Digital Sovereignty in the Public Sector: Focus on Architecture and Operations

The public sector faces a dual challenge. Core administrative services must be delivered in a digital, scalable, and user-centric way. At the same time, dependency is growing on proprietary platforms, fragmented standards, and historically evolved IT structures. The result: isolated specialist procedures, limited integration capabilities, high coordination efforts between federal levels, and rising demands for compliance, traceability, and data sovereignty.

Digital sovereignty addresses this field of tension on a technical level. It refers to the ability of public authorities to independently control architectural decisions, operating models, and data flows. Digital sovereignty in the public sector thus forms the foundation for reliable digital services and long-term controllable platform architectures.

Governability is the key benchmark. Decision-makers must be able to trace how applications are integrated, where data is processed, and what operational dependencies exist. A lack of transparency leads to operational risks in the event of legal changes, security incidents, or audits and hampers the adaptability of federal IT structures.

Architecture: Decouple, Standardize, Control

Digital sovereignty is the result of consistent architectural decisions. Modular systems, loose coupling, and clearly defined interfaces ensure technological manageability. API-based integration architectures, containerization, and service-oriented architectures enable functions to be operated, developed, or migrated independently – without destabilizing existing specialist systems.

This approach is essential for platform architectures in the public sector. Specialist systems can rarely be replaced quickly, but they can be incrementally integrated into overarching architectures. Registers, identity services, service portals, or authorization mechanisms are orchestrated as independent services. Standardized APIs ensure interoperability across administrative levels and enable integration with federal structures such as the portal network, register modernization, or the EfA service catalogs.

Cloud architectures for public authorities serve as controllable runtime environments in this context. Data access, orchestration, and service dependencies remain under institutional control. Hybrid and federated operating models in in-house or jointly operated data centers enable scalability and flexibility – while ensuring transparency, integrity, and controllability.

Operations: Automatable, Traceable, Secure

The effectiveness of an integration architecture is revealed in live operations. Sovereign platforms require full control over deployment, configuration, and monitoring. Standardized operating models with complete logging, binding policies, and technical auditability provide the foundation for regulation-proof services.

Automation increases technical controllability. Container orchestration, infrastructure-as-code, and automated deployment processes enable reproducible states, consistent configurations, and robust audit trails. In federal IT landscapes with long operating cycles and intense auditing, this approach reduces error rates, reliance on implicit knowledge, and structural operational risks.

Security is defined at the architectural level. Zero-trust models, fine-grained role and access controls, encrypted data storage, and multi-tenant platform structures are binding design parameters. Access and data processing remain technically secured, documented, and auditable – in accordance with GDPR, budget law, and federal requirements.

Production: Sovereign Platforms in the Public Sector

Federated IT landscapes are establishing platform architectures that systematically address architectural and operational sovereignty. State and municipal projects rely on containerized environments for specialist systems, modular service portals with federated authentication, or hybrid integration platforms for connecting central federal components.

A structurally decisive factor is the clear separation between robust integration architecture and temporary transitional solutions. Where standardized interfaces are lacking, automated procedures can serve as interim mechanisms. Long-term capability is achieved through interoperable data models, clearly defined interfaces, and architectural independence from proprietary platforms.

A consistent automation-first approach enables orchestrated process chains – from application submission to specialist system integration to delivery of decisions. This requires a platform architecture that unifies technical, organizational, and regulatory requirements.

Practical Example: Sovereign AI Platform at European Level

The AI-on-Demand platform of the European Commission illustrates how digital sovereignty principles can be applied at the European level within platform architectures.

The goal was to build a shared infrastructure for trustworthy AI resources – with strict attention to data protection and security requirements.

Core functions such as identity and access management, marketplace mechanisms for AI services, and a standardized DevOps environment were integrated within a European infrastructure – with clearly defined responsibilities and transparent operational processes.

How the Public Sector Achieves Digital Independence

Digital sovereignty in federated IT structures requires transparency across architecture, operations, and data flows. Control capability thus becomes a structural prerequisite for governmental effectiveness. It provides the basis for legally secure digital services, sustainable scalability, and the long-term stability of public platform architectures.

Architectural and operational sovereignty can be concretely embedded as technically feasible design and operational principles. Those who consistently align platform architectures with integration, automation, and security create robust digital structures for the public sector.