Over the course of its 20-year history, the ODF standard has been adopted, or at least recommended, by numerous supranational bodies and several countries on almost every continent. However, this does not necessarily mean that the ODF standard is used in accordance with these decisions, which are often laws in their own right, as Microsoft’s substantial lobbying and misinformation campaigns aimed at protecting its revenue of around $25 billion generated by the proprietary OOXML format (DOCX, XLSX and PPTX) encourage the use of the latter. This is despite the fact that the disadvantages for national systems, communities of citizens and individuals are very easy to demonstrate: loss of control over content, interoperability problems and dependence on the commercial strategies of a single vendor.
The information in this post is based on my research into sources relating to the adoption or recommendations for the use of ODF. I began compiling this collection of documents around 2010 and continue to update it annually. Over the last twelve months, I have also used artificial intelligence in my research, which has helped me find some articles.
Unfortunately, formal adoption or recommendation of ODF does not guarantee its actual use in accordance with the law. For example, the latest version of Italy’s Digital Administration Code explicitly prohibits the use of OOXML because it is not a standard, yet this decision is largely ignored by public bodies.
SOVEREIGN BODIES
NATO requires all 28 member countries to use ODF as the standard format for document exchange.
UN and NGOs: UN organisations favour standard and open formats to ensure that all documents remain accessible and do not depend on expensive or restricted tools. This is why ODF is used for reports, policy drafts, and collaborative documentation between teams.
European Commission: has taken a strong stance in favour of open standards and promotes the use of formats such as ODF in documents through its open source software strategy. The European Parliament, the European Commission and the EUIPO (European Union Intellectual Property Office) have integrated LibreOffice and ODF into their internal workflows to ensure greater transparency and language neutrality.
EUROPE
Belgium: Since September 2007, all Belgian federal government departments have been required to accept and read ODF documents, and a memorandum has established ODF as the standard for the exchange of office documents within the federal public administration.
Denmark: From 1 April 2011, the Danish Parliament has mandated the use of ODF by state authorities for the exchange and archiving of documents, whereas previously agencies were only required to accept ODF documents. In recent weeks, articles have claimed that the Danish government will formally migrate to open-source software and, therefore, to ODF. We are, of course, seeking confirmation of this project.
Finland: The Ministry of Justice and other ministries have adopted ODF as the main document format.
France: The Référentiel Général d’Interopérabilité (RGI) recommends ODF as the preferred format for office documents in public administrations. Agencies are therefore encouraged to use ODF …