How does open source under CADA reduce duplication across the public sector?

As proposed, the Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA) tackles the costly inefficiency of public bodies rebuilding the same digital solutions by mandating th

Summary As proposed, the Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA) tackles the costly inefficiency of public bodies rebuilding the same digital solutions by mandating that any software developed by or for them and made available for reuse must be published in a catalogue connected to the central EU Open Source Solutions Catalogue. This requirement, set out in Article 42, ensures that public funds are used to build software once rather than repeatedly. By centralising visibility, the proposal aims to "reduce duplication costs and foster innovation across the Union," thereby "maximise[ing] the value of public expenditure" as explicitly stated in Recital 83.

Detail

The European public sector faces a persistent structural inefficiency: different Member States, and even different departments within the same country, frequently commission the development of similar digital tools from scratch. This "reinvention of the wheel" fragments the market, wastes budget, and slows down the digital transformation of public services. The proposed Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA) addresses this directly by creating a legal framework that prioritises reuse over rebuilding.

The Legal Mechanism: Article 42 and Centralised Visibility

The core instrument for reducing duplication is Article 42 of the CADA proposal. This article establishes a specific obligation for transparency and accessibility regarding software that public bodies choose to share.

The text of Article 42 states:

"When making software to which they hold intellectual property rights available for reuse under an open source licence, a Union entity or public sector body shall do so using a catalogue or repository that is connected to, and made accessible through, the EU OSS Catalogue referred to in Article 43."

This provision creates a mandatory "one-stop-shop" effect. Previously, software solutions might have been hosted in isolated, local repositories or on generic platforms where they were difficult for other public authorities to discover. Under the proposal, if a public body decides to share its software, it cannot simply leave it in a silo. It must ensure that the software is listed in a catalogue that feeds directly into the central EU Open Source Solutions Catalogue.

This centralisation is the key to breaking the cycle of duplication. It ensures that a solution developed in one Member State—for example, a specific tool for processing healthcare data or managing local transport permits—is immediately visible to procurement officers and IT directors in other Member States.

The Rationale: Reducing Costs and Maximising Value

The legislative intent behind this mechanism is clearly articulated in Recital 83 of the proposal. The Commission notes that while an increasing number of Union entities and public-sector bodies are sharing software, "software is often made available and accessible in different repositories or catalogues, hampering searchability, discoverability and, ultimately, reuse."

When software is hard to find, public authorities are forced to assume that no suitable solution exists. Consequently, they commission new development work, leading to three critical negative outcomes:

Redundant Development Costs: Public money is spent on writing code that already exists elsewhere in the Union.
Fragmented Ecosystems: Multiple versions of similar tools emerge, each requiring separate maintenance, security updates, and support, which increases the long-term cost of ownership.
Missed Innovation Opportunities: As Recital 83 explicitly states, the current fragmented approach fails to "maximise the value of public expenditure" and hinders the ability to "foster innovation across the Union."

By connecting local catalogues to the central EU OSS Catalogue, CADA would ensure that the "signal" of available solutions is loud enough to be heard above the "noise" of fragmented local repositories. This allows a second authority to adopt an existing solution rather than funding a new build, directly addressing the "duplication costs" mentioned in the recital.

Maximising the Value of Public Expenditure

The proposal frames open-source sharing not merely as a technical preference, but as a matter of fiscal responsibility. Recital 83 emphasises that sharing software "may be considered to be in the public interest" because it reduces duplication costs. When public bodies reuse existing open-source components, they can redirect their budgets toward:

Customisation: Adapting the software for specific local needs rather than building the core engine from scratch.
Higher-Value Innovation: Investing in new capabilities that do not yet exist, rather than replicating existing ones.
Security and Maintenance: Improving the cybersecurity and long-term maintenance of the tools they do use, rather than spreading resources thin across multiple redundant projects.

This approach aligns with the broader CADA objective of strengthening the EU's cloud and AI ecosystem. By creating a robust financial and talent flywheel, public spending would drive innovation rather than repeating past efforts.

The Role of the EU OSS Catalogue

The effectiveness of Article 42 relies entirely on the infrastructure provided by Article 43. The Commission is required to provide and maintain the EU Open Source Solutions Catalogue as a centralised catalogue to access software made available for reuse.

Crucially, Article 43 mandates that this catalogue be hosted on the Interoperable Europe portal. This ensures that the catalogue is not just a list of links, but is "easily linked to further relevant information and training." This integration is vital for reducing duplication, as it allows public bodies to not only find the software but also access the documentation and support needed to implement it effectively.

For duplication reduction to work, the catalogue must be searchable, trustworthy, and comprehensive. By mandating that all reused software flows through this connected network, CADA ensures that the ecosystem becomes a single, coherent market for public-sector software solutions.

What this means for you

For public-sector IT leaders, procurement officers, and policy makers, the implementation of CADA would fundamentally change how software acquisition and development are approached.

1. Search Before You Build Before commissioning the development of a new software tool, your organisation would be expected to search the EU Open Source Solutions Catalogue (and connected national catalogues) for existing solutions. If a suitable open-source tool exists, reusing it would become the preferred path to avoid duplication and comply with the spirit of the regulation.

2. Mandatory Registration for Reuse If your department develops a custom software tool and decides to release it under an open-source licence for others to use, you could not simply host it on an internal server or a generic public repository (like GitHub) in isolation. Under Article 42, you would be required to publish it in a catalogue that is connected to the EU OSS Catalogue. This ensures your work contributes to the wider EU ecosystem and prevents other authorities from unknowingly rebuilding your wheel.

3. Reduced Procurement Burdens By leveraging existing open-source solutions, you could reduce the time and cost associated with procurement processes. Instead of tendering for a full build, you might only need to procure for integration, customisation, or support services. This streamlines procurement and allows for faster deployment of digital services.

4. Collaboration Opportunities The visibility provided by the connected catalogues could lead to collaborative development opportunities. If you find a tool that is almost right for your needs, you could potentially collaborate with the originating public body to enhance it, sharing the development costs and benefits. This fosters a culture of cooperation rather than competition in the public sector.

Common misconceptions

Misconception 1: CADA forces all public software to be open source. CADA does not mandate that all software used by the public sector must be open source. Article 42 applies specifically to software that public bodies voluntarily decide to make available for reuse. If a public body chooses to keep software proprietary, Article 42 does not apply. However, the proposal does encourage the use of open-source solutions over proprietary ones (Article 41) to reduce vendor lock-in and increase transparency.

Misconception 2: I can host my open-source software anywhere as long as it's free. While you can host the code anywhere, if you want it to count as "made available for reuse" under the CADA framework, it must be listed in a catalogue connected to the EU OSS Catalogue. Hosting it on an obscure, unconnected repository defeats the purpose of the regulation, which is to improve discoverability and reduce duplication.

Misconception 3: Reuse means I must use the software exactly as it is. Reuse does not mean you are locked into the original version. Open source allows for modification. You can adapt the software to meet your specific local requirements. The goal is to avoid rebuilding the core functionality from scratch, not to prevent necessary customisation.

Misconception 4: This only applies to large EU institutions. Article 42 applies to both "Union entities" (EU institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies) and "public sector bodies" (national, regional, and local public authorities in Member States). This means local municipalities and national ministries are equally subject to the requirement to connect their reuse catalogues to the central EU system.

This is general information about a draft EU regulation, not legal advice.