How Wennink's vision can become a workable strategy
.jpg)
Although the Netherlands is among the richest countries in the world, it is not a given that this will remain the case. The war in Europe, an aging population, climate change, the housing shortage, and rising healthcare costs are forcing us into major societal transitions. To cover these costs, the Dutch economy should grow by 1.5 to 2 percent annually, but have not achieved that for years.
Former ASML CEO Peter Wennink outlines how we can maintain our prosperity, guarantee our security, and also realize the energy, digitization, and AI transition in his report The Road to Future Prosperity. Presented at the end of 2025, it is a translation of Mario Draghi's European report to the Dutch context. Wennink spoke with over 1,000 people from the business community, knowledge institutions, financial institutions, and (semi) government in roundtable sessions.
The message to politicians is urgent: the Netherlands must, at speed, make some tough choices and invest in promising technologies to increase labor productivity and improve earning capacity. But above all, to remain globally relevant. The United States and China are rapidly expanding their lead in critical technologies. In seven years, the difference in investments by large European and American companies rose from thirty-six percent to seventy-six percent, representing approximately 700 billion euros per year. This puts not only our economic position but also our strategic relevance under pressure.
Four domains
The report identifies four technology domains in which the Netherlands can build strategic positions. These are: digitization & AI, life sciences & biotechnology, security & resilience, and energy & climate technology. Within these domains, the Netherlands must focus on niche technological positions, using the National Technology Strategy as a guideline.
Wennink points out that the government must act quickly to create the right conditions. There are still many obstacles. For example, the licensing process is too slow and complex, energy prices are higher than in neighboring countries, and economic growth is being hampered by nitrogen restrictions and grid congestion. The government must also invest in attracting and training technical talent and strengthening our mainports and innovation hubs – from Rotterdam and Schiphol to Eindhoven and Wageningen.
Ready to invest
Wennink's plans will require additional investments of 151 to 187 billion euros by 2035. This willingness to invest is there: pension funds, banks, investors, and companies are ready to invest heavily as soon as the preconditions are in place. Wennink also emphasizes that private equity is crucial because this form of investment not only provides money but also adds expertise, networks, and scalability. These investments increase the chances of success for innovative start-ups and scale-ups.
But public investments are also needed. Wennink advocates for two new institutions: a National Investment Bank with approximately 10 to 20 billion euros in cash to help kick-start the desired industrialization in the Netherlands, and a National Agency for Breakthrough Innovation, which will develop breakthrough technology with 1.5 to 2 billion euros annually, with the government acting as a launching customer. The idea is that businesses will follow suit, and the wave of investment will grow. Innovative companies in particular must have access to financing, because too often they still leave for the US to raise capital and gain access to a large market.
Sort out the foothold
The urgency of Wennink's master plan is undeniable. The Netherlands, like every other European country, cannot afford to fall further behind. But an important element is missing. The report does not yet specify how we will finance this innovation. To get these future plans off the ground, a strong and comprehensive financing chain is needed. Growth capital, venture capital, private equity, banks, pension funds, and infrastructure investors each play their own role and offer diverse financing solutions. These solutions are linked to the risk profile of the plan and the ability to raise debt—the latter being related to the availability of funds to pay interest and principal, and the underlying collateral. For example, a bank cannot help an early-stage deep tech startup, but can help scale innovative SMEs or finance digital infrastructure. Venture capital plays a significant role in startups and scaleups, while private equity investors can help companies achieve further (international) growth.
Many projects and technologies from Wennink's vision for the future can be privately financed. His list is a good starting point. But now it is a matter of how we secure the necessary financing. Which financing options are suitable, what can private parties provide, and what role can the government play in this?
Let us learn from the experiences gained with the National Growth Fund: many consortia that raised money there focused on knowledge development and the valorization of that knowledge in (new) companies. However, these companies can only continue to grow successfully if they can subsequently raise capital from private investors. Because entrepreneurs and investors were not sufficiently involved in the selection of the consortia, it is unclear whether the market will take up the developed knowledge and business activity once the subsidies end. The message is to organize it properly this time around and involve investors earlier in the process.
Sharp focus versus innovation by chance
A key point in the Wennink report is the choice of only four technology domains. This does provide direction and supports investments in these areas, as companies and investors know where the priorities lie. But this focus also has a downside. Innovation often arises from unexpected breakthroughs in areas between certain domains and in applications that no one had foreseen. It is no coincidence that many major discoveries were made by chance. Although the domains are broadly defined, it is legitimate to question whether all investment capacity should be categorized to those four domains. How do we ensure that there remains room for generic innovation policy and investment in as yet unknown or underestimated technologies?
End the zero-risk culture
Something else is at play too. In recent years, the Netherlands has become quite risk-averse. While innovation necessarily goes hand in hand with accepting failure, failure has been regulated virtually out of existence here. Entrepreneurs are held accountable for their mistakes, which currently leads them to avoid risks and miss opportunities.
There is a culture in which we primarily try to prevent things from going wrong and, if they do, look for the party to blame. It would be of more use if we rather focused on devising ways to do better the next time.
A healthy economy not only requires a distinction between acceptable and unacceptable risks but also benefits from an environment in which failures are shared in order to learn from them. Without experimentation, we cannot achieve innovation. The employers' organization VNO-NCW warns that the Netherlands is currently at a standstill. Slow decision-making, regulatory pressure, and the pursuit of zero risk are hampering investment and innovation.
To stimulate innovation, the government should take on the role of launching customer much more often. In this way, the state removes risks, opens markets, and pushes young technologies towards mature applications. This happens in other countries but hardly exists in the Netherlands.
It is not too late
Wennink's report is a timely wake-up call to take swift action. The geopolitical reality is changing rapidly. We are increasingly moving towards a world in which the law of the jungle prevails and where the focus is on the acquisition of raw materials, access to key markets, and technological dominance. In this changing world, the Netherlands cannot afford to remain dependent on others for crucial technologies and raw materials.
Wennink's analysis is a good starting point. However, it should now be a priority to strengthen the financing chain to ensure success. It is not too late. Our call is to engage with investors now. To determine in advance what is feasible, who can invest in which phase and who can take on certain risks (and opportunities). This will prevent risks and expectations from ending up in one big pile. Only if we create clarity and establish a structure will Wennink's ambition become a reality.
Next year, the NVP will address how the investment community can play a role in developing an investment strategy for the Netherlands and Europe. Only when we involve public and private parties in the master plan can we successfully navigate the path to future prosperity.
This essay was published in Management Scope 02 2026.