Episode 16: Building Eurostack: Martin Hullin on Europe’s Digital Sovereignty and the Future of Innovation

Europe is at a crossroads in shaping its technological future. In this episode of Inside CVC, Martin Hullin, Managing Director of the Network for Technological Resilience & Sovereignty Europe’s Future Program Bertelsmann Stiftung introduces Eurostack—a visionary framework designed to strengthen Europe’s sovereignty, resilience, and competitiveness in the digital age.

Listeners will hear:

• Why Eurostack is sparking both excitement and controversy in Europe—and what it means for global corporations.
• How corporate venture capital can accelerate value-driven innovation and help shape future markets.
• The risks of global fragmentation around technology standards, and the opportunities for cross-border collaboration.

 The CVC Open Innovation Summit Europe takes place November 25–26 in Berlin, during AsiaBerlin Innovation Week. Positioned as a bridge between Europe, the U.S., and Asia’s fast-growing ecosystems, the summit is a curated, invitation-only forum for senior leaders to tackle the issues shaping innovation: AI, geopolitics, energy resilience, health, sustainability, and more. Listeners are invited to request an invitation at cvc-summit.com → E

Support the show

Catch up on all episodes of Inside CVC at www.u-path.com/podcast.

Transcript

Steve: 0:04

Welcome to InsideCVC, the podcast that brings together leaders in innovation and capital investment to explore the trends shaping the business of corporate venture capital. I'm your host, Steve Schmidt, and together with Philip Willigman, we're speaking to corporate investors, entrepreneurs, and ecosystem builders driving the future of innovation. InsideCVC is brought to you by UPath Advisors, helping corporations and startups unlock sustainable growth through strategic partnerships. To learn more, visit uPath.com. That's the letter UPath.com. And to catch up on all of our episodes, search InsideCVC on your favorite podcast platform, or visit uPath.com forward slash podcast. Today we're joined by Martin Hullen, Managing Director of the Digital Resilience Initiative at the European Climate Foundation. Martin introduces us to Eurostack, a visionary framework for Europe's sovereign and resilient digital future. He explains why it matters, how it's shaping policy and industry collaboration, and what corporate venture investors need to understand about this moment of technological transformation. In our conversation, Martin pulls back the curtain on how Eurostat is gaining traction with policymakers, why it's sparking both excitement and controversy across Europe, and what role corporations, startups, and CVCs can play in making it real. We also explore the risks of global fragmentation, the opportunities for cross-border collaboration, and why trust and transparency in technology are becoming the next big competitive edge. Here's our conversation with Martin Hullen. Martin, thank you for joining us on Inside CVC. How are you today, sir?

Martin: 1:48

I'm very well and thank you so much for having me today on this sunny August afternoon.

Steve: 1:54

Absolutely. Really exciting conversation. I'm I'm interested certainly in looking forward to learning a lot today on the topic we are talking about in the conversation. It's such a dynamic time globally when it comes to some of the topics we're talking about. So why don't we hop in with why don't you describe the Eurostack, what it is, and why it's so important right now?

Martin: 2:20

Yes, with pleasure. So I think it makes sense to maybe zoom out a little bit at the beginning before then going into the definition and kind of defining what it is. But for the term itself, Eurostack is a framework, really kind of a visionary framework that tries to plot the technological layers across a more understandable mental model, not just for policymakers, but for thought leaders, economic decision makers, but also civil society, so that they have a better way of actually talking about the complexity and the interdependence of the different buildings pieces that we have within technological transformation. And already with the description, it's it's already a mouthful. Because I come from a world originally from sustainability policy, where one of the challenges in the run-up to the Paris Agreement was always to try to frame a topic in a way that it aligns incentives for different stakeholders to actually work together on a theme. And this is highly complex. I mean, you're familiar with it in the in the in the corporate sphere. Once you want to make public-private partnerships work, how do you align incentives there? And uh now try to do that on a massive global scale on a topic like sustainability or in this case, uh technological transformation that happens at a speed where the established systems, the institutions, and clearly also in some cases the experience or the capacity of the decision makers are not up to par to actually handle that. So, long story short, these experiences left led us basically in the past year to start developing this kind of mental framework it was originally around the notion of a sovereign and resilient digital stack in Europe. And this came not only as a reaction to, of course, this over reliance on technology from the US or from other regions outside of Europe, that especially in the past, let's say 20 years, have been very, very successful. And the Europeans also have been consuming uh very actively without, I think we can agree, overly relying on their own capabilities of innovating in that particular sphere. So there's a reaction part, but I think also going to what I was saying at the beginning, it is also an effort in actually putting forward a proactive vision of what a technological transformation that is value-driven in Europe actually could look like, and not falling into the trap of saying it needs to be X, it needs to be Y, but trying to put something forward that is a little bit more at par with the complexity that we are talking about.

