Get 4,500 Euros to Fund Solutions Journalism in Nepal: EJN Seed Grants for Natural Resource Management and Green Growth (2026)

There are two kinds of newsroom ideas: the ones that sound great in a Monday meeting, and the ones that actually make it to air, print, or a feed before everyone gets swallowed by breaking news and budget math.

The EJN Seed Grants sit firmly in the second category. Internews Earth Journalism Network is offering two grants of 4,500 euros each to media outlets in Nepal to pilot new programming on natural resource management and green growth—with a clear expectation that you’ll produce at least two stories or two episodes as proof that the concept works in the real world, not just in your proposal.

This is not a “write a report about why journalism matters” grant. It’s a “build the thing” grant. A new segment. A recurring column. A mini-series that makes complicated environmental governance understandable to ordinary people (and harder for decision-makers to ignore). Think of it as seed money for editorial ambition—the kind that usually gets postponed until “next quarter,” which is shorthand for “never.”

And yes, it’s competitive. There are only two awards. But it’s also unusually practical: EJN isn’t just handing over cash and wishing you luck. Selected outlets also receive support from a senior journalist and/or subject-matter expert, which can be the difference between “we tried” and “we built a repeatable model.”

At a Glance: Key Facts for the EJN Nepal Seed Grants (2026)

What This Opportunity Offers (And Why It’s More Useful Than It Looks)

The headline is the money: 4,500 euros. For a Nepali newsroom, that’s enough to buy time—your scarcest resource. Time for reporting trips, time to edit properly, time to translate complex policy into human language, time to design a format that audiences actually return to.

But the better part might be the capacity support. EJN plans to provide winners with guidance from a senior journalist and/or a subject-matter expert during the grant period. That matters because environmental and economic policy reporting often fails for predictable reasons: journalists are forced to become instant experts, sources speak in acronyms, and editors want neat “both sides” stories even when the facts are lopsided. A strong advisor can help you build a format that stays rigorous without becoming unreadable.

This grant is explicitly meant to seed something—meaning your concept should be designed to survive beyond the pilot. EJN wants programming that can grow roots: a recurring climate-and-economy segment on radio, a weekly explainer series on hydropower and watersheds, a solutions-focused column that tracks what local governments actually implement (not what they announce).

Importantly, you’re not required to invent an entirely new platform. Integrating these themes into an existing popular program can be just as strong—sometimes stronger—because you’re not starting from zero audience. If your outlet already has a trusted morning show, a lively YouTube channel, or a widely shared TikTok/Shorts presence, the smartest move may be to add a recurring “green growth and natural resources” format to what already works.

What EJN Means by Natural Resource Management and Green Growth (In Plain Language)

“Natural resource management” can sound like a ministry memo, but in Nepal it’s everyday life. Forests, water, land use, mining/riverbed extraction, protected areas, community forestry, tourism pressures, and disaster risk are not niche topics—they’re the national plotline.

“Green growth” is the promise that economic development doesn’t have to bulldoze the environment to be legitimate. Done well, it’s about jobs, infrastructure, energy, transport, agriculture, and industry that don’t create a long-term bill nobody can pay. Done badly, it becomes green paint on business-as-usual.

Your programming idea should help audiences see the difference.

A strong project here doesn’t just point at problems; it shows tradeoffs, power, incentives, and realistic fixes. Think of your journalism as a flashlight, not a siren. The siren gets attention once. The flashlight helps people navigate.

Who Should Apply (With Real-World Examples)

EJN is looking for media outlets in Nepal: newspapers, online outlets, radio stations, TV channels, multimedia platforms, and even social media channels. If your organization publishes or broadcasts journalism—and you can credibly manage a small project—this is meant for you.

The best candidates tend to have three things in common.

First, they already know how to publish consistently. You don’t need to be huge, but you do need a functioning editorial system. If your “workflow” is one exhausted editor rewriting everything at 2 a.m., you can still apply—but your proposal needs to show how you’ll deliver two solid outputs without collapsing.

Second, they have an audience they can reach. EJN is not paying for a beautiful series that nobody sees. A local radio station with loyal listeners may be a stronger applicant than a flashier outlet with inconsistent reach. Likewise, a digital outlet with a reliable newsletter list or strong Facebook distribution can make a convincing case.

Third, they have a specific programming concept—not just “we will cover the environment more.” For example: a weekly “resource accountability” segment that follows one river basin across the season; a short video format that explains policy decisions using a single household’s story; a column that tracks whether “green jobs” claims match wages and working conditions on the ground.

Two eligibility notes to take seriously: only one application per media outlet is allowed, and selected grantees from the 2024 and 2025 seed grant cohorts are not eligible this round. If you’re unsure whether your outlet was a selected grantee (versus just an applicant), confirm internally before you spend a week drafting.

The Output Requirement: Two Stories or Episodes (Minimum) — Aim Higher Anyway

EJN expects each selected outlet to design and pilot a new program, producing at least two stories or episodes as proof of concept. That’s the floor, not the ceiling.

