the organisation before the proposed application start date can also meet the stated route to eligibility.

The project must be UK-based. Individuals at non-UK organisations and freelancers or independent consultants without an organisational affiliation are not eligible to be included. The opportunity also excludes international elements: organisations, activities, conferences, and stakeholders based outside the UK cannot form part of the application. A UK organisation with an international community should not make that international element part of the proposed work. The impact case should be UK-focused.

Every project must include at least one non-academic co-lead. The co-lead should be a stakeholder with a relevant connection to the proposed activities and enough capacity to support delivery and impact. Non-academic co-leads can request eligible staffing costs funded at 100% FEC, although those costs cannot exceed 30% of the overall funds requested. They may also make in-kind contributions, but the scheme does not require them to do so. A letter of support is not required for a non-academic co-lead, although the application must make the role and commitment clear.

There are important participation limits. The lead research organisation may submit only one application for this programme and may co-lead on one other application, provided the applications are substantively different in both partnership team and project objectives. A project team member may participate in only one application. An unsuccessful round-one proposal cannot be resubmitted in round two. If the same people apply in both rounds, the proposals must be markedly different. The overall portfolio of proposed activity must be at least 50% within the AHRC disciplinary remit.

The scheme does not support job shares, project studentships, or subcontractors. It will not fund proposals that are not primarily rooted in design, that lack direct engagement with the green-transition theme, or that offer only a generic approach without a clear system challenge. Costs also need a specific rationale and a link to the proposed activities; vague consultancy fees and unrelated overheads are outside the stated scope.

What a credible project should contain

A useful proposal can be organised around a short chain of evidence:

1. System and context: Define the existing system, the environmental or social pressure within it, and the people who experience that pressure. Explain why the problem is suitable for design-led research.
2. Research contribution: State what new knowledge, method, prototype, or model the project will produce. Connect the arts and humanities disciplines to the decisions the team will make.
3. Co-development: Show how the non-academic co-lead, communities, and other stakeholders will shape the intervention. Budget time for participation and remove barriers where appropriate, including paying participants for their time when justified.
4. Intervention: Describe what will be created, changed, tested, or rehearsed. A service, policy approach, product, public activity, business model, or system practice can be appropriate if its design and research logic are explicit.
5. Evaluation and transfer: Set measurable outcomes for the project period and explain what others could learn. Identify which elements are locally specific and which could be adapted elsewhere.

The timetable should fit nine to 12 months. An initial phase can establish the system map, partnerships, ethics process, and baseline. A middle phase can run fieldwork, workshops, prototyping, or other co-development activity. A final phase can test and refine the intervention, analyse evidence, and share findings with the people and organisations who could use them. The application should include realistic time for governance, data management, risk review, and the host organisation’s processes.

The assessment areas include vision, approach, team capability, ethics and responsible research and innovation, resources and cost justification, project partners, and data management and sharing. The approach should address feasibility and delivery risk, not only ambition. Human participation may require consent, safeguarding, confidentiality, accessibility planning, and a clear approach to storing and sharing data. If the work involves public contributors or communities, explain how they will influence the project and how their contributions will be recognised.

How to apply

Applications are made through the UKRI Funding Service, not the former Joint Electronic Submissions system. Only the lead research organisation can submit the application. The practical sequence is:

1. Confirm that the proposed lead and host organisation meet the eligibility rules, including the UK affiliation, postdoctoral-standing project lead, AHRC-remit coverage, and non-academic co-lead requirement.
2. Make sure the organisation is registered on the UKRI Funding Service. If it is not listed, contact the Funding Service helpdesk early because organisation setup can take time.
3. Open the official grant record and select Start new application. Sign in or create a Funding Service account, choose the organisation, verify the email address, and set a password.
4. Build the application in the Funding Service. The lead should involve the full team and partners while drafting rather than adding their roles at the end. The core team must include one project lead and at least one non-academic co-lead.
5. Complete the required narrative sections. The official form covers the plain-English summary, vision, approach, team capability, ethics and responsible research and innovation, resources and cost justification, project partners, and data management and sharing. Include a clear case for the system intervention, the research methods, participant involvement, outcomes, risks, and route to impact.
6. Add project partners where relevant. Partners may contribute cash or in kind and should provide the requested organisation details, contribution information, and a letter or email of support. Do not confuse a project partner with the required non-academic co-lead.
7. Check the budget against the activities and the 80% AHRC contribution. The lead organisation should complete its internal research-office and finance checks, including hosting arrangements and eligibility.
8. Review the application in read-only view, send it to the research office for checking, make any required edits, and allow the research office to submit the completed application to UKRI.

AHRC must receive the completed application by 29 September 2026 at 4:00pm UK time. The Funding Service will not accept applications after that point. The official record also says that a submitted application cannot be changed, so the final review should cover the eligibility claims, team roles, budget, partner details, data plan, and every required answer before submission.

Practical preparation checklist

Before drafting, write a one-page description of the existing system and the people who can help change it. Name the non-academic organisation or community body that could join as co-lead and discuss what it can genuinely contribute. Avoid treating that organisation as a logo: the application should show shared problem definition, decision-making, delivery responsibility, and a useful benefit for the co-lead.

Next, map the project’s design activity to its research questions. Explain what participants will do, how the team will interpret what they learn, and how that evidence will change the intervention. If the proposal includes a prototype, say who will use it, where it will be tested, what failure would look like, and what will happen after the test. If it includes policy or behaviour change, identify the decision-makers and the safeguards needed to avoid shifting costs or risks onto people with less power.

Build a budget from the workplan rather than from the maximum award. Include appropriate staff time, participant payments, access and inclusion costs, community engagement, materials, evaluation, data management, and communication. Make the 20% standard FEC contribution visible to the host organisation, but do not describe it as a separate matched-funding competition. Third-party support is encouraged, but it should be proportionate and documented.

Finally, check the demand-management rules with every person named on the team. A team member cannot appear on more than one round-two application. The lead research organisation has a one-application limit for leading and may co-lead on one other substantively different application. Round-one unsuccessful proposals cannot be carried into this round. These checks belong at the start of the process because discovering a conflict after the narrative is written may require a major redesign.

Official status and next action

This page describes the open second round, not the closed first round. The current deadline is 29 September 2026, and the planned project start must be no later than 1 February 2027. Prospective applicants should read the full official record before committing to a proposal, confirm their organisation’s Funding Service status, and involve their research office early.

For the authoritative rules, current application controls, and the Start new application link, use the official Design Generators round two grant record. Scheme-specific questions can be sent to [email protected]. Questions about the Funding Service itself should go to [email protected].