petites singularités have been participating during the past 7 years to NGI0 consortium projects that were responding to NGI funding rounds, from the inside we could see the benefit of free software environnement as it supported a large number of European-based free software projects.
An impact study shows that NGI projects have been extremely positive in providing funding and technical support to a wide range of open projects, and in fostering an Internet ecosystem that respects digital rights, promotes sustainability and supports EU legislation. In terms of figures, the study notes that of over 1,000 projects that received funding, 57% offer “viable alternatives to existing market solutions”, and 74% continue to operate after funding.
European policy has been guided by reports that emphasized the specificity and the importance of European free software development, in its various aspects: the knowledge and technical capacity of the developers engaged in very important innovative projects, would it be with regard to high level security issues, quantum computing, specific network issues and edge hardware projects.
Investment in autonomous technology infrastructure is the fundamental need of XXIst Century. As the essential current Eurostack report explains, while US and China dominate most of technological production, Europe has a hidden strength materialized by its long standing presence in free software and open standards that form the backbone of critical infrastructure. Still, funding remains fragmented and policy support insufficient, not allowing for effective coordination of European free software ecosystem that is instead often captured by US-based companies.
This study “Benchmarking the impact of the next generation internet initiative - Final study report for EU commission” published in June 2024 was written and directed by Clémentine Valayer of Gartner Inc. The NGI programme started operationally in 2019, mobilizing about 140M€ over 5 years and supporting more than 1000 projects.
This is not news. A recent study also demonstrates that investing in open source and free software is rewarding as return on investment turns to be more than 100x the original investment translated in economic growth and SME creation.
Other studies present the satisfaction companies have while they commit to using and eventually contributing to Free Software. Indeed, benefits are observable at different levels of organisation, would it be a more engaged worker’s commitment triggered by direct engagement with software; quality of tools in return upholding productivity gains, opening towards new forms of collaboration and generally better adaptation of the digital tool to company needs. → « Les logiciels libres dans l’UE » (EUIPO, June 2020, French PDF)
On the basis of the multiple benefits demonstrated, European institutions have consistently been investing into free software with good result for the European ecosystem as we demonstrate strength and autonomy from monopolistic organisation.
However it appears that a recent trend is changing according to priorities and ideologies that seem to contradict European values.
Another report from the European Commission’s Open Source Observatory (OSOR) provides an in-depth qualitative analysis of open source policy across 15 European and non-European countries. It is based on the research carried out for the series of Open Source Country Intelligence Reports by the OSOR team. It notes that at a global level, the notion of the digital commons is now being used to encourage cooperation in the creation of technological solutions.
However the recent report by deputy Sarah Knafo seems to counter that approach and already the preamble of Knafo’s draft report emphasizes the aim to build up companies that reach a critical mass in the European ecosystem. Such a premise endangers European free software ecosystem constituted into an interdependent network of SMEs. This fragile ecosystem needs to be preserved as it is key to European digital autonomy.
This report presents the notion of digital sovereignty under a very specific angle that seems to benefit military-industrial complex more than the European citizens : the Commons and even our strong developers’ environment become at risk.
Indeed the promotion of centralisation around a few companies that would dominate the European ecosystem, mainly by emphasizing AI development, is detrimental to the existing and flourishing decentralized ecosystem, where different projects support complementary minimalist approaches to complex and edge problems.
Such positioning as promoted by Knafo is very worrying since it denies European specificity and existing strength to embrace mimicking foreign models. Sarah Knafo’s report does not acknowledge the crucial need of engaged public procurement and sustained investment are key to ensure that unique European software ecosystem becomes a foundational basis for digital sovereignty. Cutting existing support as it is proposed in Sarah Knafo’s report will only lead to open wide a breach in European infrastructure, most probably rapidly filled by foreign proprietary systems.
While the contradictory report engaged by several MEPs,brings a very well documented position on network issues and the need to publicly finance investment in hardware, it does not fundamentally modify Knafo’s position that aims to invest in AI with the same target of diluting rich SMEs ecosystem that secure a working environment to the benefit of our common needs, for a centralizing infrastructure that targets control. Furthermore the Eurostack report acknowledges the importance of the Digital Public Infrastructure, and rightly notes that most often it is relying on foreign software stack, while cutting edge privacy preserving decentralized European free software is available for implementing digital euro and identification, these capacities need to be valued, not dismissed by a sudden change of ideological orientation that ignores the state of the art.
As noted in the Eurostack report, Europe possesses all the ingredients for success and among other things talents in research and development that lack support and investment ; supporting the existing is the only possible way to autonomy.
