Funding Open Source like public infrastructure ![rw-book-cover](https://dri.es/files/images/blog/funding-open-source-like-public-infrastructure.jpg) 🔗 **Source:** [Funding Open Source like public infrastructure](https://dri.es/funding-open-source-like-public-infrastructure) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [open-source-funding, digital-infrastructure, government-policy, public-goods, sustainability] > author: Dries Buytaert > source: dri.es > reference: https://dri.es/funding-open-source-like-public-infrastructure > date created: {{date:YYYY-MM-DD}} {{time:HH:mm}} > > # 🏷️ Title: Funding Open Source like public infrastructure > <!-- deep-read:sections start --> ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ## 📝 Summary - **What happened**: Dries Buytaert argues that open source software has reached its third evolutionary phase where government funding is essential for sustainability - **Why it matters**: Open source powers $8.8 trillion worth of global infrastructure, with 96% dependent on just 5% of contributors - **Key stakeholders**: Government institutions, open source maintainers, commercial vendors, civil society organizations - **Risks and tradeoffs**: Current model creates fragility through underfunding; government involvement risks political interference but provides stability - **Bottom line**: Governments must shift from consuming open source to funding it as public infrastructure, similar to roads and utilities ## 📖 Main Content Dries Buytaert, founder of Drupal, revisits his 2009 prediction about open source evolution and argues we've reached the critical third phase requiring government support. His original three-stage model predicted open source would evolve from (1) volunteer-driven to (2) commercially-supported to (3) government-funded, following the same pattern as other public infrastructure like roads and schools. ### The Current Crisis A 2024 Harvard Business School study quantifies the dependency: replacing widely-used open source software would cost $8.8 trillion globally. More critically, 96% of this value depends on just 5% of contributors, creating dangerous concentration risk. Most digital infrastructure relies on a small group of often unpaid or underfunded maintainers. ### Government Awakening Recent geopolitical tensions have sparked digital sovereignty concerns. Denmark announced a national plan to reduce proprietary software dependency. The EU's Cyber Resilience Act recognizes open source stewards as "economic actors." Germany's Sovereign Tech Agency invested €26 million in 60+ critical projects. The UN now promotes "digital public goods" and "open by default" principles. ### The Math Is Compelling If the top 100 countries each contributed $200,000 annually to an open source project, it would generate a $20 million budget—equivalent to maintaining less than 10 miles of highway. Belgium spends over €1 billion yearly on road maintenance for 10 million people, while critical digital infrastructure serving millions lacks basic funding. ### Practical Implementation Buytaert proposes six government strategies: 1. **Health monitoring**: Track critical projects like bridge safety ratings 2. **Long-term funding**: Multi-year commitments for stability 3. **Procurement reform**: Require vendor contributions to upstream projects 4. **Public Money, Public Code**: Tax-funded software should be open source 5. **Scale direct funding**: Expand models like Germany's Sovereign Tech Agency 6. **Education integration**: Teach open source in schools and universities ### Balancing Innovation and Stability Government funding should complement, not replace, commercial and volunteer contributions. While companies and volunteers drive innovation, governments excel at ensuring stability, security, and long-term reliability. The most critical but unglamorous tasks—bug fixes, security patches, dependency updates—are often underfunded because they don't generate revenue or excitement. ## 🗒️ Notes - **Three-phase evolution model**: Volunteer → Commercial → Government support mirrors other public goods - **Concentration risk**: 96% of $8.8T value depends on 5% of contributors—massive fragility - **Digital sovereignty**: Governments recognizing risks of foreign-controlled proprietary software - **Current imbalance**: Drupal powers 100+ EU Commission sites, 1000+ French government sites, Australia's national platform—minimal contribution back - **Precedents emerging**: UN Digital Cooperation Roadmap, EU OSPOs, Germany's €26M investment - **Cost perspective**: $200K per country per project = $20M budget = <10 miles highway maintenance - **Role separation**: Government funds stability/security, private sector drives innovation - **Implementation mechanisms**: Health monitoring, procurement reform, "Public Money Public Code" policies ## 📚 References - [Harvard Business School study: The Value of Open Source Software](https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/24-038_51f8444f-502c-4139-8bf2-56eb4b65c58a.pdf) - [Open Collective](https://opencollective.com/) - [Denmark's Open Source strategy](https://www.government.dk/) - [UN Open Source Principles](https://www.un.org/techenvoy/content/open-source-principles) - [Germany's Sovereign Tech Agency](https://www.sovereigntechfund.de/) - [Switzerland's EMBAG law](https://www.admin.ch/gov/en/start/documentation/media-releases.msg-id-95320.html) - [Drupal](https://www.drupal.org/) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase