Currently, public procurement is treated as a purely technical and economic field. However, with the billions Europe spends each year, governments could push Technology giants In a greener and more democratic direction.
EU annual public procurement is the ultimate weapon for digital economy democratization
It has now become almost a political reflex to talk about the public sector as a problem: very large, very rigid, too bureaucratic. Digitization is presented as the solution — a means to shrink the state, making it more «flexible», more efficient and less costly.
However, as they point out in Social Europe Jan Willem Goudriaan, Simon Vinge and Christina Colclough, this narrow perception overlooks how the public sector has historically been a driving force for innovative changes and why the simple purchase of European products is not enough in itself.
The public sector does not just govern society. He's organizing it. In a digital economy, this organization is becoming increasingly involved in the choices made when developing and supplying digital systems.
Political decisions
The question, therefore, is not how much public sector we should have, but what role it should play in shaping digitisation. Recently, governments at central and state level —in France and Germany respectively— decided to gradually replace the main American operating systems, cooperation tools, cloud infrastructure and artificial intelligence platforms with national and European alternatives. These decisions are not just technical· It's politics. They aim to reduce dependence on American suppliers, strengthen digital sovereignty and ensure greater control over data and infrastructure.
These examples show how public procurement can be used actively to shape the market and define the direction of digitisation — Not just as consumption, but as an applied industrial policy, which also tackles security issues, reducing dependence on American technological colossals. The EU has the opportunity to improve the institutional framework through the revision of the Public Procurement Directives, as well as through the relevant Law on Acceleration of Industry and the upcoming Cloud and Artificial Intelligence Development Act.
Europe's public procurement is a powerful control weapon for Big Tech
However, tendering procedures are still not considered —or sufficiently used— as a policy tool, although more than 14% of EU GDP, amounting to around EUR 2 trillion a year, is spent on public procurement throughout Europe. Given how rapidly our societies are digitized, an important part of this dizzying amount must be assumed to be directed towards digital solutions. Public procurement is therefore not a simple budget heading, but a structural demand that helps determine which technologies will be developed and which standards will become market rules.
Non-neutral technology
However, public procurement is mostly treated as a technical sector. The criteria are formulated closely, evaluations are limited mainly to price and functionality, and wider social parameters appear secondary — or as risks to be minimised. This is wrong. Because digitization is not neutral. It incorporates specific priorities: between efficiency and legal certainty, between innovation and control, between short-term optimization and long-term sustainability. Public procurement should respect social, environmental and tax conditions, while supporting the rule of law and the proper procedures we expect from public administration and the digital infrastructure on which it is based. It is not enough for these priorities to be reflected only in legislation.· They must also be actively applied to the specific systems on which our society depends. Therefore, the question now is not how the public sector can buy as cheap as possible, but how it can use its demand to give direction.
Environmental footprint
This applies, first and foremost, to the environment. Digital systems often look intangible, but depend on a vast physical infrastructure: data centres, hardware production and global supply chains. Their operation and development require significant quantities of electricity, and cooling implies high water consumption. The production of equipment draws rare resources and causes environmental impacts throughout its life cycle.
There should therefore be a requirement for systematic environmental accounting covering the entire digital life cycle — from development and operation to upgrades and withdrawal. This will not only improve individual decisions but also change the structure of incentives in the market. Thus, through public procurement solutions that seem efficient in the short term will be avoided, but in fact they are energetic and problematic over time.
Protection of rights
Secondly, rights. Digital systems may have extensive implications for the rights of citizens and public sector employees. Automated decisions, profile creation and data-based decisions can affect access to services, jobs, promotions, legal certainty and equal treatment. Even when decisions are not taken completely automatically, system recommendations can have a decisive impact on individuals or groups already marginalised.
Requirements for impact assessments based on fundamental rights should therefore be established. These should be drawn up in cooperation with representatives of citizens and trade unions, be carried out before their implementation, updated regularly and publicly available.
Transparency and accountability
Thirdly, transparency and governance. Digital system creators for the public sector should be required to publish a number of information. It is worrying that the largest technology companies successfully put pressure on (lobbying) to prevent the publication of data on energy and water use by their data centres. It is equally unacceptable that they manage not to pay their share of tax while also devouring state funding. The public must have an image of the digital systems they pay for and their environmental impact, as well as the ability to verify how they work. Systematic checks on legality should also be carried out to ensure compliance with applicable legislation and agreements. Without transparency and access to the core of systems, it becomes difficult to identify and correct errors, prejudices and involuntary consequences — And therefore it becomes equally difficult to charge responsibility.
