 Yeah, welcome everybody. My name is Clude Lind and I have the pleasure to gather with my colleagues, Mirko Bimm, Andrew Katz and Sascha Komuto, to present you the findings of our study on the open source impact at the EU, which has been commissioned by the European Commission in 2019. And we have just released the report at the beginning of September this year. The Farnover Institute is warm of several institutes within the Farnover societies, and we especially work on innovation research and provide policy advice, but also we are also consulting companies. Okay, thank you, Clude. Just a few words about open form Europe. We are not for profit independent day type based in Brussels. We work at the intersection of open technologies and public policy. We were originally founded in the UK in 2002, with a mission to promote an open and competitive ICT market, including a level playing field for open source. Now we cover a range of digital topics, but we are always working with a range of stakeholders with academia and communities in order to provide policy advice to the European institutions. Hand back over to Clude. Yeah, policy makers need evidence. Evidence based policy, that's the code standards and the current need in order then to make good decisions on the behalf of society. Regarding open source, there has been some evidence in 2019 and Germany, Bitcoin launched the source monitor and I was also one of the kind of founders or initiators of this activity. In parallel, there have been some activities in France and also Frank Nadel in US did some work here in this context, and already back in 2006, there was a first study on the impact of open source, also launched by the European Commission. However, 15 years ago, we see some significant changes. The report is available on this link. Also be summary, including also summary in French. We applied a multi method approach where kind of warm big kind of task was the analysis of the economic impact, which I'm going to talk about then we have two tasks about the policy analysis about activities both within you but also worldwide. And the economic analysis is then compromised by some case studies and all these different sources and approaches that are going to the deviation of policy recommendations, especially how open source can be really supported in the future. Also in the context of different other policy objectives. Now about the economic impact. And since we are relying our analysis on historical data. The figures I'm going to send a firm to the situation in 2018. It means with the UK being member of the EU. But this is certainly not a big limitation. So all we looked on the one hand at the investments and into open source, and we find that around almost 10% of the 300 million employees and computer bringing programming contribute to get up. There's an effort of 60,000 full time equivalents and if you transfer that into their cost, we have an investment of a one, one billion and an important observation here is that especially small companies make the most contributions. And therefore we also see that the smaller the company, the more commits they are providing in relative terms. And we then kind of feed in these investments in a macro economic production function, which allows us then to attribute the contribution to the European GDP to the contributions to open source. And depending on the approach we also looked on the one hand on the number of comments on the other hand on the number of contributors based on on the different GitHub accounts, and therefore we get the range of contributions of open source to the European economy in 2018 between 65 and 95 billion. That means in the future we can expect probably after the COVID-19 crisis, a contribution beyond 100 million per year. And this is an estimation on on the lower bound, because there are other kind of unobservable effects which we are difficult to grasp with our econometric approach. And if we put this value into account it's it's the economic contribution of the and where to transport sector to you, or somebody else in the reaction to the report sets that the GDP of Luxembourg. Yeah for a significant amount. And what does it say that means if we really increase the number of contributors or the number of comments we get to these almost 100 billion increase in GDP. And then in order to keep this also the contributions have to be really increased every year at this level. These benefits again back to the cost that this bomb billion personal cost already in the previous slide, but if you also take into account both hardware cost, and also the fact that open source has to be kind of here. Generated over time and it's used over several periods, we get a cost benefit ratio of one to four, which is similar to other cost benefit ratios, regarding the investment in innovation, or also hardware from previous studies from the US. Yeah for that's reasonable, but still lower bound cost benefit ratio. So, thank you very much to my colleagues. Excellent. Thank you very much indeed for that. So, the study also involved a number of case studies that we did part of the rationale for this is the fact that open source hardware being something that is not as well developed as open source software in many ways. So it was not possible to do the same sort of quantitative analysis of case studies were very much more a qualitative analysis, and as well as open source software, we use the same methodologies to look at a number of open source software projects as well. So we had a large candidate list and ultimately we selected 14 projects for for review and we undertook a number of interviews as well, and we wanted to try to reach a fairly broad range and along a number of axes so we wanted diversity of geography. We wanted diversity of the sort of segments that these particular projects were operating in. Something that will become clear is that we wanted diversity of openness as well so not all of the projects that we studied would be regarded as being fully open and we'll talk about that in a moment. Obviously we're