Win the Tyler Prize 2027 Environmental Award: How to Nominate a Leader for the $250,000 Green Nobel Prize

Some awards give you a nice plaque, a polite handshake, and a line on LinkedIn that your aunt will “like” in 48 hours. The Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement is not that kind of award.

This one comes with $250,000, a medallion, a public ceremony, and the kind of global credibility that makes policymakers, university presidents, foundation directors, and newsroom editors lean in. It’s often nicknamed the Green Nobel Prize, and while that label gets tossed around too easily in environmental circles, here it actually fits. The Tyler Prize has been pointing a spotlight at world-changing environmental work since long before climate and biodiversity became dinner-table topics.

Here’s the twist that trips people up (and quietly weeds out the unprepared): you can’t nominate yourself. If you want a shot, someone else has to put your work on the record—cleanly, convincingly, and with enough proof that a serious selection committee can see the impact without squinting.

If you’re reading this from Africa (or nominating someone whose work is rooted there), pay attention. The Tyler Prize is global, and the selection criteria explicitly care about inequality, environmental justice, and real-world impact—areas where many African researchers, practitioners, and institutions are doing extraordinary work that still doesn’t get the global credit it deserves. This prize is one of the rare stages big enough to match that scale.

The deadline for nominations is May 15, 2026 for the 2027 prize cycle. That sounds far away until you realize you’ll need to assemble a nomination package that’s part biography, part evidence brief, part greatest-hits album—and it all has to fit into a single, coherent document.

Let’s make that doable.

Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement 2027: At a Glance

Why the Tyler Prize Is Worth the Effort (Even If It Feels Intimidating)

A $250,000 prize is obviously nice. But the real value is what that money signals.

The Tyler Prize isn’t a “promising early idea” award. It’s a recognition engine for work that has already shifted the world—by changing policy, changing practice, changing markets, changing ecosystems, or changing how we understand the planet’s operating system (and how close it is to overheating).

That means the nomination needs to do more than say, “This person is brilliant.” It needs to show: Here is what changed, here is how we know, and here is why it matters globally.

And because nominations are retained for three years, your effort doesn’t have to be a one-shot gamble. A strong nomination can stay in the running and mature over time—especially if the nominee’s influence continues to expand.

This is a tough prize to win. It’s also the kind that can reshape a career, amplify an institution’s credibility overnight, and—best of all—pull a crucial environmental solution into the mainstream conversation where it can finally get funded, adopted, and replicated.

What This Opportunity Offers (Beyond the $250,000)

Let’s talk about the full “package,” because focusing only on the check undersells the point.

First, the Tyler Prize is designed to recognize environmental achievement with substance. That includes scientific breakthroughs, yes, but also public policy victories, economic tools, conservation leadership, public health interventions, and energy solutions. The prize sits at the intersection of research and results—like a bridge that can hold heavy traffic.

Second, the Tyler Prize has a habit of validating work that crosses disciplines. Environmental progress rarely comes from a single lane. The strongest nominees are often fluent in multiple dialects: science and policy; community realities and academic rigor; local implementation and global replication.

Third, the recognition itself functions like a megaphone. For a nominee working in regions that get under-credited—many parts of Africa included—this matters. The prize can turn “excellent work known to insiders” into “globally recognized work that attracts partners.”

Finally, the structure of the nomination process rewards clarity. You don’t need to write a 60-page dossier. You need to write a tight, evidence-heavy narrative that connects achievements to outcomes, and outcomes to the selection criteria.

Who Should Apply (Actually, Who Should Be Nominated)

The Tyler Prize accepts nominations for individuals and institutions from anywhere in the world, as long as the impact is genuinely meaningful for the environment.

The sweet spot for nominees is work that fits one (or more) of these themes:

Ecological protection or improvement. Think: measurable biodiversity protection, restoration at scale, watershed recovery, or a new method that changed how ecosystems are assessed and managed.

Sustainable energy progress. This might be a technology, a deployment model, a financing mechanism, or policy design that made clean energy adoption faster, cheaper, or fairer.

Planetary health solutions. This category is broader than it sounds. It can include environmental drivers of disease, air and water pollution reduction, or systemic fixes that protect human health by protecting natural systems.

Now, what does this look like in real life?

• An African research team whose work changed regional standards for air quality monitoring, and whose methods were later adopted by multiple countries.
• A conservation organization that proved a scalable anti-poaching or habitat corridor model with strong community governance and documented biodiversity outcomes.
• A policy economist whose carbon pricing or subsidy reform framework actually got implemented—and measurably shifted emissions trajectories or public health indicators.
• A water initiative that doesn’t just install infrastructure, but demonstrates long-term operation, financing, and governance—so the model can travel.