Fifteen years ago, Dries Buytaert predicted open source would evolve through three phases: volunteer-driven, then commercially-supported, finally government-funded. Today, with open source powering $8.8 trillion worth of infrastructure but 96% depending on just 5% of contributors, we've reached that critical third phase. Governments worldwide are recognizing digital sovereignty risks from proprietary software dependency. Denmark, Germany, and the EU are implementing open source strategies and funding mechanisms. Yet most institutions consume open source without contributing back, creating sustainability risks. The math is striking: if 100 countries each contributed $200,000 annually to a critical project, the resulting $20 million budget equals maintaining less than 10 miles of highway. Belgium spends over €1 billion yearly on roads while critical digital infrastructure lacks basic funding. Government investment should ensure stability and security while allowing commercial and volunteer contributors to drive innovation. Key strategies include health monitoring for critical projects, multi-year funding commitments, procurement reforms requiring upstream contributions, "Public Money Public Code" policies, and open source education initiatives. ## 📰 Newsletter **🏗️ Treating Open Source Like the Infrastructure It Actually Is** WordPress powers 40%+ of the web, but how many government sites using it contribute back to core development? Dries Buytaert's latest piece hits close to home for our community. His argument is compelling: we've reached the third phase where open source needs government funding, not just volunteers and commercial sponsors. With 96% of $8.8 trillion in open source value depending on just 5% of contributors, the sustainability crisis is real. For WordPress professionals, this matters deeply. Many of us work on government contracts, but how often do those contracts include upstream contribution requirements? Germany's Sovereign Tech Agency model shows what's possible—€26M invested in 60+ critical projects. The math is wild: if 100 countries each invested $200K annually in a project, that's a $20M budget—less than 10 miles of highway maintenance. Meanwhile, Belgium spends €1B yearly on roads. **What this means for WordPress:** - Government procurement could start requiring upstream contributions - "Public Money, Public Code" policies may drive more WordPress adoption - Core development funding models might evolve significantly - Your agency's government work could include contribution obligations Denmark already announced plans to reduce proprietary software dependency. The EU recognizes open source stewards as "economic actors." The trend is clear. Worth reading the full piece—especially his thoughts on balancing innovation (private sector) with stability (government funding). The unglamorous work of security patches and dependency updates might finally get the sustained funding it deserves. **Links:** - [Full article](https://dri.es/funding-open-source-like-public-infrastructure) - [Harvard study on $8.8T open source value](https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/24-038_51f8444f-502c-4139-8bf2-56eb4b65c58a.pdf) - [Germany's Sovereign Tech Agency](https://www.sovereigntechfund.de/) ## ✅ Action Items #### DevRel - **Developer advocacy**: Create presentation materials on government funding models for WordCamps and meetups - **Education**: Develop workshop curriculum on "Contributing to Core for Government Contractors" - **Developer experience**: Document best practices for agencies to contribute upstream while meeting compliance requirements - **Community management**: Facilitate discussions between government users and core contributors #### OSPO - **Policy & Governance**: Draft template procurement language requiring upstream contributions - **License Compliance**: Develop government-specific compliance guidance for WordPress and plugin ecosystems - **Strategic Alignment**: Track government adoption trends and funding opportunities for WordPress core development #### Community - **Maintainers**: Research core development funding models based on government support precedents - **Contributors**: Create pathways for government employees to contribute during work time - **Sponsors**: Engage with agencies using WordPress to discuss contribution strategies #### WordPress - **Core**: Evaluate infrastructure needs that could benefit from government funding models - **Community**: Develop case studies of successful government WordPress implementations with upstream contributions - **Marketing**: Create materials highlighting WordPress as digital public goods infrastructure - **Meta**: Research .org sustainability through public funding models similar to Sovereign Tech Agency #### The WPCC - **Programs**: Design fellowship tracks for government employees contributing to core - **Funding experiments**: Pilot matched grants with government agencies for upstream work ### FAIR - **Technical independence**: Ensure any government funding preserves WordPress's governance autonomy - **Policies and covenants**: Develop frameworks preventing political interference while enabling public investment - **Productized governance artifacts**: Create templates for sustainable public-private funding partnerships ## 🧪 Hypotheses 1. **Government procurement reform will drive upstream contributions**: Agencies required to contribute back will increase WordPress