looking at some open source hardware and some open source software projects in there, and we also had diversity of business model and governance structure as well. We distilled those. All of those case studies into into into five specific studies that covered different sectoral success stories and areas. So let's just look at those individually. The first one that we looked at we're calling make make it a manufacturer. And this is really where you have a situation where open source weather open source hardware provides a bridge from one sector to another. So for example it could be academia could be research could be set as a manufacturing, and then that facilitates activity within the industrial domain that maybe wouldn't have been able to happen otherwise. So the projects that we looked at here at Arduino which many people will be familiar with. So it's a family of microcontroller boards. The CERN white rabbit project, which clearly it rose from particle physics it's a mechanism for doing ultra precise timing and synchronization using the ethernet networking protocol built on top of that and there's hardware around that as well. So we chose Arduino as a success story. It really started off as part of the hobbyist maker manufacturer movement, but then became a successful businesses and then right with many direct industrial applications, and during the course of this analysis we determined that the EU already possesses you know enviable projects that really do lead the way in open source hardware. But there is a degree of inhibition in the fact that the regulatory regime is unclear in some places. And the lack of clarity and IP can be an inhibitor and we'll talk a little bit about, you know, possible ways of dealing with this, particularly in terms of patents later. It's difficult to do manufacturing in Europe, especially when you're competing with countries like China, for example, you know, it may be that the European social structure adds costs to manufacturing, etc. So we need to be quite careful about how we deal with that. This is open hardware computing and infrastructure, and this very much shows how open source hardware really shifts innovation of the value chain and by that we mean that an open source, and this applies to software as well as infrastructure really means that innovation can can happen, not at the very base level at the infrastructure level but but really the differentiation can happen further up the value chain in terms of the applications that are that the infrastructure is being used in. So for this we looked at the open compute project risk five and sci five. This is really where my comment about openness comes in open compute project is on a spectrum of openness, you know, is open in many ways but you could also argue that it's not fully open in some other ways. So risk five as an instruction set architecture is fully open, but sci five is very much a commercial proprietary organization that provides proprietary solutions based on the risk five technologies, but also is involved heavily in open source hardware as well so from that perspective, it's a hybrid. So when we analyze a success story will look at risk five and sci five together and the interaction between them. So if really the instruction set architecture it emerges from from academia that the work that was done at Berkeley in the US. But it also has access to capital markets because of the fact that, you know, it's, it's based in the Bay Area makes it easier to access those markets, and from a government's perspective, risk five foundation is is has has governance based in the Bay Area as well. But during the course of this analysis I mean we found that you know there are a number of centers of excellence in the EU and EU adjacent regions. So below New Barcelona and Zurich being three of them. And there are many small and medium sized enterprises that are very knowledge intensive and active in this area as well so there's a there's a big community there's a very very powerful community which is very active throughout Europe, but we found that the biggest funding opportunities that still remain in the US case three regards end user applications. And this is really where we're talking about consumer focused applications. And this is this is a complicated business environment here, because we've got this conflict between software freedom and business differentiation in order to build a business you need to be able to differentiate. And so the question is, you know, where, where does that differentiation sit if it's unable to sit actually within the software itself because that's available on an open source basis where does the differentiation sit. So we looked at CentOS LibreOffice NextCloud and OW2 as the the the projects and organizations. And from those we chose NextCloud as the success story so NextCloud. It's a European business that produces a system which enables you to load basically cloud based infrastructure onto your local server. And it competes with things like Microsoft Teams and Google G Suite and so on and so forth but it's all capable of being run on a local server. And it's, it's therefore something that remains completely within control of the user all of it is available on free and open source software basis. So, the key findings that in this, this particular case study were that, you know, we, we, we were very interested in looking at the relationship between the altruistic and the business concerns. There's a lot of altruism behind the concept of free software but how does that inter interrelate with the business concerns of being able to run a successful business like NextCloud. We found that the market was very much characterized by SMEs, which tended to grow organically so that there was little external investment involved there. And we also found a scale disconnect between the application vendors and the service providers and integrators in this sector as well. Case four is embedded systems and Internet of Things and by this we're really talking about physical devices typically, you