If you’re strategic, you’ll propose a format where two episodes feel like the start of something, not a box checked. A two-part series can work beautifully if it’s designed like a pilot season: Episode 1 introduces the problem and stakes; Episode 2 tests solutions, accountability, and what happens next.

Even better: propose a format that can expand easily—because the review panel cares about sustainability. Your grant should look like the first two bricks in a wall, not two decorative stones placed in a field.

Insider Tips for a Winning Application (The Stuff Reviewers Secretly Want)

1) Pitch a format, not just a topic

“Green growth” is not a story; it’s a category. What’s your repeating structure? A debate segment? A field-reporting mini-doc? A solutions column with a fixed template? Reviewers fund clarity. If they can imagine it airing next month, you’re ahead.

2) Make “solutions-oriented” mean “tested,” not “cheerful”

Solutions journalism isn’t PR for good ideas. It’s reporting that asks: What was tried? Did it work? For whom? At what cost? What evidence exists? A proposal that promises only “awareness” will feel soft. A proposal that measures change—policy shifts, enforcement outcomes, community impacts, budget allocations—feels serious.

3) Put the audience at the center, not the funder

Spell out who this program is for. Farmers deciding on inputs? Urban youth looking for jobs? Local officials managing land disputes? Hydropower-affected households? If the audience is “the general public,” you’re trying to hug a mountain.

Then explain how you’ll reach them: which channel, what time, what distribution plan, what language(s), what storytelling style.

4) Treat the budget like a story about competence

With 4,500 euros, every line item communicates priorities. Allocate for reporting travel if needed, fair payments for freelancers, editing time, translation, data visualization, audio mixing—whatever actually makes the work publishable. “Miscellaneous” is where proposals go to die.

Also: show cost-effectiveness. If you can produce two strong episodes with a small team and a clear workflow, say so. This panel will reward realism.

5) Build sustainability into the design from day one

Reviewers explicitly look for programming that lasts beyond the grant period. So explain what happens after the pilot. Will you integrate the segment into an existing show? Will you sell sponsorship (ethically) later? Will you repurpose audio into short videos? Will you train two reporters so knowledge doesn’t vanish if one leaves?

Sustainability isn’t a promise. It’s a plan.

6) Prove you can do it with the team you already have

Panels get nervous when a proposal requires hiring five new people and inventing a workflow from scratch. Use who you have, fill only the essential gaps, and show you understand your own capacity. If you need an outside expert, define their role precisely.

7) Be transparent about generative AI (and don’t let it write your voice)

EJN requires disclosure of any generative AI tools used in proposal development and can disqualify applicants for unethical conduct, including plagiarism or presenting AI-written content as your own. The simplest approach: write your proposal yourself, and if you used any AI tool for minor tasks (like translation drafts or outlining), disclose it plainly and explain how you verified accuracy and originality.

Application Timeline: A Realistic Plan Backward From February 15, 2026

Most outlets underestimate how long a strong proposal takes—especially when you’re also publishing daily. Work backward and give yourself breathing room.

By February 13, aim to submit. Not on the 15th. Submission portals and internet connections have a sense of humor, and you don’t want to be the punchline.

In late January, lock your program concept and format. This is when you decide whether you’re launching a new segment, column, or mini-series, and what the two pilot outputs will specifically be.

By early January, outline your editorial plan: story angles, reporting method, potential sources, risk management (especially if reporting touches corruption, illegal extraction, or powerful local interests), and a production schedule that doesn’t assume everyone will work miracles.

In December, build your budget and confirm your internal team. Get quick commitments: who reports, who edits, who publishes, who handles audio/video. If you need partner support or an expert voice, line that up early.

If you start in mid-November, you’ll have time to draft, revise, translate if needed, and get one brutally honest external review. That last step is how good proposals become fundable proposals.

Required Materials: What You Should Prepare (And How to Make It Easier)

EJN’s application form will guide the specifics, but expect to prepare the usual core pieces: a proposal narrative, a simple budget, and information about your outlet and team. Prepare these in advance so you’re not writing from scratch inside a browser window.

You’ll want (at minimum):

• A clear proposal summary that states the programming idea, the intended audience, and the two pilot outputs you’ll produce.
• A project plan describing editorial workflow, production steps, and distribution strategy (where it will run and how you’ll reach people).
• A budget and budget justification explaining what you’ll spend and why each cost is necessary.
• Team bios or brief profiles that prove you can deliver (reporting, editing, production, audience distribution).
• Work samples or links that show the outlet’s style and credibility—preferably relevant reporting, not just viral content.

Preparation advice: write your concept in one paragraph first. If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it yet. And reviewers won’t either.

What Makes an Application Stand Out (How the Panel Thinks)

EJN’s applications are reviewed by a panel of international judges including Internews staff and environmental journalism experts. They’re evaluating more than “is this a nice idea.”

They look at overall quality—meaning coherence, specificity, and whether your plan reads like something you can actually execute.