core development funding and participation 2. **"Public Money, Public Code" policies will accelerate WordPress adoption**: Government mandates for open source will shift market share from proprietary CMS platforms 3. **Digital sovereignty concerns will create new funding streams**: Geopolitical tensions will motivate government investment in WordPress as critical infrastructure 4. **The 5% contributor concentration applies to WordPress**: A small percentage of contributors maintain the majority of WordPress's $trillion+ economic value 5. **Government funding will stabilize unglamorous core work**: Public investment will sustainably fund security patches, dependency updates, and accessibility improvements 6. **Three-phase evolution model applies to WordPress**: WordPress is transitioning from commercial-dominated (phase 2) to requiring government support (phase 3) ### 📊 Methodology - **Survey analysis**: Map government WordPress usage against upstream contribution patterns - **Economic impact study**: Calculate WordPress's economic value using Harvard's open source methodology - **Contributor concentration analysis**: Measure how much WordPress value depends on what percentage of contributors - **Procurement case studies**: Analyze contracts with upstream contribution requirements and their outcomes - **Funding model comparison**: Evaluate Sovereign Tech Agency-style programs against traditional government IT spending - **Sustainability metrics**: Track core development velocity, security response times, and maintainer retention before/after funding changes ### ❓ Questions - How many government WordPress sites exist globally, and what's their aggregate non-contribution to core development? - Could WordPress adopt Germany's Sovereign Tech Agency model for sustainable core funding? - What percentage of WordPress's economic value depends on how few core contributors? - How would "Public Money, Public Code" policies affect proprietary plugin and theme markets? - What procurement language would effectively require meaningful upstream contributions? - How can government funding preserve WordPress's community governance structure? ### 🔮 Future Research - Map the concentration risk in WordPress contributor ecosystem - Design sustainable government funding mechanisms that preserve community autonomy - Study digital sovereignty implications for WordPress hosting and development - Evaluate "Public Money, Public Code" policy impacts on CMS market dynamics - Research optimal public-private partnership structures for open source sustainability - Analyze long-term effects of procurement reforms on upstream contribution quality ### 💡 Implications **Practice**: Government contractors may need to budget for upstream contributions, changing project economics and requiring new capabilities in contribution management. **Policy**: "Public Money, Public Code" mandates could dramatically shift government IT spending from proprietary to open source platforms, requiring new procurement frameworks. **Security**: Government funding for unglamorous maintenance work could significantly improve WordPress security posture and response times. **Education**: Integration of open source practices into public education could create larger, more skilled contributor pipelines. **Funding models**: WordPress core development could evolve from primarily volunteer and commercial support to include stable government funding streams. ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment **Reading level estimate**: Flesch-Kincaid Grade 12.5 - appropriate for policy makers and technical professionals. #### 👀 Visual learners - **Present**: Economic data ($8.8T figure), contributor concentration statistics (96%/5% ratio) - **Improve**: Add infrastructure comparison diagrams, funding model flowcharts, government adoption timeline visualizations #### 🔊 Aural learners - **Present**: Well-structured argument with clear logical flow - **Improve**: Provide podcast version, audio summary of key statistics, conference talk recordings #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - **Present**: Strong analogies (highways, bridges, public utilities), clear definitions of technical terms - **Improve**: Add glossary of government procurement terms, expand infrastructure analogies #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - **Present**: Concrete funding calculations, specific implementation steps - **Improve**: Interactive budget calculators, step-by-step procurement reform checklists #### 🧠 Logical learners - **Present**: Clear three-phase evolution model, quantified economic arguments, structured implementation framework - **Improve**: Decision trees for funding mechanisms, causal diagrams linking underfunding to infrastructure risk #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - **Present**: References to collaborative efforts (UN, EU initiatives), community examples - **Improve**: Discussion guides for government IT teams, collaboration frameworks between public and private sectors #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - **Present**: Comprehensive analysis suitable for individual study, clear conclusions - **Improve**: Self-assessment tools for institutional open source health, reflection prompts on sustainability #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - **Present**: Ecosystem thinking about open source sustainability, natural evolution patterns - **Improve**: Environmental analogies