This five-part series from SUSE’s Sovereign Solutions Team, published ahead of the upcoming EU Tech Sovereignty Package, equips IT leaders, procurement professionals, and policymakers with the practical blueprints and frameworks needed to turn digital sovereignty into actionable, long-term resilience. Stay tuned this week to read the entire series!
- Part 1: An Operational Definition for Digital Sovereignty
- Part 2: How Europe’s Digital Sovereignty Frameworks Are Converging
- Part 3: Europe Already Has the Cards and Open Source Is the Ace
Recently, former Commissioner Thierry Breton reflected on the state of the digital sovereignty debate in Europe. He noted that the story most commonly told about Europe and digital technology is one of strategic absence. No cloud platform at scale. No consumer technology giant. The narrative has been repeated so consistently that it has acquired the quality of received wisdom, shaping how European policymakers frame their ambitions and, at times, how they limit them. At its core, this debate is not just about capability, but about digital sovereignty and Europe’s ability to break free from foreign influences in the systems it depends on.
I agree that the narrative is incomplete. Europe did not fail to compete in the first phase of the digital economy. It competed on different terms, building regulatory architecture, industrial infrastructure and foundational technological capabilities rather than consumer platforms built on personal data.
That approach has positioned Europe considerably better for the infrastructure phase of digital that is now arriving: sovereign cloud, industrial AI and the critical software systems on which both depend. If approached correctly, this moment represents an opportunity for building a future-proof digital sovereignty strategy grounded in resilience and control rather than dependency.
Within that infrastructure layer, Europe holds an asset that policy discussions consistently underestimate: a mature, capable and commercially-proven open source software ecosystem. It is, in many ways, open by design, sovereign by choice.
The ecosystem is real and operating
Europe produces more open source developers per capita than either the United States or China. It is home to SUSE, Europe’s largest open source company, which has spent 33 years building and maintaining the foundational software layer on which European governments, financial institutions, energy utilities and healthcare systems operate.
Across the stack, from cloud infrastructure and operating systems to AI platforms and security tooling, there is a generation of European open source companies that are not prototypes or research initiatives but operating businesses delivering sovereign, production-grade technology to public administrations today.
The problem is not that these assets are absent. It is that procurement, public and private, has not been organised to deploy them at scale. And scale at speed is what open source is best at. Without that shift, many organisations remain open, but not sovereign, relying on architectures that expose them to external control despite surface-level flexibility.
The evidence from France
We know with some precision what happens when procurement policy changes to favour open source, because France ran the experiment. In 2012, Circulaire 5608 required government agencies to prefer open source software over proprietary alternatives. A Harvard Business School study by Frank Nagle measured the effects: an increase of nearly 600,000 open source contributions per year from France: value that would have cost paid developers roughly $20 million annually to replicate. The spillover effects on national competitiveness were substantial: a 9% to 18% yearly increase in IT-related startups, a 6.6% to 14% yearly increase in IT employment, and a measurable increase in the adoption of open source across French companies more broadly.
These outcomes were not the stated goal of the policy, rather, the directive’s intent was cost reduction. These competitiveness effects were spillovers from the demand signal, applied consistently, that reshaped market incentives across the French technology sector, which led to compounding national competitiveness effects over time while strengthening national digital resilience.
The demand-pull problem
That evidence clarifies what has been missing from Europe’s broader open source strategy. The investment case has been made. The economic returns have been documented. The Commission’s own 2021 study found that EU companies’ roughly €1 billion annual investment in open source generated between €65 and €95 billion in economic impact. And yet the public sector, the largest single technology buyer in Europe, continues to default to proprietary procurement, not because open source alternatives are absent but because procurement frameworks were built around proprietary software logic and the default has never been formally revised.
This is a demand-pull problem. In order to jump-start the missing pieces of the stack to production-readiness, institutional buyers must be willing to adopt them at an early stage. SUSE has scale already, but we are everywhere part of large ecosystems of partners. The talent, the code and the commercial models exist. What the European market lacks is the demand signal that makes scaling economically rational.
An Open Source First requirement in the EU Cloud and AI Development Act would provide that signal, both to the builders and the capital markets. At the very least, a requirement that public administrations assess open source alternatives before renewing proprietary contracts, that those assessments are documented and auditable, and that the burden of justification falls on the proprietary choice rather than the open source one, would change procurement behaviour across the European market at a scale no subsidy programme can match. Critically, organisations must also assess their real risk exposure when making these decisions, rather than defaulting to legacy vendors.
The Ace in Europe’s hand
Europe is not in the position of needing to create a digital sovereignty capability from nothing. The capability exists. Open source is not the only card Europe holds in this hand. But it is the Ace. It is the infrastructure layer that determines whether digital sovereignty is operationally real or merely declaratory. The question for CAIDA is whether Europe will finally organise to play it.
The power of the purchase order
Recognising open source as a strategic asset is a necessary step, then comes the implementation. How do IT leaders and procurement teams change their buying habits to reflect this new reality?
Related Articles
Nov 11th, 2025
SUSE Private Registry: A safe Harbor for your containers.
Oct 09th, 2024
Facts Only
Europe produces more open source developers per capita than the United States or China.
SUSE is Europe’s largest open source company, with 33 years of experience in foundational software for governments, financial institutions, energy utilities, and healthcare systems.
In 2012, France implemented Circulaire 5608, requiring government agencies to prefer open source software over proprietary alternatives.