know, physically pretty small that contain general purpose computers. And they have connectivity into the Internet they can do all sorts of things we're very familiar with them from smartphones through to to fridges lawn mowers I mean even cars can be described as as being embedded devices as well. So once more that we looked at sentos as well and the open compute project sci-fi and and also Yachto and we chose Yachto as a success story so Yachto is a framework that is a development environment that enables you to build a custom Linux distribution, which you can then embed into your devices so it's almost exclusively used in embedded systems. And the findings here were that we've there's a massive impact in the embedded systems IOT subsector there's an awful lot going on in this, this sector, huge amount of activity at the moment. And the inventive activity tends to be shifting towards software and hardware combinations. So, you know this this just little devices that can sort of fit inside cars and monitor various things. Devices that can be used as part of networking infrastructure and so on, you know people keep on coming up with new and interesting innovative devices using this this this sort of technology. And there's a major European footprint in this area, Europe is very active and has a lot of interesting projects emerging. But it doesn't yet fully translate into market leading positions for companies within Europe. So Mocha, can I ask you to talk about case five please. Sure. So the public sector represents in a way a special case in this overall environment, as it complements private enterprise. And it has a also a special relationship to open source software and hardware technologies that are also a public good. And that means the public sector here interacts with the ecosystem in two ways. It is at the same time, a consumer that procures from the businesses and the communities, the technologies that are needed to run public services. And also a contributor to the ecosystem and this is the part that is in particular still emerging. Where what we see in the past contributions have been mostly in direct for example through the support of activities and private enterprise and increasingly we see the public sector pick up own activities and starting to be like a original open source contributor from the start. For specific projects specifically ow to software heritage white rabbit and X road. Software heritage in particular archives source code artifacts, if you will, that are from the open source community for posterity and makes them part of our cultural heritage. White rabbit where we spoke about an X road is the data exchange layer that was initially developed in Estonia in Finland, and is now becoming increasingly adopted all over the world. As a system to exchange data between public service agencies, even private enterprise and with mechanisms in place to maintain authority over the data and control how it is shared. And this, especially we highlighted this also as a success story here. This indicates this role of a contributor to the open source ecosystem that the public sector is emerging into where the there's increasing cooperation on creating technologies in cooperation with private enterprise that are then operated by the public sector. And where the public sector is able to a define what technologies are being developed so that they serve government services needs for example. What should be is able to collaborate with private enterprise for the operation of these services, and for further contributions or customizations, which in a way, really connects kind of the best of both worlds here private enterprise in the public sector. And the main things in this area are that there is still a developing relationship between the open source software and hardware ecosystem in the public sector. The focus in the past was primarily on open source licensing as a mechanism to simplify licensing relationships. And kind of basically to procure software that is necessary. And increasingly we see collaboration becoming a more prominent part of this. Recently, this was also apparent in the development of the COVID-19 warning applications where they were initially mostly open source licensed and then collaboration emerged between the countries that are using the same code base here. And I think there's still a lot of potential here for an increasing and closer and closer relationship between the public sector and the wider open source ecosystem. One thing that makes this a bit challenging is that the open source ecosystem is by definition international and doesn't really align itself to you or national member state borders, but it could also be this could all be a chance, not just a challenge. With Pacific focus on the European economy. There is an enormous potential because of the, the growth and the size of the single market to develop common East service infrastructure for all sorts of exchange of data between the member states and within the European Union from transactions in trade to management of public services, health systems, tax, etc. And if you consider that technologies like this, especially the code basis, technically only to be developed once the larger the market is that is able to collaborate on these aspects and to use them to, well, first of all more efficiently the whole point of these services will be and the more powerful they will come. There is a couple of challenges in this specific context is certainly a preference to local for local service providers that makes competition. And sometimes this is also already changing because the collaboration within the ecosystem is quite international already. And there is something we call here gratuitous differentiation basically where vendors are trying to kind of we regain control over the services that they are providing to the public sector by adding features to them that make them unique, but that aren't necessarily the core needs of the public service but after that you don't really have competition between the solutions anymore. This is