Deep Tech Ecosystems as Drivers of Sustainable Development: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Perspectives from Europe and Poland

Abstract

Deep tech is a broad concept encompassing scientifically and technologically advanced innovations, enterprises, and projects based on profound scientific and engineering knowledge. It addresses complex technological challenges while considering environmental, social, and economic sustainability. Ambitious R&D initiatives act as catalysts for innovative solutions and for transforming companies and sectors toward sustainable development. The literature review highlights the multifaceted nature of deep tech, particularly from diverse stakeholder perspectives—both those directly and indirectly engaged in this field. Fully utilizing deep tech’s potential requires strong scientific, infrastructural, regulatory, and financial foundations. Europe, including dynamically developing EU countries such as Poland, increasingly recognizes the need to build an ecosystem that supports the development and commercialization of frontier technologies grounded in scientific progress. This article clarifies key deep tech concepts and outlines current conditions for technological innovation in Europe. Drawing on desk research, participatory observation, and a survey, it presents an initial analysis of Poland’s deep tech ecosystem. The exploratory pilot study serves as a basis for more focused future research on key sectoral challenges. The findings offer a preliminary assessment of the potential and barriers related to science-based innovation and provide a clearer picture of Poland’s emerging deep tech landscape. This enables more accurate interpretation of results and insights into the sector’s future development. For Europe and the EU, enhancing global competitiveness in deep tech will require coordinated actions and stronger connections among local ecosystems at different stages of maturity, such as those in Poland.

1. Introduction

The first quarter of the 21st century has seen a dynamic development of knowledge- and technology-based innovation. Technological progress—the process of introducing and developing new and improved technologies—has played a key role in economic development, improving the quality of life and health, and addressing social and environmental problems. Contemporary times continue to generate new threats and social, environmental, and economic challenges. Additionally, in recent years, issues stemming from geopolitical tensions and growing inequalities between countries and social classes have intensified, creating challenges related to security, resilience, and defense. Innovation and technological progress are the driving forces of the modern world and are of fundamental importance to today’s economies. In recent decades, innovation has become recognized as a key driver of economic growth. An analysis of the impact of the Global Innovation Index on 120 countries clearly indicates that innovation positively affects GDP, infrastructure development, human capital, knowledge, and creative outputs [1]. We are currently witnessing the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution (Industry 4.0), which is transforming the functioning of the economy, society, and technology [2,3,4]—similar to previous industrial revolutions but on a much larger scale, with greater impact on digitization and automation. Key technologies driving this transformation include artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, the Internet of Things (IoT), big data, and 3D printing. There is a noticeable trend toward digitizing everything, integrating physical, digital, and biological systems [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14]. As a result, the labor market is evolving, new business models are emerging, the importance of data is increasing, and new ethical, social, and competency-related challenges are arising [15]. “The Fourth Industrial Revolution is characterized by a fusion of technologies that blurs the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres” [16]. New digital technologies will increasingly influence the development of skills and competencies [17,18], and their advancement will be continuous [19]. In recent years, a trend known as the competency revolution has gained momentum [15]. These transformations are systemic rather than fragmented, indicating a clear trend that underscores the fundamental role of knowledge and technology in modern innovation and economic transformations. What we are witnessing are not isolated technological breakthroughs, but a profound structural transformation and integration of three spheres (physical, digital, and biological), which could not take place—now or in the future—without the highest level of knowledge and science. Science and knowledge play a key, strategic role and are the driving forces behind current and future technological and innovative transformations. “Scientific knowledge is the core enabler of technological innovation, and the intensity of a country’s investment in science and research is a reliable predictor of its long-term economic success” [20]. The world recognizes the need to invest in education, science, and R&D in line with the principles of a knowledge-based economy, as such investment guarantees the building of competitive advantages and the development of solutions to current societal challenges. The use of advanced technologies, green and digital transformation, enables sustainable economic, social, and environmental development, influencing such strategic areas as resource management, raw materials management, waste reduction, and the use of renewable energy [21,22,23]. Research centers, universities, and laboratories conducting both basic and applied research are the sources of new technologies. In this context, alongside the well-known concept of high-tech—referring to technologically advanced products and solutions based on available, ambitious scientific discoveries—the concept of deep tech has emerged. Deep tech innovations originate from breakthrough scientific and engineering discoveries. These are technologies closely tied to collaboration with science, universities, and research laboratories. “Deep technologies are innovations built on significant scientific advances, often with long development cycles and high capital requirements, but with the potential to address large-scale societal challenges” [24]. Recognizing the role and importance of deep tech innovations, various economies and major global players (such as the United States, China, and the European Union) are taking action to build scientific and technological ecosystems that provide the desired competitive advantage. Regions, countries, and companies are striving to become technological leaders in specific domains, aiming for technological independence. Investing in science, knowledge, infrastructure, and ambitious research agendas is the key to global competitiveness, sustainable development, and addressing social, demographic, and crisis-related changes (such as COVID-19). Additionally, in recent years, deep tech has gained special importance (comparable to the Cold War era of the 1950s–1990s) in developing solutions for defense and security. A noticeable direction in pro-innovation policy involves the development of dual-use technologies, applicable in both civilian and military contexts.

