The most recent HeiCADLecture adopted an unconventional format: Instead of a traditional lecture, two members of the Competition & AI Commission at the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, Mrs. Claudia Nemat and Prof. Rupprecht Podszun, engaged in a discussion on a central question of our time—how Germany can position itself in the international competition for artificial intelligence. The result was a conversation that was as nuanced as it was urgent, covering pace, structural problems, and new opportunities.
Right from the start, a tension became apparent that shaped the entire discussion: Artificial intelligence is developing rapidly—and at the same time, a kind of structural stagnation prevails in Germany and Europe. The innovative capacity is there, both speakers emphasized, but it is not being consistently translated into marketable applications. Germany does not need to hide, they said, but it is simply too slow.
Between Aspiration and Reality
A key point of criticism: the fragmentation of the AI landscape. While large, coordinated initiatives dominate on the international stage, responsibilities in Germany are spread across numerous actors, institutions, and federal states. This leads to inefficient use of resources and lost synergies. “Europe lacks focus”—this assessment was made repeatedly.
This problem is particularly evident in the digital infrastructure. Although technological expertise is available, there is a lack of a common foundation. Instead of uniform solutions, parallel structures are emerging—for example, in the areas of data protection or data management. What is needed here is less micromanagement and more strategic consolidation.
People at the Center
Despite all the economic and geopolitical dimensions, one question remained central: What concrete benefits does AI offer people? The commission members’ answer is clear: technology must be designed with a “human-centered” approach. This means not only that AI should provide solutions to real-world problems, but also that people must be actively involved in the transformation.
This includes targeted training programs as well as a societal attitude described as “critical enthusiasm”: openness to innovation, coupled with a thoughtful approach to risks. AI should neither be blindly celebrated nor reflexively rejected.
Business as a Key Player
A particularly fascinating part of the discussion centered on the role of the business sector. Large companies could act as so-called “anchor customers”—that is, specifically seek out innovations from startups and thereby accelerate their growth. Companies such as BMW, Siemens, Deutsche Telekom, and SAP were cited as examples.
The idea: When established players identify specific “key challenges” and collaborate specifically with young companies, this not only leads to innovation but also sends a strong signal to the entire market. At the same time, this could help build European alternatives to dominant U.S. providers like Microsoft—an important step toward digital sovereignty.
Capital, Data, and Regulation
In addition to collaboration between startups and large corporations, the financial dimension was also discussed. Germany does not primarily suffer from a lack of capital, but rather from structural barriers that hinder investment. A “closed market” and complex regulatory frameworks are said to slow down innovation.
Here, the AI Commission identifies several key areas for action: high-performance infrastructure, better access to data, innovation-friendly regulation, and targeted talent development. These factors are particularly crucial in the context of international competition.
Talent as a Bottleneck
Another critical issue is how to handle skilled workers. The discussion made it clear that Germany needs to adopt a more nuanced approach to its immigration policy. While public debates are often driven by emotion, pragmatic solutions are needed for the targeted recruitment of talent.
The message is clear: Germany cannot afford to lose highly qualified skilled workers due to bureaucratic hurdles or societal deterrents. Faster procedures and an open attitude are necessary to remain competitive on the global stage.
Rethinking Europe
The European perspective was also interesting. “Europe first” does not necessarily mean national solutions, but could also involve greater specialization within Europe. For example, a central data center could be located in Scandinavia—where energy is more affordable and sustainably available.
This perspective shows that competitiveness in the AI sector requires not only national strategies but also closer European cooperation.
Fields of the Future: Defense and Life Sciences
In terms of content, two areas were highlighted as particularly promising: the defense sector and the life sciences. While significant investments in AI are expected in the defense sector, Germany already has a strong foundation in the field of bio- and life sciences.
It is precisely here that the public sector could play a key role—as an active driver of innovation. If government institutions specifically focus on European solutions, they could themselves become drivers of technological development.
From Research to Application
A recurring theme was the so-called “transfer gap”: Germany ranks among the world’s leaders in research, but too rarely succeeds in translating scientific findings into marketable products. This is precisely where the work of the AI Commission comes in.
The goal: to create framework conditions that enable truly transformative innovations. To achieve this, the country’s strong research landscape must be better integrated with its industrial implementation capabilities. Ultimately, the goal is to translate innovation back into economic growth more effectively.
Conclusion
The HeiCADLecture made it clear that Germany is by no means without a chance in the AI competition—quite the contrary. The prerequisites are in place: excellent research, a strong industrial base, and high innovative capacity. However, without structural reforms, faster processes, and a clearer strategic direction, the country risks losing further ground.
The discussion between the two commission members did not provide simple answers, but it did point to a clear direction: greater focus, more collaboration, and a consistent emphasis on the benefits for people. Only in this way can Germany make the leap from insight to application—and succeed in the global AI competition.