Steve: 5:07

I think you you hit upon it there, the word complexity. That sounds incredibly complex. I think about where I'm living, where I'm sitting right now in the United States, and and as sort of we talked about a little bit in the precursor to our conversation, the all the gyrations, all of the movement, all of the complexity and disruption that's going on in in our country alone or in the United States alone. I have to imagine that's incredibly, exponentially more complex when you think about cross-borders in in Europe, in the European nation. So how's progress? You've talked about it as a framework. Can you talk about sort of as you've developed this framework and shared it and socialized it, how how progress goes towards that vision?

Martin: 5:48

Yeah, I think it's important to state at the beginning that it's basically a multi-stakeholder initiative from the get-go. So, of course, I work for one of those bigger think and do tanks and operational foundations in Europe. But it was very important for us at the beginning to make sure that we have a wide array of authors, thought leaders that engage in actually developing this framework together. And there were several reasons for that, but one of them was to make sure that it not only includes all of the relevant perspectives that we think it has to, but also due to the complexity that you have mentioned and that I also was alluding to, that it is set up in a way that actually we can measure the progress moving forward. And Eurostack, when it was first conceptualized, it was in autumn 2024, was not much more than a term, really. And it took a while and it took a few different streams to actually sit down and say, okay, what does it actually mean? What are metrics that we could utilize, for example, to define what the different stacks are? What are certain recommendations that can be given in order to incentivize also action across the different layers, for example? And I think most important of all is what is a narrative that can be weaved around it so that while the complexity is still existing, it's nevertheless something that is catchy that you can talk about when you bump into a stakeholder or a stack holder that has to do with this digital transformation. And one of the big success stories, I think, was that we were surprised already when at least our study came out in February, how quickly it was basically picked up across the board in different uh decision-making areas, not only in civil society, but also in political decision making. There was the talk of the town, a lot of C-suites, even though it wasn't fully defined what Eurostack really was. And I think that was to its benefit to a certain extent. But now also when the question comes up of implementation and what do we actually want to achieve with it, this aspect of it, it not yet being fully defined, now needs to be tackled by ASAP. And to finish maybe with this answer, one of the big I think achievements was that we made it with the definition of the term, so to speak. Yeah, that Eurostack is supposed to support European technological resilience into the German coalition treaty. And of course, our political ecosystem is a complex one, but usually two parties or three sometimes want to body together to make the government work. And in this case, they set up a little contract and then define all the tasks that they would like to achieve. And we're very glad that Eurostack made it into it, which now gives us a certain degree of a mandate of now filling it with life.

Philipp: 10:10

Martin, I'm so excited to have you on the show. We know each other for many years and have been partnering and collaborating around various initiatives uh to drive competitiveness, I would say, for regions. And so happy uh to have you on talk about the Eurostack. I recently was at an event where I was invited after a paper was published in Handesblatt of mine. And I thought in Europe everybody understands Eurostack, sees the potential, understands why it is so important to drive sovereignty and really also invest into a stronger technology landscape in Europe. But at this event where there were participants from some of the big US tech companies, but also big European tech companies, policy participants, as well as one of your co-authors and one of the brains behind Eurostach, Francesca Bria, was there, who I think was similarly surprised than me that there was a lot of controversy around this. And even like European players weren't really understanding why this is important. Is it really driving growth for Europe? Doesn't it kind of like risk some of the strong partnerships we currently have with some of the US tech players when it comes to cloud usage, when it comes to software we are we are leveraging, cybersecurity solutions we are leveraging? So, can you talk a little bit about why there's such a polarizing discussion in Europe and uh yeah, why it is not clear for everybody Europe needs to be stronger on the tech side and needs to have more sovereignty to also lead more on the world?