The final stage of the innovation process is the commercialization of research results. Advanced technological innovations will address economic and societal needs and challenges only once they reach the market. Therefore, the development of ecosystems from the scientific and research side must be accompanied by actions, solutions, and regulations that enable the effective contribution of new technologies to economic practice, creating real added value. The commercialization process of deep tech represents a significant challenge due to, among other things, high costs, technological risk, investment risk, and difficulties in collaboration between science, industry, government agencies, and venture capital investors [25,26,27]. When analyzing the topic of deep tech commercialization, it is important to note that most breakthrough scientific and technological innovations enter the market through startups rather than large corporations. Startups are young companies based on advanced scientific and engineering knowledge, attempting to introduce innovative solutions to the market, either by creating new markets or solving very complex technological problems. Startups in the deep tech sector are the primary vehicle through which scientific discoveries are transformed into groundbreaking innovations with real-world impact. Support for the development of such innovation-driven enterprises is often provided by a variety of startup pre-accelerators, startup accelerators; entrepreneurs, investors, and other support actors are in place to facilitate entrepreneurship, dynamically operating at universities [28].

The development of deep tech has a geopolitical and strategic dimension, with countries and regions treating breakthrough technologies as key assets determining security, independence, and international standing. Among the countries and regions competing in this field are the United States, China, India, Israel, and the European Union. According to a BCG [29] report, the United States and China together account for over 70% of global deep tech funding. Europe accounts for approximately 20% of scientific publications in deep tech, but only 10–12% of investments [29]. The report’s authors also point out that Europe generates a significant stream of scientific output that does not proportionally translate into investments. Its share of funding (~14%) remains well below its scientific contribution, indicating a substantial gap between research and commercialization. The question arises: how is Europe performing? How does Poland compare in this context? At what stage of awareness and concrete action is a country that ranks among the top European economies in terms of development pace and GDP growth?

The aim of the research undertaken in the area of literature analysis on deep tech was to organize the terminology and characterize the conditions for the development of technological innovations. In the empirical part, the objective was to conduct a preliminary analysis of the deep tech ecosystem, using the example of Poland—one of the most dynamically developing economies in Europe. To achieve the stated goals, the research employed desk research analysis, participant observation, and survey studies. The analysis of reports illustrating the development of deep tech in Europe, combined with one of the researcher’s experience in the academic innovation ecosystem, made it possible to design a survey questionnaire. The survey study was conceived as an exploratory pilot study, aimed at providing a preliminary understanding of the state, perspectives, and awareness of deep tech in Poland.

The conducted research allowed the authors to address the following research questions:

• RQ1: What actions is Europe undertaking in line with its strategic goals to build independence based on deep tech?
• RQ2: Is a dynamically developing European country (Poland) ready—in terms of knowledge and ecosystem solutions—to support innovations based on advanced technology and science?

This article consists of five parts. The second part presents a literature review on the subject, particularly focusing on the systematization and characteristics of the deep tech concept. The third part outlines the materials used for the analysis, the applied methods, and the profile of the respondents who participated in the exploratory pilot study. The next section presents the research results and analyses, including EU reports (Section 4.1), the current state of deep tech (Section 4.2), development barriers (Section 4.3), ecosystem cooperation (Section 4.4), and development perspectives (Section 4.5). The survey findings are discussed and analyzed. The fifth part contains the conclusions and final remarks.

