Page 31 - Building digital public infrastructure for cities and communities

A notable example is Denmark’s growing reliance on one key technology provider’s products, has
sparked national debate over the sustainability of such procurement models. Concerns have been
raised about the implications of dominant vendor/technology provider’s pricing strategies, limited
market competition and the erosion of digital sovereignty (Cleura, 2025). This case highlights
how market concentration can drive up public expenditure without delivering proportional
improvements in service quality, adaptability, or control. Across the Nordic region, similar concerns
have emerged. In Sweden, one-third of public agencies reported that vendor lock-in impeded
cost-effective IT operations.

Challenges extended beyond pricing and included complex licensing arrangements, restricted
legal usage rights and insufficient exit strategies (Lundell et al., 2021). These findings suggest that
technical and legal constraints often limit the ability of public institutions to pivot toward more
adaptive digital solutions.

Moreover, lock-in is not limited to proprietary systems. A case study on municipal e-service platforms
identified instances of “soft lock-in,” where even open-source solutions became difficult to replace.
This was due to limited technical documentation, exclusive dependencies, procurement constraints
and a general organizational preference for maintaining the status quo (Persson & Linåker, 2024).
Such cases highlight that overcoming lock-in requires addressing broader institutional capabilities,
including skills development, process redesign and cultural change rather than focusing solely on
licensing terms.

Addressing vendor lock-in is therefore a crucial part of tackling the broader implementation
challenges that affect DPI development. Fragmented systems, inequitable access to funding,
outdated technologies and dependence on dominant vendors collectively limit the potential
of DPI to promote digital inclusion, economic opportunity and sustainable public governance.
Policy responses must be context-specific yet globally informed, grounded in open standards,
collaborative governance models and resilient, future-proof design principles.

4 DPI in action: Case studies of successful implementations

To ground the discussion in real-world context, we examine several leading cities (case studies) that
have pioneered effective governance and regulatory frameworks for their digital infrastructure, with
key sustainability and people-centricity at their core processes. The core analytical viewpoints for
cities, outlined in earlier sections, have been used to frame the analysis of the case studies. These
case studies – including Singapore, Estonia, Barcelona, Egypt’s New Administrative Capital, New
York City – highlight diverse approaches shaped by different legal systems and priorities. Each offers
insight into how cities can leverage policy and regulation to foster innovation while safeguarding
public interest in the digital age.

18