Martin: 11:47

I mean, great question and plenty of points to mention. I think the first one I'd like to raise is the whole notion of path dependency. Because as innovators in Europe, and I was I'm a former startup entrepreneur myself, having tried to scale businesses in Europe 20 years ago. So I'm familiar with the challenges that we are facing. But the path dependency, I think, touches upon a certain school of thought also that in order to generate a certain degree of competitiveness or also capability to innovate, there is still, especially in the technological sphere, this whole notion of copy-pasting the US approach of the hyperscalers, of an extraordinary risk capital or venture capital market, and a completely different approach to the one that we could or I think want to replicate in Europe as well. And this is when somebody comes out and says, Yeah, let's do this industrial policy called Eurostack, and in particular, after five to ten years of regulatory muscle flexing on the European side, lots of red tape, lots of bureaucracy, et cetera, it triggers people. I think we have to be very realistic there. That um while when you take a step back and say, what if there's this big vision for resilience and sovereign technology stacks there, that once you say this with a certain kind of conviction, that all of these old echoes kind of come back and they trigger uh to a certain extent. And I think also what is not to be underestimated is that of course, some of the points made in the Eurostack study, but now also in let's say the heterogeneous, I think, movement that also started growing around the notion of Eurostack, it's very easy to misconstrue that it's, for example, something that is only asking for public funding. Where one of the recommendations, I think, in the original study was the setting up of a sovereign technology fund, for example, that should be scaled across Europe, not only so much to be the sole investment vehicle, but for example, ensure that if we have fascinating and very um successful uh innovation developing within Europe, that we can keep it in the continent and that we don't fall into the valley of little investment in order to scale it, for example. There were very fascinating discussions also around one of the recommendations that is linked to the whole notion of public procurement. Public procurement within Europe could be harmonized in order to incentivize also the development of certain technological solutions and the types of metrics that we would need to also develop in order to measure whether or not this is positive for, let's say, the competitiveness of the continent or not. So, long story short, it certainly is something that is polarizing. I think it is to a certain extent also a wake-up call. And I think now recording this not even two weeks after the uh EU-US uh tariff deal or agreement, I think it only kind of underlines that we need to leave this reactive stance, which is disarmingly, I think, pessimistic, and be convinced that this is a place from which a lot of innovation came from, and that we need to start telling also a story that we believe can actually help us get our act together, uh, yet again to be competitive in a very new world that I think a lot of decision makers only just started to wake up to and are thoroughly shocked.

Philipp: 15:21

I just read a report on the role of the boards of big corporations in the future, and given the geopolitical changes and AI, so board members will have a very different, different view on how to lead and how to support corporations in this world. The way you uh spoke about this and and how I've heard about Eurostack in the past, it sounds very Europe-focused at first glance. But the implications obviously go go far beyond Brussels and Berlin. And so why should global corporations, especially those from the United States and Asia-based multinationals, paying attention to this shift and to this policy?

Martin: 16:01

I think there are two dimensions because the term kind of lets one think that it is an exercise in isolationism. And it's the contrary, really, because it is an exercise in trying to ensure that certain critical parts of digital infrastructure in Europe are set up in a way that is value aligned. And one cannot regulate one's way out of that. This has to be built to a certain extent. And in times where 80% of our technological stack comes from outside, um, it also showcases that there's plenty of work to be done. But with extremely complex global supply chains, with the complexity also surrounding the not only the tech stack, but the software stack, for example, or the training data for AI models, etc., etc. Semiconductors, it's endless. None of this can be solved by homegrown solutions, so to speak. So from the get-go, it needs to be thought global. And I think in times where kind of minted by uncertainty, more and more, we don't know what will happen with the next decisions in DC, what will happen once Beijing initiates a new decision. I think we are at a time where any type of trust anchor, any type of technological approach to not just be the first to market, but to be the first to be trusted in a way, suddenly becomes a competitive edge. And this, when you try to look at the technological stack also as something that is put together with building blocks or digital commons, as we like to call them, suddenly becomes super relevant. Because I mean, of course it's relevant for the C-suite or board members to invest, not in what is the hype of this year or next year, but to plan how they can maneuver their companies five to ten years from now. And I think certainty, trust, transparency and technology, those will be all essential, I think, competitive edges that with the stack that is solely put forward, I think, by a lot of market concentration and just a few actors outside, let's say, of Europe, I think it won't be as easy to actually then persevere as they they would like to.

