How can Europe secure its technological sovereignty in a rapidly changing world? Growing dependence on overseas software is the main concern. However, in the EU’s new open source strategy, one challenge keeps resurfacing: money.
With more than 1600 replies last month to an un-glamorous technical call for evidence, the so-called Open Digital Ecosystem has generated more interest than expected.
And the fundamental nature of responses is essentially the repetition of general demands that have been in circulation for some time. With one particular issue standing out.
“The primary challenge of the EU open-source sector is the lack of funding for development, especially when it comes to community or individual-led projects,” pointed out Francesco Siddi, COO at Blender.
You might be interested
According to multiple sources the European Commission actively sought out organisations to request contributions. Though some believe that most of the respondents were the “established usual suspects”.
Importance of open source
The majority of respondents are in favour of a coherent strategy to support Europe’s open source ecosystem. According to the Commission, open source software underpins 70–90 per cent of all code in the digital economy. And the importance of open source only growing. In key sectors such as high-performance computing and edge computing, a strategic approach is critical.
However, the biggest problem many see is financial. “I believe that the entire strategy will only be successful if a budget is allocated to the activities that the Commission will develop. But there was no budget allocated, and the most recent strategy is replete with loopholes,” stated one of the respondents.
Open Source is by nature a global collaborative effort: it works because people around the world collaborate to make it happen. It is vital that the EU doesn’t take actions that undermine that global collaboration. – Open Source Initiative
The Commission itself agrees that funding remains a stumbling block. “While across the EU there are thriving communities of open source developers whose work is aligned with EU digital rights and principles, European governments and companies are heavily dependent on non-EU digital technologies, hampering choice, competitiveness and creating challenges for cybersecurity. Yet the value generated by European open-source communities flows outside the EU, often benefiting tech giants elsewhere.”
The Commission is due to unveil the strategy before the end of this quarter. It is yet another in a long list of initiatives that aim to secure Europe’s technological sovereignty and is the follow up to the Open Source Strategy which expired in 2023.
The private sector’s role
It is evident that many industry players would like to see a model similar to the German Sovereign Tech agency.
But financing should be secure and long-term, not only for security but also for public and private purposes. NGOs in particular want to see governments and the private sector contributing financially.
Civil society stakeholders face significant barriers in gaining access to growth capital, and essential infrastructure. Supporting communities through research programmes alone has proven insufficient for successful scaling of open source solutions.
“At present, we are either juggling multiple pilot projects or engaging in a dispute over Horizon funds, which could be readily reduced,” explained one actor.
“This is due to overly complex applications for large grants, or opaque and overburdened cascade-funding initiatives,” agrees Francesco Siddi. “Multiple surveys report that increased funding would directly impact the quality of open source products and start a virtuous cycle that goes beyond software development and maintenance.”
His suggestion is “to define the budget/scope of public funding of open source projects retroactively, based on applications submitted by the projects themselves. Offer open source communities the tools to apply for funding with minimal restrictions, and evaluate the business plans. Crucially, plans should be evaluated by public, expert-led peer-nominated panels or advisory groups”.
Public money is the key
Large established companies are also dependent on open source. Orange, the French telecommunications operator, explained it relies heavily on OS for its telecommunication services. Including telcocloud infrastructure (Sylva, in the Linux Foundation Europe), customer equipment operating system (PRPL Foundation), or telecom routing equipment software (SONiC, Linux Foundation). It also uses horizontal IT open-source solutions.
But according to the telco giant, 42 per cent of EU organisations contribute directly to the open-source projects on which they have dependencies.
“The software sector within the European Union exhibits significant strengths, notably a growing community of developers (users or contributors to open-source) and a rich ecosystem of public, academic and industrial actors,” said Orange.
While private funding would ease concerns, public money is key. Eau de Web, a Romanian web development company with a focus on open source, said: “The main barrier remains public procurement frameworks. Tendering rules often prioritise market share.”
It is therefore worth noting that the procurement reform is currently underway, and the Commission and European Parliament both focus on strategic procurement.
Independence or isolationism?
The Free Software Foundation Europe also mentions the problem clearly in its response: “A look at the current state of digitalisation reveals that administrations in Europe are becoming increasingly dependent on proprietary software providers, often from non-European countries. In Germany alone, nearly €4.7 billion is being spent on software from the US corporation Oracle under a single framework agreement for seven years. The US corporation Microsoft is receiving €1.3 billion through two framework agreements. These figures exemplify the deep-seated dependencies that will only become further entrenched over the next decade unless the state takes strategic countermeasures.”
“Europe’s institutional infrastructure is locked into a non-EU proprietary monopoly. ESRIs dominance, fueled by free academic licensing and restrictive public procurement, creates a ‘sovereignty gap’ where critical national data is managed via proprietary software. This concentration hinders technological autonomy and captures economic value outside the Union,” added the Open Source Geospatial Foundation.
However the Open Source Initiative warned: “In its search for digital sovereignty, it is vital the EU doesn’t confuse independence with isolationism: we’ve recently heard some voices calling for ‘European Open Source’, but Open Source is by nature a global collaborative effort: it works because people around the world collaborate to make it happen. One of its core benefits is that the ability to study and fork the code enables the kind of trust and collaboration that lets countries benefit from global expertise while retaining local control. It is vital that the EU doesn’t take actions that undermine that global collaboration.”