for digital ecosystem health, lifecycle thinking about software infrastructure ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - **Present**: Clear heading hierarchy, meaningful article structure - **Improve**: Alt text for symbolic illustration, landmark roles for main sections #### Keyboard navigation - **Present**: Standard web navigation, logical reading order - **Improve**: Skip links for long-form content, clear focus indicators on interactive elements #### Contrast and readability - **Present**: Good text contrast on white background - **Improve**: Verify color accessibility for any charts or graphics, ensure sufficient line spacing #### Text resizing and reflow - **Present**: Responsive design supports text scaling - **Improve**: Test at 200% zoom, ensure no horizontal scrolling, maintain readability #### Media and captions - **Present**: Single illustration with symbolic content - **Improve**: Descriptive alt text explaining the infrastructure metaphor, audio description if animated #### Forms and interactions - **Present**: Standard blog post format, minimal interactive elements - **Improve**: If comments enabled, ensure accessible form labels and error handling ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - **Present**: Global examples (Denmark, Germany, Belgium, Brazil), international scope - **Improve**: Include examples from Global South governments, address digital divide implications #### Inclusive language - **Present**: Professional tone, technical terms explained in context - **Improve**: Define policy acronyms, provide plain language summary of key concepts #### Neurodiversity support - **Present**: Clear structure, logical argument flow, section headings - **Improve**: Add summary bullets, use consistent formatting, break up long paragraphs #### Representation - **Present**: Diverse geographic examples, acknowledgment of collaborative input - **Improve**: Include perspectives from government employees, underrepresented contributor voices #### Psychological safety - **Present**: Professional, respectful discussion of policy differences - **Improve**: Acknowledge legitimate concerns about government involvement, provide balanced perspective ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - **Economic argument**: Quantified analysis using $8.8T Harvard study provides strong empirical foundation for infrastructure investment argument. - **Historical analogy**: Three-phase evolution model (volunteer → commercial → government) draws compelling parallels to roads, schools, utilities with clear precedential value. - **Mathematical comparison**: Highway maintenance cost analysis ($200K × 100 countries = $20M = <10 miles highway) provides powerful scale perspective. #### Fallacies - **Appeal to consequences**: "Without it, we leave critical infrastructure fragile" - while the risk is real, this slightly overstates the certainty of negative outcomes without government funding. - **False analogy risk**: While roads/utilities analogy is compelling, software has unique characteristics (infinite replication, network effects) that don't perfectly map to physical infrastructure. #### Tone of voice - **Authoritative**: Drawing on 25 years of Drupal leadership and previous predictions that proved accurate - **Pragmatic**: Focus on practical implementation mechanisms rather than abstract principles - **Urgent but measured**: Conveys necessity without alarmism, supported by data ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis No DARVO patterns detected. The article presents a constructive policy argument without defensiveness, personal attacks, or victim-offender reversal. Buytaert acknowledges legitimate concerns about government involvement while advocating for measured solutions. ## 🎯 Conclusion Dries Buytaert makes a compelling case that open source has reached a sustainability inflection point requiring government investment. His three-phase evolution model (volunteer → commercial → government) provides a valuable framework for understanding this transition as natural infrastructure development rather than problematic intervention. The quantified analysis is particularly strong: $8.8 trillion in economic value depending on 5% of contributors creates obvious systemic risk. The cost comparison to highway maintenance ($20M for critical digital infrastructure vs. 10 miles of road) powerfully illustrates the modest investment required. For WordPress professionals, this signals potential significant changes in government procurement, core development funding, and the balance between commercial and public investment in platform sustainability. The key insight is that government funding should complement rather than replace existing contribution models, focusing on stability and security while preserving community-driven innovation. ## 🔄 Refactor Appendix — Funding Open Source like public infrastructure ### 📚 Literature Atoms (H3) #### Open source infrastructure dependency creates $8.8 trillion systemic risk > [!quote] ID:lit_001 > A 2024 Harvard Business School study estimates that replacing the most widely used Open Source software would cost the world $8.8 trillion, with 96% depending on just 5% of contributors. **Context & use**: Core economic justification for treating open source as critical infrastructure requiring government investment **Tags**: #xref #systemic-risk <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### Government funding should complement