2. Literature Review

One of the fundamental types of innovation, classified by its impact on the market, is so-called disruptive innovation. This term was introduced by Clayton M. Christensen in 1995 and popularized through his book “The Innovator’s Dilemma”, in which he defines it as: “Disruptive innovations are innovations that create new markets by discovering new categories of customers. They typically start at the bottom of a market and move up, eventually displacing established competitors” [30]. Disruptive innovations are those that completely change existing markets or create entirely new ones, displacing existing technologies, products, and often companies. Although such innovations do not necessarily rely on entirely new technologies, in practice, their added value often stems from changes in the market model, business model, and value delivery mechanisms.

The term “deep tech” was first introduced by Swati Chaturvedi, founder and CEO of the online investment platform Propel(x). It emerged from the need to deepen the understanding of disruptive innovation and to emphasize the role of advanced science and technology as the source of radical and breakthrough innovations. The definition of deep tech highlights the distinction between typical high-tech innovations—based on business models and digital applications—and deep tech innovations, which are deeply rooted in science and built upon groundbreaking discoveries, inventions, and technological advances. Deep tech refers to those startups whose business model is based on high-tech innovation in engineering or significant scientific advances [31]. The concept of deep tech and the emphasis on challenges in the innovation process were primarily promoted by the venture capital community [32].

The evolution of deep tech innovation is a continuous and highly dynamic process. If we accept that it is driven by technological progress, scientific advancement, and emerging societal needs and problems, its trajectory has been unfolding since the 1960s. In many areas, the development of technology, technological innovation, and its impact on the world and society is difficult to predict—not only over the span of decades or a quarter-century, but even within just a few years (

Table 1. Deep tech areas of interest over time. Source: own study.

Analyzed Period	1960s	Turn of the 1970s and 1980s	Turn of the 20th and 21st Centuries	2010s and 2020s of the 21st Century
Strategic research and development directions	Defense industry, military and communications technologies, nuclear energy, space technologies	Digital technologies, computers and microelectronics, and biotechnology	Development of telecommunications—making the Internet available for civilian use	Artificial intelligence models, machine learning, development of the following fields: medtech, fintech, climate change mitigation, digitalization

).

The term deep tech quickly gained popularity among investors and decision-makers, including innovation policy-makers. Researchers and analysts have explored the concept of deep tech, as evidenced by several insightful reports on contemporary innovation, such as MIT REAP [33], BCG [26], and ESADE [34].

An analysis of the literature, reports, and practical usage of the term deep tech reveals that there is no single, universal definition. The way the term is defined and understood is based on its distinctive features, but it can also vary depending on the context, such as technological, scientific, business, investment, or policy-related (

Table 2. Ambiguity of the term “deep tech”. Source: Based on: [29,34,35,36].

Deep Tech As	Characteristics
science-based innovation	Innovation based on: Fundamental scientific research (e.g., physics, chemistry, biotechnology, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, machine learning, photonics, new materials, quantum materials, clean energy, fusion energy, cybersecurity, space technologies, brain–computer interfaces); Advanced R&D (research & development); Breakthrough technological discoveries, knowledge, know-how, and protected intellectual property (patents); Challenges such as high technological risk and long time-to-market (TTM).
technology start-ups	Young, innovative companies or projects that take on the challenge of introducing new products, services, or solutions to the market (or bringing them closer to the market). These products and services are based on unique, proprietary technologies derived from advanced scientific and engineering research.
economic sector, ecosystem	A specific part of the market or industry (similar to fintech, medtech, biotech) encompassing specific technology sectors and their key players, such as: Startups creating and implementing breakthrough technologies; Universities, research centers, and laboratories, along with scientific fields with transformative potential; Funds financing R&D projects and long-term venture capital financing; Incubators and accelerators of innovation and entrepreneurship; The industrial sector.
business model, innovation model	A distinctive value creation model based on: The knowledge of scientists (universities, research institutes) ready to solve problems of high complexity and scale; Advanced research infrastructure and laboratories; A long innovation lifecycle (research—proof of principle—proof of concept—tech transfer—commercialization); Long-term investments, a willingness to wait for profit over a longer period rather than quick returns (patient capital); High technological risk, with the potential for relatively lower market risk (especially when the solution addresses real and important problems).
political term	It identifies technologies of strategic importance, crucial to the independence and security of the state and region. It serves as a basis for the creation of strategic programs, grants, and dedicated funds, for example, in the EU (Horizon Europe, European Innovation Council), the USA (CHIPS and Science Act), and China (Made in China 2025 strategy).

).