A Harvard Business School study by Frank Nagle found that France’s policy led to an increase of nearly 600,000 open source contributions per year, valued at approximately $20 million annually.
The policy resulted in a 9% to 18% yearly increase in IT-related startups and a 6.6% to 14% yearly increase in IT employment in France.
The European Commission’s 2021 study reported that EU companies’ €1 billion annual investment in open source generated between €65 and €95 billion in economic impact.
Public sector procurement in Europe continues to default to proprietary software due to legacy frameworks.
The article proposes an "Open Source First" requirement in the EU Cloud and AI Development Act to shift procurement behavior.
Former Commissioner Thierry Breton noted Europe’s perceived strategic absence in digital technology, particularly in cloud platforms and consumer tech giants.
Europe’s approach to digital sovereignty focuses on regulatory architecture, industrial infrastructure, and foundational technological capabilities rather than consumer platforms.
The article argues that Europe’s open source ecosystem is mature, commercially proven, and capable of supporting sovereign cloud and industrial AI.
The demand for open source solutions at scale is hindered by procurement frameworks that favor proprietary software.
Executive Summary
Europe is positioned to leverage its mature open source software ecosystem as a strategic asset for digital sovereignty, particularly in sovereign cloud, industrial AI, and critical software systems. The continent produces more open source developers per capita than the U.S. or China and hosts established companies like SUSE, which has decades of experience in foundational software for governments and industries. However, procurement frameworks remain biased toward proprietary software, limiting the scaling of open source solutions despite their proven economic and resilience benefits. France’s 2012 policy requiring open source preference in government procurement demonstrated significant spillover effects, including increased IT startups, employment, and broader adoption of open source. The European Commission’s 2021 study found that €1 billion in open source investment generated €65-95 billion in economic impact, yet public sector procurement has not shifted accordingly. The proposal suggests an "Open Source First" requirement in the EU Cloud and AI Development Act to create the necessary demand signal for scaling open source solutions, emphasizing the need for procurement reforms to align with strategic digital sovereignty goals.
The debate around Europe’s digital sovereignty often focuses on its perceived lack of consumer tech giants or large-scale cloud platforms, but this narrative overlooks Europe’s strengths in regulatory architecture, industrial infrastructure, and foundational technologies. Open source software, described as "the Ace" in Europe’s hand, offers a path to operational sovereignty by reducing dependency on foreign-controlled systems. The challenge lies in institutional adoption, where legacy procurement habits and risk assessments favor proprietary vendors despite the availability of sovereign, production-grade open source alternatives. The call to action includes revising procurement frameworks to prioritize open source assessments and justify proprietary choices, rather than the reverse, to drive systemic change.
Full Take
The narrative presented here is a compelling case for Europe’s untapped potential in digital sovereignty through open source software. At its strongest, the argument highlights concrete evidence—such as France’s procurement policy and its measurable economic spillovers—to demonstrate that open source isn’t just a theoretical advantage but a proven lever for competitiveness and resilience. The framing of open source as "the Ace" in Europe’s hand is effective, positioning it as a strategic asset that aligns with the continent’s regulatory strengths and industrial infrastructure. The call for procurement reform, particularly an "Open Source First" mandate, is a pragmatic step that could reshape market incentives without requiring massive subsidies.
However, the analysis also reveals a subtle tension between the optimistic vision of open source as a sovereignty enabler and the systemic inertia of procurement frameworks. The article acknowledges that the capability exists but is underutilized due to institutional habits—a classic case of the "innovation adoption gap." The emphasis on France’s success story, while persuasive, may overlook the challenges of replicating such policies across diverse EU member states with varying levels of digital maturity. Additionally, the argument assumes that open source adoption inherently reduces dependency on foreign influences, but it doesn’t fully address the complexities of global supply chains in software development, where even open source projects may rely on contributions from non-European entities.
The root cause of this narrative is a paradigm shift in how digital sovereignty is defined—not as the creation of European tech giants but as the control over critical infrastructure through open, interoperable systems. This challenges the dominant Silicon Valley-centric view of digital power, which equates sovereignty with market dominance. The implications are significant: if Europe succeeds in institutionalizing open source procurement, it could redefine global standards for digital resilience, reducing lock-in to proprietary ecosystems. Yet, the second-order consequences—such as potential resistance from entrenched proprietary vendors or the need for upskilling public sector IT teams—are only briefly touched upon.
Bridge questions to consider: How might proprietary software vendors adapt their strategies in response to an "Open Source First" policy? What safeguards would be needed to ensure that open source adoption doesn’t inadvertently create new dependencies on non-European contributors or foundations? And crucially, how can the economic benefits of open source be balanced against the short-term costs of transitioning legacy systems?
Counterstrike scan: If this narrative were part of a coordinated influence campaign, the playbook would likely involve amplifying the economic and sovereignty benefits of open source while downplaying implementation challenges or the role of non-European actors in open source ecosystems. The actual content aligns with this pattern to some extent, as it emphasizes the upside of open source without deeply interrogating potential risks or trade-offs. However, the inclusion of specific policy examples (e.g., France’s Circulaire 5608) and economic data lends credibility, suggesting a genuine advocacy effort rather than manipulation. The focus on procurement reform as a systemic lever is a constructive approach, but readers should remain attentive to whether the narrative oversimplifies the complexities of digital sovereignty.
Patterns detected: none
Sentinel — Human
The text is highly likely human-written, characterized by a structured, empirically supported policy argument that uses specific historical data to build a sophisticated case for open source adoption.