something to primarily watch out for and in this case, the public sector is the consumer of the services and can take influence on the public sector essentially. And overall, as I said, it is this emerging understanding of the public sector as a core contributor to the ecosystem and I think this is a very welcome development. Okay, so the European Commission also asked us to conduct a public policy analysis, sort of looking at existing government strategies around open source around the world. I want to take time some time here to tell you about what or if he did better understand the government's relationship with open source. So, specifically what did the Commission asked us to do here. They asked us to look at the existing policies and sort of to create a framework that would allow allow for a comparison of different public policy actions across a number of countries. And understand what the governments have been doing and in what areas and understanding sort of what had worked well and where there were lessons to be learned and at the same time, I should emphasize here that we're not asked to be sort of normative but but more to sort of create a framework that would allow for some comparisons. We also wanted to understand a little bit better the different reasons for why governments would like to engage with open source to ask questions with regards to how this involvement has evolved over time. And also to look at some of the factors that play a role in creating those preferences. And thirdly, we wanted to get an idea of why certain policy actions worked well and created positive effects and why others did not and what sort of what was missing in those cases. We also conducted additional analysis in focusing on specific areas, but the Commission was interested in these included open hardware, artificial intelligence and cybersecurity. I officially don't have time to go into those details today but obviously I think that we'll leave back to the study for that. So the significant effort was put into creating a framework. And we sort of, I think here presenting in a quite a simple way. We sort of took the viewpoint that public sector engagement with the source has two main dimensions. First, we can see public policies that are aimed at the public sector. And then sort of public sector policies that are aimed to to stimulate the economy and to engage with the private sector after. So, if we look at the first dimension of public sector, we looked at elements such as public procurement policies, internal and public strategies relating to to competencies, skills, etc. And then, you know, with regards to the second dimension, we looked at how the government governments had involved with private sector actors and looked at more sort of the innovative aspects of open source and contributions to to to growth, entrepreneurship, etc. And for this, this part of the study, we relied on on desk research and also conducted over 50 expert interviews in active in the countries that we studied. So, just to have a quick look at the countries that we looked at in the study. We covered and agreed these countries in in in conversation with the European Commission, and covered countries both in the European member states and the United Kingdom, and also in both North America and South America, and as well as a couple of a few countries in Asia, we also wanted to look a little bit more closely at sort of what motivates these governments in, you know, across across the world to engage with the source and we identified four main sort of various economic concerns, political concerns, technical concerns and legal concerns. And, and so we also mapped the countries in terms of these issues and you can see that also there are some patterns emerging there where I just go to the next slide we can see that there are sort of, we've seen sort of so far two main waves of government policies around open source. And where the first one, I think was a lot driven around, you know, first, maybe sparked by by activism. Also, interest from the government side was mainly focused on on on on cost, cost reductions. And we have sort of a second wave of interest where it's more based on, it's more driven by sort of the private sector uptake the open source. And then, you know, we are seeing also. So, you know, we're thinking now there's sort of, we call it maybe a third way but increased awareness of in Europe, at least of the digital sovereignty aspects, which also important to the commission. So, some of the, you know, takeaways from this is that, indeed, it's important, as was illustrated in it say that, you know, that the focus cannot only be on on on policy and legislation. But the focus is very important. And also understanding what motivation to engage with open source within the institutions, and that the success of any policy really depends a lot on on culture, and being able to sort of follow up with with awareness and in a changing in culture. I. Another issue is political support where we've seen in a lot of cases that that when there is support of the political level when the issue becomes politically, politically salient, this can come to the top of the agenda but there needs to be some sort of institutional change cultural change has to happen. Because these sort of moments, they come they come and go and, and then can often lead to something a quite big statements, ambitious policies that are not, you know, where the results are not realized. So, you know, again, I think just continue on this. Lessons learned is that that culture is really key and I'm going to quickly. You know, we move to the policy recommendations. We'll talk a little bit more about that but political support from the top can be very valuable, but it needs to trickle down, need to have institutional change and also a sort of awareness raising. You know, it's not top down bottom up. It's not an either or need to have some some level of both. Okay, so moving on to sort of the final part of this panel is really taking everything together I think notes. So let's start