The DPG Charter: Key takeaways on supporting digital public goods for the long-term

This article shares key insights from consultations held by the Digital Impact Alliance (DIAL) and the Digital Public Goods Alliance (DPGA) in Summer 2022. These discussions aimed to shape the Digital Public Goods (DPG) Charter, focusing on how to support DPGs effectively for the long term. The findings provide valuable context on the challenges and potential solutions for sustaining these critical digital assets for use as digital public infrastructure.

Core Arguments & Findings

The consultations revealed critical barriers to the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of DPGs, primarily centered around funding and community coordination.

Insight 1: Challenges in Sustaining DPGs Financially and Technically

Digital public goods frequently struggle to secure funding and resources for the ongoing maintenance and value-addition of their core code, especially beyond initial donor investments.

• The “Free-Rider Problem”: The decentralized nature of open-source communities means not all users or implementers are incentivized to contribute back (financially or technically) to the core product, despite benefiting from it. This is particularly acute for DPGs designed for sovereign use.
• Underestimated Costs: The true cost of sustaining DPGs is often higher than estimated and includes:
  • Development Costs: Consistent staffing (e.g., 3-4 technical staff) is needed even before deployment, competing with private sector salaries.
  • Non-Development Costs: Funding is required for capacity building, training, documentation, community engagement, events, and awareness initiatives.
  • Operational Costs: Ongoing expenses like HR, logistics, hosting, and other recurring costs (“keeping the lights on”) need stable funding sources.
• Funding Reliance: Many DPGs become reliant on donor subsidies, as commercial models like Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) are often unsuitable or insufficient due to the need for competitive pricing for governments and non-profit implementers. Product owners spend significant time seeking funding rather than focusing on the product.

Insight 2: Difficulties in Coordinating DPG Communities

While open-source software communities are crucial for creating value (code contributions, support, thought leadership), governing these communities and leveraging their contributions effectively presents significant challenges.

• Balancing Engagement and Resources: Product owners struggle to balance the benefits of community engagement with the substantial time and resources required to manage contributions and interactions.
• Governance Models: How DPGs engage communities depends heavily on their governance model, broadly categorized as:
  • Single-Vendor Governance: More centralized, often pursuing commercial revenue, may be for-profit or non-profit.
  • Community Governance: More decentralized, often requiring a central coordinating entity like a foundation.
• Coordination Challenges: There’s debate on the best coordination approach. While traditional open-source relies on decentralized networks, DPGs underpinning critical infrastructure might benefit from more centralized curation of contributions, though the sustainability of such models needs more evidence.
• Quality Concerns: Managing and reviewing community contributions can be time-consuming and potentially divert resources from core development, sometimes impacting product quality or performance if not managed carefully.

“Now’s the time to collaborate and build inclusive digital public infrastructure with the primary goal of improving the lives and livelihoods of all.” — Michala Mackay, Chief Operating Officer; Director Sierra Leone Directorate of Science Technology and Innovation

Methodology

The insights presented are derived from a series of consultations conducted by DIAL, DPGA, and partners during the Summer of 2022. Participants included a diverse group of stakeholders: DPG product owners, system integrators, and global policymakers. The process aimed to gather varied perspectives to inform the scope and substance of the DPG Charter, particularly regarding DPG sustainability, governance, and deployment as digital public infrastructure.

Key Conclusions & Recommendations

The consultations highlighted the need for shifts in how DPGs are funded, governed, and supported.

Addressing Sustainability Challenges (Insight 1)

• Holistic Lifecycle View: Adopt approaches that consider the entire DPG lifecycle, emphasizing persistent monitoring, feedback, and long-term maintenance funding, not just initial deployment costs.
• Funding Model Innovation: Move away from single, deployment-focused grants towards models that enable value capture and support the core product over time.
• Explore Alternative Financing: Investigate and document the effectiveness of models like pooled procurement, three-sided marketplaces, and joint funding mechanisms to address market failures.
• Acknowledge True Costs: Donors and funders need to recognize and budget for the full range of development, non-development, and operational costs required for DPG sustainability.

Improving Community Engagement & Governance (Insight 2)

• Learn from Experience: Monitor and analyze the governance and community engagement experiences of existing DPGs implemented as infrastructure (e.g., MOSIP, Mojaloop, Primero, X-Road, OpenCRVS, Mifos) to identify best practices.
• Generate Evidence: Develop more nuanced evidence on which governance models work best for different types of DPGs and how to effectively leverage both financial and non-financial community contributions.
• Explore Shared Structures: Consider establishing foundation or custodian-like structures to provide common services (e.g., HR, recruiting, payroll) across multiple DPGs, potentially facilitating community coordination while maintaining essential donor support for core functions.