The ESADE publication (along with subsequent updates, the latest being 7 March 2022), prepared by authors from ESADE Business School and the University of Navarra, highlights the fact that the academic community was initially slow to respond to the emergence of the deep tech concept. This delay led to misconceptions about the proper development and application of deep tech. Today, it is increasingly evident that the concept and term “deep tech” are gaining traction within the university environment, including in scientific literature that presents the results of analyses and research on innovations rooted in fundamental science. We are also seeing emerging studies focused on the ecosystem developing around deep tech innovations, including commercialization through startups and academic spin-offs/spin-outs.

Johan Kask and Gabriel Linton present research findings, including case studies, on the challenges faced by deep tech startups. They highlight the unique nature of the innovation process, which requires long-term financing, is capital-intensive, and depends on access to human capital and resources for industrialization processes [37]. The growing importance of deep tech in the context of innovation, technology, and public policy is also emphasized by Benjamin Cabanes [38]. Scientific research and analyses particularly stress the challenges related to the creation and development of deep tech startups, pointing to the complex, lengthy, and risky process of their validation and scaling [39]. Moreover, attention is drawn to the idea that scaling deep tech startups aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) can potentially make their validation and final implementation more predictable [25]. Deep tech is characterized by the need for cross-sectoral action (deep tech is qualified as a cross-sectoral enabler). Its development requires a holistic approach at all levels of the entrepreneurial ecosystem. This requires ambitious research using advanced technologies, design thinking, interdisciplinary collaboration, and coherent regional policies. It is crucial to strive for synergistic collaboration between industry, academia, and government stakeholders [40].

Scientific research and development (R&D) activity has become a key driver in the creation and advancement of new advanced technologies, ultimately enabling the implementation of innovations (products and services) that respond to the most pressing challenges of the modern world. The creation of deep tech innovations requires complex iterative research processes, interdisciplinary in nature, and demands substantial resources—intellectual, infrastructural, and financial. Work on deep tech development requires significantly greater resources compared to standard research, including access to knowledge, funding, research infrastructure, and, above all, time and patience [41]. Designing and executing ambitious research scenarios demands highly specialized knowledge, experience, creativity, analytical skills, and teamwork. The execution of complex, novel, ambitious, and high-risk research necessitates above-average levels of funding [35]. This is due to the highly complex nature of research, conducted within narrow research disciplines, taking into account various development and commercialization scenarios. Additionally, the long duration of research activities does not contribute to reducing the demand for funding [33]. The deep tech domain is characterized by high technological risk, particularly in technical and engineering work—raising questions such as: Will the technology work? Will it be scalable? Will it meet established standards and regulations? The complexity of the goals and lengthy research phases also increases the uncertainty of success in achieving desired outcomes. However, the risk associated with the utilization and commercialization of successful results is considered relatively low. Due to the high level of focus on purpose and its careful selection, the outcomes are likely to effectively address real social and market needs [26]. With appropriate commercialization, deep tech solutions have the potential to achieve significant success, thanks to their high value and relevance to humanity. The BCG & Hello Tomorrow report highlights that while market risk is predictable, technological risk is high—yet it can be mitigated through experience, expert involvement, structured and iterative project development (following, e.g., the design-build-test-learn methodology), as well as through strong, protected intellectual property [26]. It is also important to note that advanced scientific research, and the subsequent efforts to bring solutions to market based on research results, are associated with numerous moral, ethical, and legal challenges. New solutions often do not fit within existing legal frameworks, making their regulation difficult, delayed, or even impossible at a given point in time.

To summaries the literature review, it should be clearly stated that the term deep tech is ambiguous and functions in many areas and contexts. From a research perspective, however, it is important to distinguish between the definitions of high tech and deep tech.

Table 3. Definition of deep tech and high tech—summary of characteristics. Source: Based on: [24,25].