not replace existing open source contributions > [!quote] ID:lit_002 > Government funding should reinforce the ecosystem that makes Open Source thrive, not replace it or control it. Companies and volunteers drive innovation while governments ensure stability, security, and long-term reliability. **Context & use**: Framework for balanced public-private partnership in open source sustainability **Tags**: #xref #governance <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### Open source follows three-phase evolution pattern like other public infrastructure > [!quote] ID:lit_003 > I suggested it would develop in three stages: (1) starting with volunteers, then (2) expanding to include commercial involvement and sponsorship, and finally (3) gaining government support, following the same pattern as trade routes, schools, and national defense. **Context & use**: Historical model for understanding current transition from commercial to government support phase **Tags**: #xref #infrastructure-theory <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> ### 🧠 Permanent Candidates (H4) #### Critical infrastructure requires public investment regardless of origin story **Claim**: When volunteer-initiated systems become essential public infrastructure, government funding becomes necessary for societal stability regardless of the system's commercial viability. **Evidence pointer**: [[#lit_003]] on three-phase evolution pattern **Scope & conditions**: Applies when failure would cause significant public harm; may not apply to niche or easily replaceable systems **Links**: - [[Public goods theory]] — because extends economic framework - [[Infrastructure investment models]] — because applies-in digital context <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> ### ✏️ Fleeting Queue - Research WordPress contributor concentration - does 5% create 95% of value? — #fleeting #research - Map government WordPress usage vs upstream contribution patterns — #fleeting #data-gathering - Document successful procurement language requiring open source contributions — #fleeting #policy ### → Things 3 - [ ] Research WordPress Foundation's position on government funding models #things - [ ] Draft procurement language template for WordPress upstream contributions #things <!-- deep-read:sections end --> 📄 **Full text:** ![[Full Document Contents/Articles/Funding Open Source like public infrastructure.md|Funding Open Source like public infrastructure by Dries Buytaert]] ## Highlights - In that same post, I actually went beyond discussing the case for commercial sponsorship and outlined a broader pattern I believed Open Source would follow. I suggested it would develop in three stages: (1) starting with volunteers, then (2) expanding to include commercial involvement and sponsorship, and finally (3) gaining government support. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01ksj5mag2rpkz2ftw7bxpj90p)) - Note: 3-stage maturation of OSS funding: volunteers → commercial sponsorship → government support. - Tags: atom/literature/h2, open-source-funding, sustainability - A 2024 Harvard Business School study, [*The Value of Open Source Software*](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4693148), estimates that replacing the most widely used Open Source software would cost the world $8.8 trillion. If Open Source suddenly disappeared, organizations would have to spend 3.5 times more on software than they do today. Even more striking: 96% of that $8.8 trillion depends on just 5% of contributors. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01ksj5m5jxbw8dp98fxt83vfs5)) - Note: Scale + fragility: replacing OSS would cost $8.8T, and 96% of that value depends on just 5% of contributors. - Tags: open-source-funding, atom/literature/h1, public-goods - **Encourage contribution in government contracts.** Governments can use procurement to strengthen the Open Source projects they depend on. Vendor contribution should be a key factor in awarding contracts, alongside price, quality, and other criteria. Agencies or vendors can be required or encouraged to give back through coding, documentation, security reviews, design work, or direct funding. This ensures governments work with true experts while helping keep critical Open Source projects healthy and sustainable. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k31tcd7xm7s2a2dckkdxsepp)) - Government funding should reinforce the ecosystem that makes Open Source thrive, not replace it or control it. Companies and volunteers are strong drivers of innovation, pushing forward new features, experiments, and rapid improvements. Governments are better suited to a different but equally vital role: ensuring stability, security, and long-term reliability. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01k31tcd8pddqrp73k3btptqhb)) - Government funding should reinforce the ecosystem that makes Open Source thrive, not replace it or control it. Companies and volunteers are strong drivers of innovation, pushing forward new features, experiments, and rapid improvements. Governments are better suited to a different but equally vital role: ensuring stability, security, and long-term reliability. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01ksj5m7s2n13ynp7hmy2gnxs0)) - Note: Thesis: government should fund stability/security/reliability — reinforcing, not replacing or controlling the OSS ecosystem. - Tags: government-policy, open-source-funding, atom/literature/h1