Steve: 18:22

I want to get to the role that corporations and CVCs have in accelerating the Eurostack objectives. Before I do, though, I want to take a quick sidebar. You mentioned long-term certainty in terms of driving this in some experiences that have I've had in past in doing research on U.S. manufacturing competitiveness and interviewing manufacturing CEOs, et cetera. That was one of a consistent set of recommendations from a policy perspective, right? Give us certainty, et cetera, so we can drive these long-term, these complex things and create the value that you're describing. Part of that issue, I believe, in in at least in the U.S. are voters. Our sort of our election cycles, et cetera. And at the end of the day, right, when you think about that competitiveness, it's about individuals having jobs and being able to put food on the table and so forth. And I think we can all agree that these innovations lead to that long-term growth. Sometimes, though, those cycles maybe trail the voting cycle. So I want to get back to the corporate. But for me, I just love your opinion on if I'm a voter and I'm thinking about this and I'm looking at at job growth and I'm not seeing that right away, how do you create that certainty, that long-term certainty throughout these election cycles? I'm just curious if you have a point of view on that.

Martin: 19:55

I go back to narrative. I think one thing that we are currently struggling with in Europe across the 27 member states, and if we'll let the governance union aside, even more countries that are value aligned with democracy, transparency, et cetera, which is something of a high good in the times that we are currently living through, I think there is still a search for what it is that we are offering here to a certain extent. And I want to look past just the technological dimension of this all. I think it's it's it's a it's a societal and economic challenge. Is the models, or is the model and the institutions attached to them now, at this stage, are they actually delivering the way they're supposed to be delivering? And I think a lot of people are questioning that, not only in civil society, but I think also in the uh uh in the corporate decision-making cycles, where folks are talking about red tape, overburdening, bureaucracy, inability to innovate because X, Y, Z. And I think this all comes together and is supercharged by, of course, the election cycles and the day-to-day grind of information and again disinformation that also plays a role there. So is there an out there or is there kind of a way to look beyond that? And I am quite optimistic, again, looking at this from a European point of view, because it's very easy to say Europe is non-innovative or doesn't get its act together and it's slow and it's overburdening, etc. But if you were to ask lots of CEOs in the US where they would rather live, much rather they would live in Europe than having their kids go through like a metal detector in Menlo Park. So there is something here. And also I think what people underestimate when they talk about Europe and our inabilities, don't forget, it's a highly heterogeneous place where all the differences in society's economic setups are enormous. And I'm half Polish. So I remember having visited family in the early 90s, having bought bread doing hyperinflation with a sack of banknotes. And guess what? Those recent memories that also made the Polish society or economy as a whole make it quite well through the financial crisis. Why? Because they were used to austerity and they did not have as much mortgages, for example, as others. And now supercharging this with the case that we have in Ukraine. Also, what is going on technologically there when it comes to drone warfare and other abilities under enormous pressure from outside, with very little resources at their disposal, extraordinary things can happen. But without kind of limiting it only to the narrative part, I think it's a very important piece of the puzzle because obviously in Ukraine it's a fight for uh survival. So, I mean, whole society economy is aligned in order to kind of cut red tape where people are feasible, to innovate, to be creative. And I think this type of urgency has not yet fully arrived, I think, in Germany, if I if I may say. And this is the biggest economy we have in Europe. And maybe as a last point, if I if I would like to boil it down also on one of the kind of challenges that we have there, it's the whole notion around our failure culture. Um, the whole question of like on a societal and economic level, is it all right to make mistakes? Is it all right to kind of try something, fail, and redo it again? A B testing, right? Uh on a massive scale. And I think in Germany we're not there yet. And this is something of kind of a new innovation paradigm that I really hope visions and industrial policies like Eurostack and other approaches uh could help us a little bit to leave this comfort zone and and try to be less risk-averse in these things because we see right at the right in the neighborhood of some of the very comfortable European uh economies that it's possible if the if the pressure is on and the folks left to their to their own devices to keep going.