Characteristics	High Tech Innovation	Deep Tech Innovation
Source of technology	Based on the application or incremental improvement of existing advanced technologies. High-tech industries typically leverage established scientific knowledge and apply it to create more efficient or commercially attractive products.	Rooted in fundamental scientific discoveries or engineering breakthroughs that enable entirely new technological paradigms or markets. Deep-tech innovations often emerge from basic research and require the convergence of multiple disciplines.
Development and Maturity Cycle	Characterized by shorter R&D and market adoption cycles. High-tech products can often be developed and commercialized within existing industrial infrastructures and supply chains.	Involves long development timelines and higher technological uncertainty. The maturation of a deep-tech innovation typically requires several years (or decades) of experimentation, prototyping, and validation before commercial viability is achieved.
Financial Requirements	Requires substantial investment in skilled labor and product development, yet the path to revenue generation is typically faster and more predictable.	Entails very high initial capital expenditure due to laboratory research, hardware prototyping, and infrastructure. The return on investment is highly uncertain and long-term.
Technological and Market Risk	Dominated by market risk (competition, consumer acceptance, market timing), while technological feasibility is generally established.	Characterized by high technological and market risk, as both the feasibility and demand for the innovation may be uncertain at the early stages.
Strategic and Societal Impact	Generates significant economic and technological progress, but tends to be evolutionary, improving existing markets and systems.	Aims to achieve transformational or systemic impact, addressing “grand challenges” such as climate change, health, and sustainable resource management; often creates entirely new industries.
Type of Product or Service	Frequently focused on software-driven, ICT, or digital solutions, as well as improvements in existing hardware or processes.	Oriented toward fundamental sciences, technologies—such as advanced materials, energy devices, photonics, quantum computing, robotics, artificial intelligence, machine learning, or biotechnologies
Commercialization and Barriers to Entry	Commercialization pathways are well established, with moderate entry barriers due to accessible technology and lower regulatory constraints.	Commercialization is complex, with high entry barriers linked to intellectual property protection, long testing cycles, infrastructure needs, and regulatory compliance.

below presents the relationship between key characteristics that are also important from the perspective of sustainable development.

3. Methodology

3.1. Materials and Methods

When designing the research, several key factors were taken into account. First, the fact that the term deep tech can be regarded as a relatively new research topic, increasingly present in substantive and valuable analyses and reports, but still only marginally represented in academic discourse. At the same time, the potential for development and the significance of innovation and the deep tech sector for the economy and society—locally, regionally, and globally—were considered.

Second, the interdisciplinary nature of the subject, which on one hand is naturally linked to engineering and technology, and on the other hand to social sciences, particularly innovation management.

Third, the fact that among the co-authors of the publication is an expert with over ten years of experience involved in the development of the entrepreneurship and innovation ecosystem at one of Poland’s top technical universities. Additionally, the design of the research took into account its pilot nature, which, according to the researchers’ assumptions, was intended to provide a preliminary exploration of the deep tech topic along with an assessment of the potential for conducting broader yet focused and detailed research on this issue.

As a consequence, the natural choice of research methods included:

• Desk research—analysis of secondary data, preceded by the collection and examination of information gathered in key reports and other industry studies related to the deep tech innovation market and sector.
• Observational method—specifically, participant observation, where the researcher actively engages in the functioning of a given community or team and observes phenomena from within.
• Survey research—conducted using a questionnaire inspired by the analysis of secondary data and observations.

The research was conducted in two stages. The first stage consisted of the analysis of publicly available materials and studies, with particular emphasis on reports and analyses such as:

• Deep Tech: The Great Wave of Innovation—BCG & Hello Tomorrow (2021) [42];
• New European Innovation Agenda—European Commission (2022) [43];
• State of European Tech—Atomico (2016—2024) [44];
• European Deep Tech Report—Lake Star, Walden Catalyst, dealroom.co (published: 2023) [24];
• European Innovation Scoreboard—European Commission (annual, published: 2025) [45];
• The Baltic Deep Tech Report 2024, Dealroom.co with Iron Wolf Capital, WALLESS, Startup Estonia & Commercialization Reactor [46];
• The Baltic Deep Tech Report 2023, Dealroom.co with Iron Wolf Capital, Google Cloud, Walless, and Startup Lithuania [47].

The analysis of these documents allowed for the systematization of concepts and conditions characterizing deep tech innovations, as well as an understanding of the current state of development of this strategic sector, particularly from a European perspective.

An additional element of the first stage of research was participant observations. Participant observations provided additional value to the research. They resulted from the co-author’s involvement in assessing research teams’ applications for funding for technology development and commercialization (funded by an EU project, Ministry of Science and Higher Education).

The second, more extensive part consisted of a survey study aimed at preliminary exploration of the opinions of key actors in the innovation ecosystem regarding the state and prospects of deep tech in Poland. Expert assessments were used to collect the necessary data. The applied method was a prepared questionnaire survey. The developed questionnaire was directed to the scientific and research community, startups, and experts from institutions and programs supporting innovation development and entrepreneurship. As mentioned at the outset, it was assumed that this survey using the developed questionnaire would have a pilot character and could serve as a starting point for further research. The data collected via the questionnaire were processed using quantitative methods. The aim of the survey was to gather respondents’ opinions on the state and prospects of deep tech in Poland. The survey also included a demographic section for respondents, which allowed for confirmation that the research reached representative actors of the innovation ecosystem and potential deep tech innovators. The substantive part of the questionnaire was divided into four areas (see Figure 1):

• Current state of deep tech;
• Barriers to deep tech development;
• Collaboration within the ecosystem;
• Prospects for deep tech innovation.

