Europe’s digital sovereignty is at risk due to chronic under-investment in our shared digital infrastructure. This is not due to a lack of skills or activity, but because investment, responsibility, and long-term ownership remain fragmented across Europe. While the United States and China pour billions into developing and maintaining open, scalable, and strategic technologies, Europe continues to treat common digital infrastructure as a policy afterthought rather than a foundation and driver of competitiveness and autonomy.
Common open source-based software and hardware platforms are the arteries of a modern digital economy. They enable startups to innovate faster, public administrations to collaborate, and society to trust the digital services it depends on. Our earlier work shows a cost-benefit ratio of 1:4 for investments in open code. A 10% increase in such investments would also generate an estimated 0.4% to 0.6% GDP growth and more than 600 additional ICT start-ups in the EU—figures that are still modest compared to other research. Yet today, the development and long-term maintenance of these open technologies are underfunded and fragmented. At the same time, open source is progressively being positioned as key to Europe’s digital sovereignty, security and competitiveness, where commercialization and a strong vendor ecosystem are key success factors (access the source material of the graphic below).
Recent data shows that while Europe accounts for a substantial share of global developers, its contribution to open-source infrastructure remains fragmented across countries, with activity – as measured by the number of GitHub commits - concentrated to a small number of Member States. Germany alone accounts for roughly one quarter of all active open source projects created in the EU, while Germany and France together represent more than 40% of total European output—reflecting, in part, their larger economic size and industrial base. By contrast, a long tail of Member States each contributes only a few percent, indicating that Europe’s open-source capacity is unevenly distributed rather than continental in scope. This outcome is not irrational: Member States invest primarily at national level because budgets, accountability, and political incentives sit there. However, when this happens without coordination, the aggregate European result remains fragmented and sub-optimal (access the source material of the graphic below).
A similar effect can be found when looking at firms being active in the open source industry. Data from Crunchbase shows that France has the largest shares within Europe with 21% of all OS firms being located there, closely followed by Germany with a share of 19%. Spain and the Netherlands follow with a share of 10% each, while and Italy (6%) and Sweden (5%) rank 5th and 6th, respectively. The other EU-27 member states show a rather scattered picture with shares below 5%. From a business perspective, this suggests that open source firms cluster where demand is predictable and sustained, not only where technical talent exists.
Beyond volume, differences also emerge in how open-source is institutionally anchored. In leading countries, projects are more frequently owned and maintained by organizations (median 46 projects per organisation) rather than individual developers, reflecting the availability of corporate capacity, digital infrastructure, and financing. This points to strong organizational concentration of open-source activity. In countries with weaker digital and institutional infrastructure, open-source activity is more often driven by individual initiative, resulting in a more scattered organizational ecosystems. Without organisations able to commit long-term resources, maintenance weakens, reliability erodes, and trust in the infrastructure suffers.
These patterns are not the result of a lack of skills or demand. They reflect a governance and investment gap. European funding instruments largely support short-term projects and research activities, but provide few mechanisms for long-term infrastructure maintenance and operational ownership. Open-source development in Europe remains heavily dependent on individual effort, short-term research funding, or volunteer labor, with limited mechanisms to support long-term maintenance, scaling, and institutional ownership. As a consequence, Europe produces code, but too rarely produces the durable digital infrastructure on which competitiveness, resilience, and technological autonomy depend (access the source material of the graphic below).
By contrast, the US invests heavily through their domestic BigTech industry further fueling their global platform reach. When ranked among the top ten producing countries, the US consistently stands alone, with a repository base far exceeding that of any other single country. China has emerged as the strongest individual challenger, reflecting how they treat strategic digital infrastructure as a public-good priority, coupling industrial policy with consistent funding and coordinated state-capital investment, reiterated through their five-year plans. In both cases, continuity of demand, long-term planning, and clear ownership of strategic infrastructure play a central role. No single European Member State approaches the scale of either the US or China; Europe only becomes visible at this level when national contributions are aggregated at the EU level.
However, the shares have shown substantial changes overtime. In the early years, the United States accounts for close to half of the global open-source repository base (≈45–50%), reflecting its early and sustained investment in digital platforms and ecosystems. Over time, this share gradually declines—not due to contraction, but because other regions expand. China’s share rises steadily from a low base and now accounts for roughly one tenth of the global cumulative stock (≈10%), consistent with its long-term industrial strategy and coordinated state-capital investment. Europe, even when aggregated, stabilizes at just over one fifth of the global total (≈22–25%), remaining structurally below the United States and increasingly challenged by China (access the source material of the graphic below).
Examining development activity provides additional insight and highlights Europe’s underlying strengths. Measured as the total number of commits accumulated across all repositories, the United States accounts for the largest global share (≈32%), followed by the European Union (≈22%), while China represents a smaller, though increasing, share (≈8%). A similar comparison using contributor data puts EU under a better light. Across all years, the EU accounts for a share of GitHub contributor accounts comparable to that of the United States (≈23%) and substantially higher than that of China (≈12%). That indicates that Europe supplies a large share of the global talent base and does not lack skills or engagement in open-source software. What is missing are mechanisms that turn this talent into durable products, companies, and infrastructure that remain rooted in Europe.
Taken together, and viewed across all datasets, these patterns underscore the path-dependent nature of open-source development.
Scale is not achieved through isolated projects or short-term initiatives, but through sustained investment, institutional backing and coordination over time. Therefore, investing in shared digital infrastructure is not charity; it’s a growth strategy, while also increasing Europe’s strategic resilience and reducing dependency on external platforms. Studies repeatedly show that open, reusable technology lowers innovation costs, stimulates SME creation, and builds domestic expertise. Each euro invested multiplies in economic impact - spawning skilled jobs, new digital companies, and an ecosystem less dependent on foreign technology suppliers. This is precisely the model Europe needs if it is to shape, rather than follow, the next wave of technological transformation.
Europe undoubtedly has the talent - across industry, research, and civic innovation - to lead the next generation of digital infrastructure. Initiatives like the European Open Source Academy and the annual European Open Source Awards show that vision and leadership already exist, and help signal maturity and reliability to funders, public buyers, and market actors. What is missing is scale and continuity. Europe must move from scattered pilots to sustained, strategic investments that make common digital infrastructure a shared continental priority. Establishing long-term funding frameworks, integrating open technologies into industrial and public procurement policy, and aligning national strategies around digital commons would transform Europe’s latent strength into sovereign capability. The time to act is now, before the foundations of tomorrow’s digital economy are once again built elsewhere rather than scaled and sustained in Europe.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER TO BE INFORMED ABOUT FUTURE RELEASES OF THE DATA VISUALISATION TOOL
