Digital sovereignty in Europe 2026: what small organisations can learn

For years, digital sovereignty was mostly a topic for conferences. Recently, several administrations have started to act on it. A few examples:

• Schleswig-Holstein, Germany: the northern German state has been moving its administration towards open-source software since 2024 – office applications, e-mail and calendar, and in the longer run the operating system of its workstations. The change runs in stages over several years.
• German city-states: at least one German city-state has said publicly that it is evaluating an open-source workplace suite for its administration – a bundle of office, collaboration and communication tools developed for the public sector.
• EuroStack: since early 2025, politicians, researchers and industry groups have been discussing a “EuroStack” – the idea of a European technology base that reaches from chips and cloud infrastructure to software. It is a debate with proposals, not a finished programme.
• Luxembourg: the government has published a Digital Government Strategy 2026–2030 that sets the direction for digital public services in the coming years.

The reasons given are similar across countries, even if the weighting differs:

• Dependency. When a few providers supply most of the software, prices, licence terms and product decisions are made elsewhere.
• Control over data and law. Administrations want to know where data is stored and which law applies – including whether authorities outside the EU can request access.
• Exit options. Open formats and standard interfaces make it possible to change provider without losing years of documents.
• Local know-how. Open-source software and European providers keep expertise and jobs in the region.

None of this happens overnight. Large migrations take years, and administrations report that training and support matter as much as the software itself.

A sports club, a small agency or a gaming community has no IT department and no five-year plan. But the core questions scale down well:

• Where are our conversations, files and recordings stored?
• Which companies process them – and in which countries?
• Can we get our data out in a usable form if we want to leave?
• Who decides whether AI processes what we say?

Small organisations even have an advantage: switching a single tool for 20 or 200 people is a matter of weeks, not years. You can start with the tool where the most sensitive content lives – often meetings and chat.

1. 1

   List your tools

   Write down every tool your group uses, what data is in it and who manages it. A simple table is enough.

2. 2

   Check where data goes

   For each tool: operator, server location, subprocessors and what leaves the EU. Our GDPR checklist for tools helps.

3. 3

   Check the way out

   Test the export before you need it. Can you download messages, files and member lists in a usable format?

4. 4

   Set rules for AI

   Decide whether meetings may be transcribed and summarised, and make sure people can opt out.

5. 5

   Change one thing at a time

   Start with the tool that matters most. A calm, well-explained change works better than a big switch.

Coviqo is operated from Luxembourg, and our servers are in Germany. Transcription, translation and summaries run on servers we operate. Space owners can export a space’s data as a ZIP archive, and everyone can download their own data.

Some data does leave the EU: network protection by a CDN/proxy provider in front of the website and app, the payment provider, and sign-in providers or integrations you choose to use. We list this openly on Why a European platform. What digital sovereignty means for us in practice is on Digital sovereignty.