The report Funding Europe’s Open Digital Infrastructure: The Economic, Legal, and Political Feasibility of an EU Sovereign Tech Fund (EU-STF) — authored by Nicholas Gates, Jennifer Tridgell, Rosa Maria Torraco, Carsten Schwäbe, Felix Reda, Andreas Hummler, Thomas Streinz, Astor Nummelin Carlberg, and Knut Blind — examines how Europe can strengthen and sustain the open digital infrastructure on which its digital economy depends. It provides a detailed roadmap for establishing an EU Sovereign Tech Fund capable of investing strategically in critical open source technologies that underpin Europe’s digital sovereignty, cybersecurity and resilience, and long-term competitiveness.
Executive Summary
This feasibility study reveals deep pockets of political will and momentum for the establishment of an EU Sovereign Tech Fund (EU-STF). Chronic under-investment in open source technologies creates systemic risks – exposing Europe to (amongst other things) cybersecurity threats, supply chain vulnerabilities, and strategic dependencies on non-European technology providers.
In order to maintain, secure, and improve existing open source technologies to meet the EU’s public and industrial goals, it requires policymakers to understand the logics underpinning failures in investing in the maintenance of open source technologies as open digital infrastructure, in order to prioritise the use of public policy towards the unlocking of financial and nonfinancial resources that support the open source ecosystem.
The EU-STF is envisioned as a scaled-up, pan-European, and mission-driven initiative with a proposed budget of at least EUR €350 million over seven years to invest in maintenance, security, and improvement of key open source components, as well as help identify and map dependencies and invest in ecosystem strengthening activities.
It is vital that the EU-STF embodies some key principles (many of which have made the German successful): pooled financing, low bureaucracy, political independence, flexible funding, community focus, strategic alignment, and transparency.
To this end, it has been determined that two active budgetary scenarios are worth considering for the EU-STF: (1) a standalone and centralised fund (e.g. a new funding body created by legislation and set aside via the MFF negotiations), and (2) a hybrid/shared management structure (such as leveraging established EU institutional frameworks like the EDIC that allow for pooled contributions of Member States alongside EU funding, and even industry co-financing). These options are not necessarily mutually exclusive either.
No single approach offers the most viable path and each has its own advantages as well as trade-offs. On the one hand, the hybrid/shared management structure models offer distinct advantages in flexibility and preservation of the character of the German STF, and would not require legislation or a legislative amendment (as compared to a standalone and centralised fund). On the other hand, the standalone and centralised fund offers distinct advantages in terms of unlocking a significant volume of capital, improving public recognition of the challenge, and prominently showcasing the mission-driven nature of the EU-STF.
To implement the vision for an EU-STF, we issue a call-to-action to the EU and its Member States to act with urgency in considering these two budgetary scenarios and the related recommendations, recognising that fragmented, uncoordinated, or siloed efforts will not be sufficient to unlock funding for open digital infrastructure which addresses Europe’s digital challenges.
We call for their contribution to this important and timely fund, which would be complemented with additional external sources of funding including from the private sector rather than place the budgetary onus exclusively on the EU. That diversification of funding furthers sustainability and buy-in from relevant stakeholders to overcome these systemic challenges.