Democratic participation
Τέταρτον, δημοκρατία και συμμετοχή. Τα ψηφιακά συστήματα αναπτύσσονται συχνά χωρίς τη συστηματική συμμετοχή των εργαζομένων και των πολιτών που τα χρησιμοποιούν ή επηρεάζονται από αυτά. Αυτό δημιουργεί όχι μόνο προβλήματα εφαρμογής, αλλά και ένα δημοκρατικό έλλειμμα. Εάν η συμμετοχή καταστεί προαπαιτούμενο στις δημόσιες συμβάσεις και στην ανάπτυξη, δεν θα αλλάξει απλώς η ποιότητα των λύσεων, αλλά και η λειτουργικότητα και η νομιμοποίησή τους.
Ψηφιακή κυριαρχία
Και τέλος, η κυριαρχία. Η εξάρτηση από ιδιώτες προμηθευτές περιορίζει τα περιθώρια δράσης του δημόσιου τομέα — τόσο τεχνικά όσο και πολιτικά. Όταν τα δεδομένα και τα συστήματα δεν βρίσκονται υπό δημόσιο έλεγχο, υπονομεύεται η αυτονομία του δημοσίου. Τα δεδομένα από αυτά τα συστήματα δεν πρέπει να τυγχάνουν εμπορικής εκμετάλλευσης, ούτε να μεταφέρονται εκτός ευρωπαϊκής δικαιοδοσίας. Ο καθορισμός ορίων σε αυτό το πεδίο δεν είναι μια τεχνική λεπτομέρεια, αλλά πολιτική προτεραιότητα. Θα πρέπει να εξεταστεί η δημόσια ιδιοκτησία των ψηφιακών υποδομών και να υποστηριχθούν οι συμπράξεις δημόσιου-δημόσιου τομέα — όπως προωθείται από την Κομισιόν στον επερχόμενο Νόμο για την Ανάπτυξη του Cloud και της Τεχνητής Νοημοσύνης. Αυτό θα πρέπει να ενισχυθεί με χρηματοδότηση ώστε να βοηθηθούν, για παράδειγμα, οι δήμοι να αναπτύξουν συστήματα εστιασμένα στις κατευθύνσεις που θέτουμε εδώ, και όχι στην υποστήριξη της μεγιστοποίησης του κέρδους και των αρχών της τεχνολογικής υποβάθμισης (enshittification).
Μια νέα προοπτική
Όλα τα ζητήματα που περιγράφονται παραπάνω μπορούν να αντιμετωπιστούν εντός των υφιστάμενων πλαισίων για τις δημόσιες συμβάσεις. Η σχετική νομοθεσία δεν αποκλείει τη συνεκτίμηση του περιβάλλοντος, των δικαιωμάτων ή των μακροπρόθεσμων κοινωνικών επιπτώσεων. Ο καθοριστικός παράγοντας είναι το πώς ερμηνεύεται και εφαρμόζεται αυτή η νομοθεσία.
Σήμερα, η κυρίαρχη άποψη είναι ότι ο δημόσιος τομέας οφείλει πρωτίστως να ελαχιστοποιεί το κόστος και τα ρίσκα. Κάτι τέτοιο υποβιβάζει τις δημόσιες συμβάσεις σε μια καθαρά διοικητική λειτουργία. Μια εναλλακτική θεώρηση, όπως παρουσιάζεται εδώ, υποστηρίζει ότι ο δημόσιος τομέας μπορεί, μέσω των συμβάσεών του, να επηρεάσει την αγορά και τις διαθέσιμες λύσεις. Από αυτή την οπτική, το δημόσιο δεν στέκεται εμπόδιο στην καινοτομία, αλλά αποτελεί προϋπόθεση για να διασφαλιστεί ότι η καινοτομία κινείται σε μια κατεύθυνση συμβατή με τις δημοκρατικές αξίες και την κυριαρχία, προστατεύοντας παράλληλα τα θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα και το περιβάλλον.
- Jan Willem Goudriaan: Γενικός Γραμματέας της EPSU (Ευρωπαϊκή Ομοσπονδία Συνδικάτων Δημόσιων Υπηρεσιών)
- Simon Vinge: Επικεφαλής οικονομολόγος του σουηδικού συνδικάτου Akademikerförbundet SSR, με εξειδίκευση στη χρήση αλγορίθμων στον δημόσιο τομέα
- Christina Colclough: Ιδρύτρια του «The Why Not Lab», ειδικός σε θέματα ψηφιοποίησης της εργασίας, τεχνητής νοημοσύνης και προστασίας των δεδομένων των εργαζομένων