They weigh relevance to the program goals: stronger media capacity in Nepal, and solutions-oriented public-interest coverage of green growth and resource management. If your project is mostly advocacy or mostly general climate education without a Nepal-specific resource/governance angle, it may drift off target.

They assess impact and project design. “Impact” doesn’t have to mean national policy change. It can mean a format that reaches underserved audiences, changes local conversations, or gives policymakers evidence they can’t shrug off. Design matters: good journalism needs a backbone—clear episodes, clear questions, clear editorial standards.

They reward innovation, but not gimmicks. An innovative format that makes complicated issues understandable (interactive explainers, call-in shows, data-driven visuals, field diaries) is stronger than a flashy idea that can’t be produced consistently.

And they care about sustainability, financial viability, and your ability to carry it out. In plain terms: can you do this well, on time, with this budget—and keep it alive afterward?

Common Mistakes to Avoid (And How Not to Step on These Rakes)

Many applications fail for predictable reasons. Avoid these, and you’re already more competitive.

One: proposing a theme instead of a product. “We will raise awareness about green growth” is not a plan. Name the show/segment/column, define the structure, and specify the first two outputs.

Two: budgets that don’t match reality. If you budget zero for editing, translation, or production—but promise high-quality multimedia—you’re basically telling reviewers you don’t understand what your own work costs.

Three: vague sustainability claims. “We will continue after the grant” is nice sentiment, not strategy. Tie continuation to something concrete: integration into an existing program, a content calendar, republishing partnerships, or revenue planning that doesn’t compromise editorial independence.

Four: overpromising output. The grant requires at least two stories/episodes. If you promise twelve investigations in two months with a tiny team, reviewers will assume you’re guessing.

Five: sloppy ethics around AI and originality. If you copy text from elsewhere, or present generated text as your own, you risk disqualification. Keep your proposal original, cite what you must, and disclose tool use honestly.

Six: ignoring distribution. Great reporting with no audience plan is like printing posters and storing them in a cupboard. Explain where the content will live and how people will actually encounter it.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can we apply if we are a small local outlet, not a national brand?

Yes. This grant is about capacity and programming, not prestige. A strong local outlet with a clear audience and a practical pilot plan can be highly competitive.

Do we need to create a completely new program?

Not necessarily. You can propose a new program/column/section, or integrate these themes into an existing popular program—as long as the concept is clearly defined and produces at least two pilot outputs.

Can we produce stories in languages other than English or Nepali?

Yes. Applications must be submitted in English or Nepali, but your published/broadcast stories can be in any language.

Can we submit more than one application from the same media outlet?

No. One application per media outlet. If you have multiple ideas, choose the one with the cleanest format and strongest sustainability plan.

Our outlet applied in the past. Are we eligible?

If your outlet was a selected grantee in the 2024 or 2025 seed grant cohorts, you’re not eligible for this call. If you only applied and were not selected, you should be eligible (confirm internally).

What does EJN mean by being transparent about generative AI?

If you used generative AI tools at any stage of proposal development, disclose that use honestly. Do not submit plagiarized text or pass generated writing off as your own original work—EJN can disqualify applicants for unethical conduct.

How competitive is this?

Very. There are two grants. Your best defense is specificity: a clear format, realistic budget, credible team plan, and a strong argument for why your audience will care.

What should our two pilot outputs look like?

They should demonstrate the format working in practice. For example: two radio episodes with field reporting and expert voices; two articles that follow a repeatable template; two short video episodes with a consistent narrative structure. Aim for “this could become a series,” not “this is a one-off.”

How to Apply (And What to Do This Week)

Start by writing a one-paragraph concept note: the format, the audience, the two pilot outputs, and why your outlet is the right home for this work. Then pressure-test it with someone skeptical—an editor, a producer, a colleague who hates vague pitches. If they can repeat it back accurately, you’re ready to draft.

Next, build a simple production plan that respects reality: who does what, when reporting happens, how editing works, and how you’ll publish/distribute. After that, draft the budget so it matches the plan—not the other way around.

Finally, decide your ethics posture early. If you’ll use any tools for translation or transcription, plan how you’ll verify accuracy and how you’ll disclose usage in the application.

Ready to apply? Visit the official opportunity page here:
https://earthjournalism.us.auth0.com/u/login?state=hKFo2SBvRGJpTHBzNndEclZibGhyX3FtZ1lqazNTWGFxYnZXRaFur3VuaXZlcnNhbC1sb2dpbqN0aWTZIG9JS202TGYyQXA3QXZKLVBWZGowNUl1dldFZ1FhNEw3o2NpZNkgM1FXQUR2SUVLdktHMkt6UzFOazRaUWJUb3N4ME5YcW0

If your newsroom has been waiting for a reason to treat natural resources and green growth as a core beat—not a occasional headline—this is it. The grant is small enough to move fast, and serious enough to matter. The only real question is whether your proposal reads like something that will still exist after the pilot money is gone.