One more important point: because self-nominations are prohibited, the “applicant” is really the nominator—the person (or entity) willing to assemble the case and submit it. If you’re considering nominating someone, assume you’ll be doing the work of a very well-informed biographer, plus a part-time evaluator.

The Selection Criteria, Translated Into Plain English

The Tyler Prize expects nominees to show:

Strong science (natural and/or social). Translation: the work should be grounded in credible evidence and methods. If it’s advocacy, it should still be evidence-led. If it’s technology, it should have proof it works. If it’s policy, it should have data behind it.

Attention to global inequalities and solutions. Translation: environmental solutions can’t be blind to who pays and who benefits. Work that reduces harm for vulnerable communities—or shifts power and resources in a fairer direction—will resonate.

Measurable and scalable impact on policy and/or practice. Translation: “We raised awareness” is not enough. Show adoption, replication, policy change, implementation, and outcomes.

Engagement with younger generations. Translation: mentorship, training, youth partnerships, pipeline-building, education models, or meaningful inclusion of early-career leaders.

They also consider whether the work integrates diverse perspectives and advances environmental justice. If your nominee’s work does this, don’t treat it like a side note. Make it part of the spine of the story.

Insider Tips for a Winning Tyler Prize Nomination (The Stuff That Matters)

This nomination lives or dies on narrative discipline. Here are the strategies that separate “nice nomination” from “shortlist material.”

1) Write the nomination like a closing argument, not a biography

A common mistake is treating the summary as a life story: childhood, education, career steps, awards. That’s pleasant—and useless.

Instead, build an argument: Claim → Evidence → Consequence.
“Dr. X transformed how Country Y manages groundwater. Here’s the method. Here are the policy changes. Here are the measured outcomes. Here is why it can scale.”

2) Put numbers on impact (and define what the numbers mean)

“Improved water quality” is vague. “Reduced nitrate concentration by 35% across 120 monitoring points over five years” is legible.

If you don’t have perfect numbers, use the best available indicators: adoption counts, hectares restored, households served, policy jurisdictions changed, cost reductions, emissions avoided, disease burden reduced. Just don’t drown the reader—choose a few metrics that make the case.

3) Prove scalability with a trail of replication

Scalability isn’t a vibe. It’s evidence that others copied the model successfully.

If the nominee’s approach spread to additional regions, institutions, ministries, utilities, or community networks, document the spread. Even better: show what conditions made replication possible (training, open-source tools, financing model, legal template, community governance structure).

4) Treat “strong science” broadly, but seriously

The Tyler Prize recognizes science in the lab and science in the field—and social science too. If the nominee’s work is policy-heavy, show the analytical backbone: data systems, evaluation designs, peer-reviewed work, credible reports, or third-party assessments.

If the work is Indigenous/community-led or practice-led, show rigor through outcomes, monitoring, and clear methodology. Rigorous does not mean “academic only.” It means “you can trust this.”

5) Make youth engagement specific (and not patronizing)

Saying “they care about youth” won’t help. Show how the nominee created real roles for younger generations: fellowships, training cohorts, co-authorship, leadership pathways, paid internships, community youth councils, school partnerships with measurable reach.

And if younger collaborators went on to lead programs or publish influential work, include that. That’s legacy you can point to.

6) Address inequality and justice as part of the main plot

If the nominee reduced exposure to pollution in low-income communities, or redesigned conservation so communities benefit rather than get displaced, say so plainly. Show outcomes and decision-making structures.

Environmental justice isn’t a garnish. In this prize, it can be a deciding factor.

7) Don’t assume fame substitutes for clarity

Well-known nominees still lose when the nomination is sloppy. The committee is evaluating a package, not your nominee’s Wikipedia page. Your job is to make the evidence easy to find and impossible to ignore.

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

You’ll want at least 8–10 weeks to do this well, especially if you’re coordinating across institutions or time zones.

Mid-May 2026 (submission week): Finalize the single compiled PDF/Word file, double-check filenames, confirm all links work, and proofread like you’re allergic to typos. Submit at least a few days early—forms and uploads have a habit of misbehaving at the worst moment.

April 2026: Draft and revise the 1–2 page accomplishments summary. This is the heart of the nomination. Circulate it to two types of reviewers: someone who knows the work deeply and someone smart who does not. If the outsider can’t explain the impact back to you, rewrite.

Late March to early April 2026: Gather supporting links: publications, project websites, policy documents, evaluations, datasets, press coverage that indicates adoption (not just praise). Identify 3–5 references and confirm they’re willing to write if contacted.

February to March 2026: Decide who the nominator will be (and confirm they can submit). Collect contact details for nominee and nominator. For individuals, request a short CV and key publication links. For organizations, request a datasheet or brochure and impact metrics.

January 2026: Quietly do your strategy work. What is the central claim? Which achievements best match Tyler’s criteria? What proof is strongest? This is where you choose the story you’ll tell—and what you’ll leave out.