This proposed division enabled the structured collection of opinions on deep tech in Poland while simultaneously highlighting key parameters and determinants of its development.

The questionnaire included closed-ended questions with single-choice and multiple-choice options. In selected questions, respondents were given the possibility to supplement their answers according to their own opinion or, if they felt it necessary, to comment on the proposed answer options. A Likert scale was also used in some parts of the questionnaire. This scale allows the collection and measurement of opinions, providing information about the degree of agreement or acceptance of specific views, statements, or phenomena [48]. In this study, a 5-point scale was proposed, with the middle point—the third in order—allowing respondents to express a neutral opinion. Following the recommended substantive assumptions of this methodology, an odd number of points (possible responses) was chosen. This approach allows for a so-called “midpoint” response, enabling respondents to indicate that none of the available options fully represents their view [49]. The choice of a 5-point scale is also a compromise in this survey between the precision of collected opinions and the number of available response options. The more options there are, the more respondents may be discouraged from choosing or providing answers, which could result in non-response or answers that do not adequately reflect reality. Consequently, this can negatively affect the sample size and the quality of the collected research data.

The survey was made available online using Microsoft Forms. Invitations to participate were sent to selected accelerators/incubators of entrepreneurship and innovation, technology transfer centers operating within university structures, startups/spin-offs operating for no longer than 5 years, and institutions supporting and promoting technological innovations. The survey remained active for two months. After this period, the collected responses were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative methods.

3.2. The Study Sample—Respondent Profile

The surveyed group of respondents allowed a focus on analyzing the roles of participants in the deep tech ecosystem, as well as their professional experience in this area within the Polish market. The study helps to understand better who the people actively shaping this sector are, what functions they perform, and how long they have been working in the industry. Understanding the profile of respondents who answered the questions enabled the identification of the needs of different groups forming this environment.

The surveys conducted were exploratory pilot studies designed to identify hypotheses for future large-scale research. In line with this assumption, the goal was not to generalize the collected data to the entire Polish ecosystem. Respondents were recruited through technology transfer offices at Polish universities and EU-funded accelerator networks (e.g., EIT InnoEnergy) to reach active participants in the ecosystem. Given the pilot’s exploratory nature, we prioritized breadth of stakeholder input over statistical reliability.

The study involved 31 participants (Figure 2). The largest group of respondents were founders—founders of companies, startups, and ventures operating in the deep tech industry. There were 15 of them, making up nearly 50% of the study sample. The second largest group consisted of representatives of incubators or accelerators—8 people (26%). Four respondents identified their role in the ecosystem as investors (13%). The remaining 4 (13%) described their involvement as “other,” indicating roles such as representatives of NGOs working for deep tech, individuals engaged in business development in this sector, as well as integrators of the national system.

Regarding the respondents’ work experience (Figure 3), the largest group consisted of industry participants with over 10 years of experience—8 people, making up 26% of the sample. Tied for second largest were those with 4 to 6 years and 7 to 10 years of experience, each group comprising 7 people (23%). Slightly fewer respondents, 6 people (19%), reported having 1 to 3 years of experience. The smallest group was respondents with less than 1 year of experience—only 3 people, accounting for just 10% of the sample.

4. Results

4.1. Deep Tech—European Perspective

Europe recognizes the importance and significance of innovation in the context of economic and social development, and in recent years, also in terms of security and resilience. The overarching goals of innovation efforts include ecological and digital transformation. To a large extent, it is thanks to innovation, particularly technological innovation, that Europe can play a significant role on the global stage. Developing and bringing new technologies to market will enable Europe to address social challenges and enhance competitiveness against economies such as the United States and China. Creating conditions for the development of deep tech innovations in response to sustainable development challenges is becoming a key European objective. As Mustafa Torun notes, “Deep Tech companies will be crucial not only for innovative competitiveness but also transition towards more sustainable economy, since these companies are providing the key enabling technologies for a carbon neutral economy” [24].

