Is artificial intelligence useful in preparing EU projects?

Is artificial intelligence useful in preparing EU projects?

In the last year, we have witnessed a rapid increase in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in all sectors, including in the preparation of EU projects. But can AI really help in writing a project proposal – and if so, to what extent? Below we provide an overview of the possibilities, limitations and advice for using artificial intelligence in the context of the preparation of EU projects.

Artificial intelligence today includes tools such as ChatGPT, Copilot, Claude and similar ones that enable automatic text analysis, content generation, document processing and decision simulation. In the context of EU funds, AI can serve as an aid in drafting project briefs and analyzing relevant calls, and can also be used in the development of project objectives, indicators and activities.

It is increasingly used for:

- structuring the logical matrix,
- automating the search for tenders,
- generating potential project ideas,
- help in formulating the so-called "soft" components of the project (eg education, communication, dissemination).

When used correctly and responsibly, AI can significantly speed up the preparation phase, offer creative language formulations, as well as help consultants and applicants recognize broader contextual connections between project ideas and strategic documents.

Key advantages include faster preparation of first drafts of documentation, generation of sentence variants in accordance with the formal tone of the tender, as well as checking consistency in the description of activities and results, and also providing the possibility of adapting the content to different applicant profiles (LGU, SME, OPG...). Therefore, artificial intelligence can save a lot of time and take over some of the easier tasks within the framework of project application. However, despite its potential, it is not a substitute for human expertise, experience and contextual understanding of project logic. AI is still far from key functions such as interpreting regulations, call conditions and legal frameworks with complete accuracy that is necessary for successful application of EU projects. Artificial intelligence cannot independently develop a budget, nor work out acceptable costs or assess their justification. It simply does not know local realities, which means that it can generate proposals that are strategically out of line with local/regional development plans.

Furthermore, over-reliance on AI can lead to projects that sound great on paper but in practice fail to deliver the necessary depth, sustainability and engagement with relevant stakeholders. In fact, AI is best used as a support tool, not as a replacement for project consultants. The optimal approach is for consultants to expertly interpret calls and regulations, while AI is used as a quick assistant for language processing and template generation.

Artificial intelligence can be a valuable ally in the preparation of EU projects – but only if we use it thoughtfully, selectively and under the guidance of a team of experts. The question is not whether AI will become part of the future of EU funds, but how we integrate it in a way that enhances, rather than replaces, what matters most: the quality of the project idea and its feasibility.