on on the sort of the economic impact and the findings there about just sort of being able to quantify the value of open source to to the European economy. The sort of insights from the case studies about sort of the opportunities and challenges, and then also sort of lessons learned from from existing policies. The commission also had asked us to, to, to come up with a list of policy recommendations and I'm just going to talk about the first part. We have sort of, I think we came up with a list of 30 or so recommendations. We also then try to look at both sort of looking almost at the possibilities of the European Commission to ask both at both as a sort of you know the initiator of public policies but also as a funder of research and and finally as sort of being able to act as a as a capitalist in in in building and driving an internationally competitive European industry so I think really if we look at sort of the first aspect which is a digitally autonomous public sector. And we have really focused on this aspect of being able to have the institutional capacity to engage with these issues. I think at the beginning mentioned something about sort of the size of open source sector in Europe and comparing it to some other sectors where if you look at, you know, European governments and European Commission. Those sectors are the focus of quite sort of large departments in government departments. We don't see that level of sort of institutional capacity in in in Europe today. And so we're making this sort of basic comment that the value of open source to the European economy exceeds the institutional capacity in Europe that would be needed to extract that value and to sort of to to to you know to encourage further investment in open source so really that's what we are emphasizing first and foremost is is building this capacity and then the European Commission has already taken a step last year to to build an open source program program office as well. And this is something we see as very a very crucial step. And we, I think, are asking, you know, or recommending that the commission promote such a network of hospitals within the member states in Europe, and also that the commission has the opportunity to to sort of be a current coordinator, if you will, of this of this of this network. And, you know, with sort of. In a semi-formal way, but it was still able to sort of collaboration and cooperation. I will hand over to to note for our next set of policy recommendations. Thank you, Sachiko for focusing into the first pillar of this table of policy recommendations, especially on building institution capacity. So overall this this also then contributes to and create an increased legitimacy of open source. Another point from a researcher's perspective I just want to make is we also need better data that means open source activities. I mean, impact should be really go into the portfolio of the data collection activities by us that the UP level in order to to increase and improve the the evidence base which we have called for the very beginning of our talk. That's also very important recommendation from my side. Now, looking at another list of policy recommendations which are a little bit derived from the concept of innovation systems and the different functions. And first, we have to invest more in the development of open source that means our funding programs should focusing especially on open source soft but also is fairly hardware activities also maybe specific programs for open source based companies and organizations can be recommended that's that's one aspect. And in order to generate the economic benefit of open source, it has also to be distributed. And in the context of digital sovereignty, maybe setting up European repository is another proposal, which which might be considered also improve the networks, also the networks between the private and the public sector, which are related and focus on open source. A third and very important aspect because I didn't focus on this as we also found that the increase of 10% more contributions per year into open source would also create around 600 additional open source based Starbucks. That means here, open source is an important source for pushing also the creation of new companies, but this is has been exactly neglected in all this data program so far that means here again, specific programs which especially focusing on on creating startups in the context also by providing guidance for the people in doing so that means, especially also kind of giving them skills and knowledge to, to develop sustainable business models around open source is an important aspect. And fourth point and this is especially for Europe, a crucial channel trend, we have a demographic trend, which will reduce the skill people in general, and we have already a skills shortage related to contributors to open source. This has already been shown in the in the bitcom open source monitor as a most relevant disadvantage for companies to get involved. I mean it's here. Also universities and I'm also here representing the two Berlin as one big techno universities they have to really expand their activities here and thanks to Mirko, giving a course also an open source in our chair. This is only a very small activity compared to the kind of really broad initiative to strengthen the human capital development related to open source skills. And that's, that's, that's also important. Now if you move from these kind of research and human capital focused set of recommendations to, to the more industry related one also access to financial capital is an issue and one important argument which is beyond this is is also the role of public procurement. That means here, if the public sector really steers their, their, the public procurement activities by by opening up or maybe by even encouraging open source companies, especially small companies to to really submit tenders and offers to provide their solutions to the public sector would be great, maybe a double dividend for the public sector but also for the companies