Analyses of the state and conditions for deep tech development in Europe—from the perspectives of innovation, startup ecosystems, and public policy—have been the subject of interesting and valuable reports and studies published in recent years, as mentioned earlier in this article.

Innovation policy is a focus for decision-makers in the European Union, as well as individual regions, member states, and countries outside the EU (such as the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Norway). Europe aims for even more dynamic development of innovation activities, including promoting entrepreneurial attitudes, conducting top-level scientific research, and implementing research results into the market. In 2022, the European Commission adopted the “New European Innovation Agenda” [50]. Europe’s goal is to become a global leader in deep tech innovation. Europe has recognized the potential embedded in deep tech innovations while being aware of its strengths that can support these ambitions, as well as threats that may hinder this potential. Deep tech can also significantly contribute to advancing ecological and sustainable development goals that the Union sets for its member states. The development of such initiatives may additionally help Europe regain its position as a leader in the technology market. European countries may also become pioneers and creators of new, previously non-existent fields. Finally, deep tech can stimulate the growth of new enterprises, creating jobs and helping to mitigate economic slowdowns [51].

A key factor that should support the achievement of the intended goals is the very fact of the integration of European countries, their economic-political union, and deeply rooted shared cultural roots. Building on these connections, Europe supports the formation of international teams that find it easier to conduct highly specialized research and development work by utilizing knowledge and equipment available within member countries [52].

It is also significant that many academic and scientific centers operate in European countries, educating and developing highly qualified specialists across various fields of science and technology. Therefore, creating university alliances and cooperating to adapt education and research programs to challenges and areas with a key impact on society is important [53]. Thanks to unified higher education standards and numerous scientific and student exchange programs (notably the Erasmus Plus program), opportunities for international collaboration emerge. Additionally, new possibilities for the development and further training of the academic community are being created, which further enhances the level of specialists’ education [54].

Since 2023, innovation alliances under Erasmus+ have supported the development of entrepreneurial skills, with a particular emphasis on skills related to the most advanced technologies. The European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) implements the “Deep Tech Talent Initiative,” which focuses on training personnel for the deep tech sector [55].

Another factor supporting the development of deep tech in Europe is the diverse range of financial support opportunities and instruments. Many framework programs, such as Horizon Europe, the European Institute of Innovation & Technology (EIT), and the European Innovation Council (EIC), provide significant funding for scientific research, technology development, and innovation [56]. Additionally, Europe hosts funds specifically aimed at making the continent a leader in new and breakthrough technologies, including:

NATO Innovation Fund (NIF)—a €1 billion venture capital fund investing in startups from the advanced technology sector, particularly in areas such as artificial intelligence, autonomy, quantum technologies, biotechnology, and hypersonic systems. The fund’s goal is to support innovation in defense and security [57].

Joint European Disruptive Initiative (JEDI)—an initiative led by European technology company leaders, universities, and research centers, also involving companies and scientists from the UK. Modeled after the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), JEDI focuses primarily on areas like the environment, energy, healthcare, space utilization, and digital human augmentation technologies. One of its innovation support tools is a grant fund estimated at €50 to €100 million annually [58].

European Investment Fund (EIF)—a key institution supporting SMEs in obtaining financing for developing innovative technologies. EIF offers various financial instruments through intermediaries such as banks, guarantee and leasing companies, microcredit institutions, and venture capital/private equity funds. For example, EIF invested €30 million in the Quantonation II fund, which focuses on quantum technologies and deep physics [59]. EIF also supports the European Tech Champions Initiative (ETCI), aimed at strengthening the European technology ecosystem, including deep tech companies.

Beyond EU-wide support, individual countries run their own programs and funds financing deep tech projects. France pursues an ambitious AI strategy combining public investment, talent development, startup support, and an ethical approach to technology. In 2018, the national AI strategy “AI for Humanity” was announced and updated in 2021 under the “France 2030” program. The plan included significant investments in research, education and talent development, research infrastructure, open public data, and the establishment of ethical frameworks for AI. Public spending on AI from 2018 to 2024 exceeded €3 billion [60]. Germany has also implemented a new AI and quantum infrastructure development strategy aimed at strengthening digital sovereignty for the country and Europe. In 2023, the DeepTech & Climate Fonds (DTCF) was launched to finance new green technologies, with an initial investment target of up to €1 billion in companies developing future-oriented technologies [61]. It is also worth noting that UK deep tech companies secure substantial venture capital (VC) investments, often obtaining larger VC cheque sizes compared to the broader population of VC-backed companies in the UK [62].