Steve: 23:59

Yeah, that's a that's a theme. And I think you just touched on it there, right? There's with what we're talking about here, some of the previous work that I've done, there's always an underlying sense of optimism, right? It's the sense of it's the right thing to do. Certainly hard, etc. But but uh in in that case as well. So let's get back to the Eurostack and sort of making the vision a reality. What role do corporate venture units play in aligning with or accelerating that Euro, that Eurotech or that Eurostack strategy and its objectives?

Martin: 24:29

Are they essential? They're really essential because some of the incentivization mechanisms that I've mentioned, be the procurement rules or digital norms, they might favor in the future made in Europe or Europe solutions. Henceforth, this is something that can be driven by industry if it embraces it. Also, there are really strategic opportunities, I think, here for firms that align with the intrinsic uh values within the stack notion, which are interoperability, sustainability, ethical open AI, some of which already now, despite the big hype still around the AI scaling paradigm right now with compute, et cetera, they're slowly, slowly starting to also develop there. And I think this is something to have on the on the radar. Also, I would not underestimate the risk of future regulatory and market friction for those who would be ignoring kind of a values-driven tech agenda in Europe. Um, because again, I mean, I was there at the Action Summit in February when JD Vance was basically framing the end of 80 years of transatlantic collaboration. Same goes for the Munich Security Conference a week later. And something changed here. And I think there is a big embracing of what it means to build European. And at the same time, what cannot be done without partners globally, and it cannot be done without the supercharged power of the private sector. I mean, this will need to be shaped, the standards will need to be shaped, and also the businesses play a big role in actually uh ensuring that this whole uh kind of hope for an integrated European market really comes to bear as well, because I think that's also one of the woes and one of the challenges that we are currently facing also in building innovative competitive tech in Europe. It's still too much of a um kind of spliced and non-harmonized market.

Philipp: 26:32

Martin, I've been spending the last 10, 12 years in the United States and uh also spent quite some time in Asia and have recently not come back, but being more in Europe trying to bring some lessons learned and some examples uh to the European ecosystem. What you just said, if if if that's going to be true, that means the the private sector also has to partner better or has to partner. I've seen the struggles in the US bringing different corporates together, but they they found their way to do things together, to co-invest. Just as a follow-up on Steve's questions here, how do you see that cooperation, co-opetition working out in Europe in countries like Germany on its own, but of especially cross-European? Do you see kind of there will be a will be a struggle? Are there specific strengths Europe can build on because maybe the cultures are closer, tied together? I'd love to hear your thoughts on that.

Martin: 27:31

Yeah, no, it's it's also a very good point. I think there is a muscle that we can flex in Europe, which is to a certain extent the compromising nature of working together. Because compromising or collaborating means compromising in some cases, but it shouldn't be a race to the bottom, of course. And in order to do so, a regulatory framework is key, but a harmonized one. Um, so I'm not advocating for deregulation. At the same time, the incentives need to be set up in a way that actually enables public, private, other stakeholders to collaborate with each other. And I mentioned the importance of the narrative or the mental model that actually works across different silos of decision making. And this touches everything from folks that come from an engineering background to politicians that come from a legal background. It's all about terms in some cases, in other cases, all about the technological kind of capabilities, uh, you name it. But I think we need to break even big concepts like Eurostack down to something very concrete. Um it needs to have demonstrators, it needs to be set up in a way where we say, listen, we are now embarking on an exercise, for example, to build a European web index. Um, because if you zoom completely out, it's completely underserved or under-reported strategic dependency that we have here. Because everybody talks about the search engines that are privacy preserving and others, Googles of the world, the Baidu's or Yandexes, if you want to call it. But uh, once you look at the web index behind it, which is super costly in order to set up the catalog behind it, so to speak, there's no European version of that. And if we talk about data availability for trustworthy AI that also benefits from enormous and extremely valuable data silos we still have in Europe, then such an index has to be set up. And this is something that should not and cannot just be done by public uh entities or by civil society actually. But this is a cross-societal exercise in building a commons for this particular aspect. And that's where I think the private sector uh could play a huge role in actually also collaborating on something very concrete and then benefiting from it, because immediately you would have access to training data that otherwise your competitors could not immediately use, and henceforth, yet again, an opportunity to align and cooperate better with each other. Just one example.