Required Materials (And How to Prepare Them Without Losing Your Mind)

The Tyler Prize nomination requires that you assemble materials into one document in Word or PDF format. Think of it as a carefully curated exhibit, not a file dump.

You’ll need:

• Full contact information for both nominee and nominator (names, addresses, emails, phone numbers). Collect this early; it’s always harder than it should be.
• A 1–2 page accomplishments summary describing the contribution being recognized, with links to relevant work. Write this for an intelligent reader outside the nominee’s niche. Use plain language, then back it up with evidence.
• A list of 3–5 potential references (name, organization, email). Choose people who can speak to impact with specificity—ideally from different vantage points (e.g., a policy partner, a scientific peer, a community implementation partner).
• If nominating an individual, include a short CV plus links to publications, reports, or credible media that document the unique contribution.
• If nominating an organization, include a brochure/datasheet, website links, key performance data, and any supporting evidence that shows outcomes and scale.
• File naming: include the nominee name and year (example format given: JoannaSmith2027). Don’t get creative here; follow the instruction literally.

What Makes a Tyler Prize Nomination Stand Out

The shortlist tends to favor nominations that do three things at once.

First, they show original contribution. Not “part of a big movement,” but “this nominee introduced, proved, or implemented something distinctive.”

Second, they show causal impact. Meaning: not just correlation (“pollution decreased after we started”), but a credible link between the nominee’s work and the outcomes.

Third, they show global relevance. The work can start local—most great work does—but it needs to teach the world something transferable: a method, a model, a policy design, a governance approach, a technology pathway.

If you can tie those to inequality, justice, and youth engagement, you’re speaking the selection committee’s language without sounding like you’re parroting it.

Common Mistakes to Avoid (And How to Fix Them)

Mistake 1: Submitting a greatest-hits list with no throughline.
Fix: Choose one central contribution and build around it. You can mention other achievements, but they should support the main claim.

Mistake 2: Making big claims with thin proof.
Fix: Add concrete indicators and credible third-party sources. If the best evidence is internal, be transparent and include methodology.

Mistake 3: Jargon-heavy writing that hides the point.
Fix: Use one clear sentence for the “what changed” claim, then explain the mechanism in plain English. Save technical detail for links.

Mistake 4: Ignoring the “engagement with younger generations” criterion.
Fix: Include specifics—program names, numbers trained, leadership outcomes, mentorship structures.

Mistake 5: Treating environmental justice as an optional bonus.
Fix: If the work reduces inequity or expands participation, explain how decisions were made, who benefited, and what changed for communities.

Mistake 6: Waiting too long to line up references.
Fix: Identify references early and brief them with a one-page impact summary so they’re ready if contacted.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can someone nominate themselves for the Tyler Prize?

No. Third-party nominations only. If you’re the potential nominee, your move is to identify a credible nominator who understands your impact and can assemble a strong package.

Is the Tyler Prize open to African nominees?

Yes. It’s open globally, and work connected to Africa can be especially competitive when it demonstrates measurable outcomes, justice-aware solutions, and models that scale.

Can an organization be nominated, or only an individual?

Both. The Tyler Prize recognizes individuals and institutions.

Can the same person nominate multiple candidates?

No. Multiple nominations from a single nominator are not permitted. Choose the strongest candidate and go all-in.

Can we nominate someone who has passed away?

No. Posthumous nominations are not permitted.

What if our nomination is strong but doesn’t win this year?

Good news: nominations are kept for three years. A well-built nomination can remain under consideration, which makes it even more worth doing carefully.

Does the nomination have to be in English?

Yes. All nominations must be submitted in English. If your supporting materials are in other languages, link them, but make sure the core narrative stands on its own in English.

What kind of impact matters most: science, policy, or on-the-ground practice?

The Tyler Prize values all of the above, but it clearly emphasizes measurable, scalable impact on policy and/or practice anchored in strong science (natural or social). In other words: ideas matter, but outcomes matter more.

How to Apply: Submit a Tyler Prize 2027 Nomination

If you’re ready to nominate someone, start by doing two things this week: (1) confirm the nominator (the person who will officially submit), and (2) draft a blunt one-paragraph statement answering, “What changed because of this nominee’s work?” If you can’t write that paragraph yet, don’t open the form. Build the case first.

Next, assemble your materials into a single PDF or Word document. Keep it clean: clear headings, working links, and evidence that maps directly to the criteria (science, inequality, scalable policy/practice impact, youth engagement, and justice).

Then submit your nomination before May 15, 2026. Don’t treat the deadline as a suggestion. Treat it like a train departure.

Apply Now (Official Link)

Ready to apply? Visit the official Tyler Prize nomination page here: https://usc.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1NQkRscVCbFzlFY