which, which are really and maybe winning these bits and providing additional open source, then the regulatory environment is also not yet really open or taking the open source issues into account. You see no reference in the intellectual property regulations at the you you level which make explicit links to to open source that's, that's, that's an issue. Also the public procurement regulations they they address the important role of international standards or standards in general, but no mentioning of open source as another important element for public. So market creation is also important aspect here that that the competition rules and competition regulations take open source into account, especially since we have seen that platform companies are really relying heavily on open source and and on that and here this has to be considered. And so far, the competition regulations and the implementation of these regulations and practice do not yet consider the important role of open source as maybe an instrument to lower the interest between new markets, but maybe also misused by by some big players, according to their interest, which is then harming the whole market that means here that that's also an important aspect to be considered. So over to our open source hardware specialist Andrew for the next two issues on our list. Thank you, and those recommendations are equally as applicable in almost all cases to open source hardware as they are to open source software. But we also considered and you can look at the report in greater detail for these will consider the number of specific recommendations for policy as they apply specifically to open source hardware. So one of the things that we identified was a lack of harmonization of patent rules throughout the member states. So what we suggest is it will be helpful to introduce a standardized safe harbor so that people who were working in the area of open hardware were aware that when they were using doing work that was for example research or they were doing activities in a domestic context that they would automatically not be infringing any patents so we had to sort of balance the rights of the researchers, the developers and people using open hardware and domestic context with the rights of the patent holders so we wanted to look into as well. We also recommend that research is done on looking at the regulatory regime there is always a tension between clearly everyone agrees that consumers need to be kept safe and in order for consumers to be safe in such as medical devices pharmaceutical automotive and so on and so forth. We need to have rules that make sure that the devices, etc, when they're delivered to the consumer safe. But the problem is there's a tension there between that and the federated manufacturing and the self manufacturing that can happen in the context of open source hardware so we need to look at regulatory mechanisms that both protect the safety and security of the consumer while at the same time, allowing the development of open source hardware infrastructure to take place and open source hardware manufacturing to happen in a way that's not hibited by overburden some regulation for when the various materials are manufactured put onto the market and acquired by consumers as well. Another issue relates to the tools and services now for open hardware. If we're talking about software tools for example for the sort of tools that you might need as part of a hardware description language tool chain. At the moment although there's an increasing number of open source tools available and still many of the major tool chains and the tools that are needed for testing and simulating designs and so on are still in a proprietary world. So thought needs to be given to how the situation can be moving to one that's much more similar to the open source software world when many of the tool chains are themselves open source. But that also ties into the fact that obviously with hardware quite often you need physical machines to be able to create open hardware design so for example things like you know laves milling machines at 3d printers and so on and so forth. So one way of making these more accessible to people to enable the communities to access them is through the support of fab labs and maker spaces and similar centers of excellence where many people can make use of this equipment. Yeah, thank you. Thank you Andrew. Last point here on our list is sustainability and indeed here I think we are at the very beginning of exploiting the options of open source soft and but also hardware to approach maybe more in detail that the 17 SDT is the sustainable development goals. And here also policy has to consider the potential of open source in order to address these future major challenges. So, and this moves us to the summary slide. We have seen, or we have revealed that there's a large economic impact on software and maybe this impact could be similar for open source hardware in the future. Public policy is an important instrument to push that because we have here also some market or system failure, which can be addressed by by public policy. On the other hand, what we have just seen there are very different areas of policy which have to be taken on board and and we have to find kind of a coordinated policy mix approaching all these different steps. And the providing the framework conditions in the public sector to the R&D, the entrepreneurship and the market creation, including that the regulatory framework, which have to be addressed and we have also the challenge that we have different layers. We have the European Commission layer we have the national member states layer but but open source, especially we think about procurement this goes down to the municipalities and the regional level. And this is another challenge which has to be addressed. And therefore, still quite some work to do but based on our finding, it's worthwhile, not only from an economic perspective but also from a social and at the end from a sustainability perspective. Thank you very much.