Philipp: 30:04

Before I want to go deeper on corporates and the role of the private sector, in your report, and you also just mentioned it in one of the examples on some of the standards. One very unsettling signal in your work is really around the risk of global fragmentation, especially around standards and interoperability. So are we really heading towards uh bifurcation? And if so, what does a pragmatic pass forward look like?

Martin: 30:32

I'd like to zoom out just a little bit as well here. Also having worked quite a bit in kind of the standard setting bodies around the internet, and in particular the governance of the internet. So there are entities like ICANN, for example, the domain naming system, and others. And already years back, even before COVID hit, there was talk in those ecosystems of the splinter net, of the risk of actually what was perceived as a universal interoperable net to actually start to splinter. And this was, of course, very visible with uh with the now infamous Chinese digital wall. We've seen that under the sanctions with the Russians, and now more and more even in the cross border tension or the transatlantic tension between Europe and the US when it comes to, for example, the data sharing frameworks. This being said, I think um. It certainly is a byproduct of our times, but it's also a symptom of institutions that are supposed to be the standard setters, so to speak, that in some cases do not function as good as they should. Uh what do I mean with that? You have entities in the UN system, for example, that for many years have been struggling to set clearly visible standards in the technological stack, for example. In some cases, that had also to do with interests, geopolitical interests of who was representing these institutions, for example. And I think a lot of actors also underestimate the standard setting power of the hyperscalers that we have today. And as much as I'm a proponent of open standards, open source, transparency, shared digital comments, there's always this risk that there will be a playbook use that was extremely successful already since the 90s, for example, in the AI race at the moment. And this is the so-called EEE framework. Microsoft was very famous for it, where at first would actually embrace open standards, open ecosystems, for example. Then they would start extending them with additional functionality to actually make them function a bit better, et cetera. You could even apply this onto kind of the Linux ecosystem, right? Of how different systems were built. But then the third E is all about extinction and extinguishing some of that functionality in order to actually have it proprietary and then basically start owning this particular part. And from a corporate point of view, this is of course very understandable. But once you look at this infrastructure that is then being kind of proprietized there as an essential building block of entire economies and also societies in our case functioning on top of, then I think the governance question uh comes into play. And I know there's no direct answer to your question. I think we have a risk of bifurcation at the moment of global standards. But at the same time, I think a realistic path forward is now to being really a proponent for open standards and trying to see globally who is out there who would like to actually embrace them, such as we would like to do.

Steve: 33:51

So, Martin, where do you see the opportunities for CVCs, for cross-border collaboration, whether it's between the US and the EU, whether it's the EU and Asia, where where are some of these near-term opportunities that you see for collaboration?

Martin: 34:09

So certainly ever since Eurostate came out, but also since the discussion really started a few years back on how potentially a third way could look like between the American and also the Chinese innovation paradigm. There are quite a few like-minded regions that are currently considering collaborating. Singapore was mentioned before, of course, the South Koreans, the Japanese, between a very different difficult choice for many reasons, as are we Europeans looking over to the Canadians, looking over also to other states such as India or Indonesia, for example. There are plenty of interesting opportunities for collaboration. And I think if you frame it through, for example, collaboration and data exchange around solving some of the bigger challenges that we have, which is, for example, climate change or the climate catastrophe, then very quickly I think one has to realize that, for example, some of the climate mitigation technology at our disposal, much of it comes from China. It doesn't mean that this technology can't be used, but at the same time, the data flows need to be set up in a way that they're actually aligned with the values that, for example, in Europe would play a big role in actually being able to share the data, et cetera. And I'm not talking about regulatory frameworks per se, but I'm also talking then about the digital infrastructure that yet has to be developed and set into action in other for these then also international collaborations then um come together. Um when it comes to the US-EU collaboration, of course, yeah, the the trade agreement is something that needs to be further investigated. But what is very important here, nevertheless, from a European point of view, is privacy preserving AI. And I think just last week also the ChatGPT uh kind of fallout of I think public links suddenly popped up, which also was a wake-up call. I think for many that considered asking ChatGPT very private questions. And this is clearly something with existing uh regulatory uh kind of agreements that exist between the US and the uh the Europeans will need to be reviewed, I think, to a certain extent. When looking at investment in open source ecosystems, AI safety, green compute capacity, et cetera, this is certainly also something where international collaboration, EU Asia will be will be super important.

