Digital sovereignty sounds great until you try ditching your suppliers
Most organizations say tech independence is unrealistic – and one in ten can't replace a critical provider at all
After years of governments and tech vendors promoting the concept of digital sovereignty, most large organizations have concluded that achieving complete technological independence is not feasible. According to new research from Capgemini, 59 percent of organizations consider full digital sovereignty unrealistic. Instead, two-thirds define it as "resilient interdependence," accepting reliance on external technology providers while attempting to minimize potential threats to critical operations.
This pragmatic conclusion is likely due to the extensive nature of these dependencies. Digital sovereignty generally refers to an organization's control over its data, infrastructure, software, and critical technology operations, including where they are hosted and which laws apply. Capgemini surveyed 1,300 business and technology executives and government departments in April 2026, finding that 86 percent had significant exposure to foreign or externally controlled supply chains.
Only 14 percent reported end-to-end visibility into these dependencies. Moving away from critical technology providers is not always easy; 36 percent said the transition would take over a year, and 10 percent had no viable alternatives. European organizations are more receptive to this compromise, with 75 percent defining sovereignty through resilient interdependence, compared to 50 percent in the US.
The UK tends to view sovereignty through the lens of risk, with 56 percent associating it primarily with resilience and risk mitigation. Despite this, 93 percent of respondents mentioned digital sovereignty as a board-level topic, with 44 percent ranking it among their top priorities. AI is now a key area of focus for these boards.
Three-quarters of organizations consider AI a key focus of their sovereignty efforts, ahead of cloud infrastructure, cybersecurity, data, and software. However, the financial aspect is also a concern. About half of the organizations said they would pay extra for sovereign technology, with the acceptable premium averaging 23 percent.
A more troubling finding is the lack of contingency plans when dependencies fail. Among organizations that recently experienced an operational disruption, only 42 percent had contingency plans in place, with only slightly more than a third in Europe and Asia-Pacific prepared. Capgemini suggests that instead of seeking complete technological independence, organizations should decide which systems and capabilities require tighter control, while building alternatives and recovery plans for everything else.
This may be less about embracing interdependence and more about acknowledging where the exits truly are.
Written by urgent.news from The Register Science's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
