Debate at the CNIS on reuse, data and technological sovereignty
Share
At the CNIS 2026 congress, the session “Reuse, data and technological sovereignty” put on the table an essential debate: how can administrations guarantee quality information systems that are sustainable, secure and aligned with the public interest?
The speakers, José Joaquín de Haro Navarro of the Provincial Council of Albacete and Miquel Estapé and Valls of the AOC agreed on a shared diagnosis: without control over data and without public alternatives or under public governance, the digitalization of the public sector is exposed to organizational, economic and democratic risks. In this framework, Miquel Estape shared several reflections and proposals on a personal basis, with the aim of fueling a strategic debate on the digital future of the public sector.
An increasingly concentrated market with growing risks
Public administrations operate in a highly dynamic, but also increasingly concentrated, technological market. The presence of large investment funds, the consolidation of suppliers and the configuration of a single European market generate a scenario where the negotiating capacity of administrations —especially local ones— is limited.
In Spain, 90% of local entities are small and heavily dependent on technology providers. This situation entails risks:
“Kidnapping” (lock in) technological: difficulty in changing suppliers without high costs.
Long and rigid contracts: five-year tenders, plus two migration years.
Price increases and unpredictable conditions.
Organizational and political risks: loss of control over essential services.
Difficulty prioritizing public strategies over interesYou are private.
These concerns do not question the role of the market—which is essential—but they do highlight the need to strengthen the public sector's capacity to act autonomously and avoid excessive dependencies.
Reuse as a sustainability and efficiency strategy
The session highlighted the reuse of common solutions as one of the most efficient strategies for the public sector. When these solutions are overseen or driven by a public entity, the benefits are clear:
Economic savings and resource optimization.
Reduction of implementation time.
Improving quality through standards and good practices.
Boosting innovation through collaborative ecosystems.
Guarantee of digital rights and inclusion.
Generating trust in digital public services.
Public service vision above commercial logic.
However, Estapé recalled that developing and maintaining software is complex, and that the public sector has accumulated historical failures.
Sedipualba is clearly a success story with more than 1.000 entities reusing its solutions. And the AOC's common services model too: it has generated 744 million euros in savings, with an ROI of 30 euros per euro invested.
Technological sovereignty: control the data to control the future
Digital sovereignty does not mean doing without the market, but ensuring that the public sector maintains control over its critical assets. This includes:
Public data platforms that ensure direct access to one's own information.
Documentary repositories under institutional governance.
Standardized integration layer that allows components to be replaced without blockages.
Shared data models between local entities.
Public functional cores: population register, territory, people, etc.
This approach is not contrary to the market: it complements it. A public sector with its own technological capacity generates a more competitive, more diverse and less exposed market to structural dependencies.
Actions to boost the market and reduce risks
In the debate, several lines of action were discussed to move towards a more balanced model:
Stimulate the market through more open and results-oriented public procurement.
Reduce bareres entry point for new companies, especially in integrations.
Encourage innovative emerging companies that contribute new solutions.
Promote standardized management and data models that facilitate interoperability.
Promote public alternatives or those under public control that act as a counterweight and guarantee stability.
Estapé used an analogy with housing: the presence of public housing does not replace the market, but it helps to moderate it and avoid abusive situations. Similarly, a public technological alternative does not have to be the most advanced, but it must be functional enough to guarantee equity and stability.
Public alternative
In Catalonia, different ways are being explored to have a public alternative or under public control. On the one hand, initiatives to develop open source information systems. On the other, Localret proposals for centralized purchases or long-term concessions. These options provide:
Price stability.
Functional adaptations aligned with the public strategy.
Reduction of commercial pressure.
Long-term vision, beyond five-year contracts.
The debate is lively and cross-cutting. There is a broad consensus that the public sector needs its own alternative or one under public control that acts as a real counterweight to the market.
A new model of public-private collaboration
Public-private collaboration is essential. The private sector brings innovation, specialization and execution capacity that the public sector cannot assume alone. But it is also necessary to ensure that this collaboration is balanced and sustainable, where the benefits and risks are shared.
In this sense, Estapé defended a model based on:
A technological core under public control, with free and open source code.
An ecosystem of collaborative development between administrations and companies.
Business models based on complementary services and developments, not on structural dependencies.
Shared innovation between the public and private sectors.
It is an ambitiously hybrid model: it strengthens the public sector, but also opens up opportunities for the private sector. And although it is innovative and risky, it is not a new idea: it has been appearing in strategic reflections on the digitalization of the public sector for years.