Philipp: 36:47

Thank you, Martin. So we touched on on regulatory aspects quite a bit. From the AI Act to the SHIPS Act to data spaces, the regulatory landscape is shifting fast. For corporate innovation leaders who don't want to get blindsided, what should be on their radar right now?

Martin: 37:07

So as of August 1st, the AI Act is starting to be in full swing. So I think that is certainly a first thing that should be on the radar. Chips Act, the same goes for the DMS or Digital Markets Act, those are all very relevant. I think having on the radar what is planned with the Euro HPCs will be key in order to also shape platform access, the question of the compute that lies behind it. Those are all essential aspects. And I think also depending on the size of the corporate actors that you're speaking about, I'm not so worried about the big ones having having all of these developments on the radar. I see the challenge in the small and middle-sized enterprises and also the startup ecosystems, because again, this is the setup that we have mainly here on the continent. And that's also where lots of innovation is being generated. And I think between all of the different regulatory initiatives that are taking place at the moment, the mechanisms, the terms, the fact that some of them also are not yet fully harmonized, it's a it's a huge effort to actually then fully grasp also the implications for oneself. So I think having the awareness that maybe it's good to federate around these topics within a specific industrial vertical in order to be aware of what matters, being also involved in the industry associations, for example, will be important. But there's also a big task still ahead, I think, for the Commission and also for the different member states to make sure that whatever is now being put into uh into motion actually generates what it's supposed to generate, which is value generation for society, for economy, uh, and also uh serving the public interest. Yeah.

Steve: 38:55

Martin, thank you so much for for your time today. Why don't we close perhaps with uh some advice? Uh you write that the window to shape the future stack is closing. You advise uh executives, board level directors, and leaders every day. Can you share a little bit about what advice you are giving them today on innovation and in their role in investments and perhaps what do they need to keep in mind for the next three, five, seven years?

Martin: 39:28

I think embracing that this digital stack notion is becoming a new arena of industrial policy and sovereignty in Europe is key number one. And also that waiting and seeing is no longer viable. The rules are being written right now, the world is shifting fast, a lot of capital is also currently taken into the hands. And I think something something really changed, as I mentioned before in February, that there is this reboot within European decision-making circles of saying, okay, we gotta get our act together now. These developments will define market access, they will define procurement logics and also the types of innovation frameworks and incentivization mechanisms to come. And the recommendation, I think, here for those board-level leaders that would like to also benefit from them is I think we should invest early in alignment to shape these future markets and don't be forced to adapt later under pressure. And really to repeat what I said before, because that's where I also see lots of movement outside of Europe and reactions to with the Eurostack study and also other now reactions, so it's a European digital resilience and also sovereignty, is again this whole notion of trust in a world that is highly uncertain, and this will not change in the foreseeable future. Or the world will be chaotic, it will be minted by uncertainty. Investing in a market that went through all of this before, that can be a trust anchor and that can potentially, with some of the innovations that will come out of here, be the first to be trusted for some of these essential building blocks for kind of this new world that we are entering. I think this is something where I personally would double down right now because it will matter once the hype dies and once we actually realize where this world is headed.

Philipp: 41:21

Martin, thank you so much for joining us. This was a fascinating conversation. I have the feeling we can continue this discussion for at least another hour. But uh we'd love to extend an invitation to the CVC Open Innovation Summit, which we are bringing to Europe, where we are inviting senior leaders from corporate innovation, corporate venture to actually talk about exactly these topics we discussed today and how we can bring the corporations together in the private sector and motivate and energize them to move forward. Um, so I hope we see you there. But thank you so much for your time and I'm looking forward to many more conversations and uh keeping collaborating together.

Martin: 42:04

Thank you so much, gentlemen, and thank you also for throwing a spotlight at this important topic. And wish you all the best with other interviews that we'll have on the podcast in the future.

Steve: 42:18

That's it for today's episode of Inside CVC. A big thank you to Martin Holland for joining us and sharing his perspective on Eurostack, digital sovereignty, and the evolving role of corporations in shaping Europe's technology future. If you enjoyed this conversation, be sure to subscribe to InsideCVC wherever you get your podcast and catch up on all of our episodes at uPath.com forward slash podcast. We'll be back next week with a brand new episode. Until then, as always, thanks for listening. We'll catch you next time.