On the other hand, Europe also faces numerous challenges in the area of innovation, including administrative barriers, limited involvement of private investors, a demographic crisis, and the migration of skilled workers and specialists outside of Europe. Despite efforts to harmonize regulations, differences in the fields of science and innovation among individual countries, along with administrative obstacles, hinder the exchange of knowledge and technology within the European Union’s single market. Although the EU, as a public institution, allocates substantial funds to finance, strengthen, and initiate activities in innovative research, there is still a lack of strong support from private investors in this area. Their participation remains at a relatively low level, insufficient to meet existing needs and increase motivation for action. Europe is also grappling with a demographic crisis and an aging population. This affects innovation by limiting the availability of qualified workers, which may result in a slowdown of innovation development within the community.

Current research, analyses, and trends in the area of deep tech in Europe are reported annually in publications such as the “European Deep Tech Report.” This report is created in partnership with Lakestar (a venture capital fund), Walden Catalyst (a venture capital fund), and Dealroom.co (a global provider of data and insights on startups and technology ecosystems). The 2025 Report, the fourth edition, was additionally co-created by Hello Tomorrow (an international non-profit organization that supports the development of innovations in advanced technologies) [24,63]. The authors of the report identified key European deep tech technologies, including artificial intelligence, quantum computing, space technologies, new energy technologies, and the use of technology in biology and chemistry.

The conclusions of the report confirm a strong need to activate the development of deep tech startups, including spin-offs and spin-outs (companies founded by researchers that utilize university infrastructure and intellectual property). It is important to advance this model of technology commercialization by companies attempting to bring novel research results and scientific work conducted at European universities to the market.

In terms of value, the most valuable companies originated from research conducted at the ETH Zurich, the University of Oxford, and the University of Cambridge. Looking at aggregate results by country, the leading United Kingdom outperforms the value of spin-offs and spin-outs from Germany and Switzerland by a factor of two.

The report’s authors also point out that universities in the United Kingdom, which until recently was part of the European Union, receive the highest number of official patents for deep tech innovations. Within the EU, the most active centers in this regard are located in Germany, France, and Belgium. However, many of these achievements remain underutilized. Data for the European Union show that as many as 95% of patents have never been commercialized.

The European deep tech reports indicate that technologies based on advanced research are more resilient to market downturns and fluctuations. Despite their high level of complexity, deep tech companies represent the largest category of venture capital funding. Looking at individual sectors in 2023, deep tech ranked first with a total of $14.7 billion. The podium is completed by energy-related innovations with $11.9 billion and health with $8 billion. Analyzing venture capital funding for deep tech by financing rounds, the resilience of this group to the slowdown observed across the broader market during the analyzed period is evident. A concerning trend is the origin of capital in the different funding rounds for this group. In the later stages of development, the share of capital originating from the European community drops to 50%. This trend could, in the long term, threaten Europe’s technological independence. The significant share of domestic and public funds mentioned earlier is noticeable only in the initial phases of development. In later phases, capital from American and Asian sources begins to dominate. To counteract this phenomenon, the initiative called “European Tech Champions” was launched. Its goal is to pool funds to support 10–15 funds with a total of €3.75 billion. However, the condition for this support is a focus on deep tech and an existing capitalization of at least €1 billion.

A huge potential, confirmed by numerous best practices in supporting and developing deep tech innovation, can be observed in the Netherlands, the Nordic-Baltic states. The United Kingdom continuously attracts the most deep tech funding according to “The 2025 European Deep Tech Report,” followed by France, Germany, Sweden, and the Netherlands. However, Finland shows the strongest growth in VC funding—nearly four times higher than the UK and twice as high as the Netherlands.

Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, thanks to high investments in innovation supported by government initiatives, private investments, and international programs, have built a very strong foundation for deep tech development. In the context of analyzing the local environment and the level of deep tech innovation in the Baltic countries, this is reflected in the Baltic Deep Tech Report 2023 and Baltic Deep Tech Report 2024 [46,47]. The authors of the report highlight the high effectiveness in commercializing startups founded in the Baltic countries. Around 80 startups secure venture capital funding in their first round each year. Impressively, 12 companies from the Baltic countries have achieved unicorn status since 1990. It is worth noting that between January and May 2024, half of the venture capital funding raised went to deep tech and artificial intelligence startups. The year 2024 is also very promising for this market in terms of deep tech investment levels—in the first five months of this year, financial support exceeded the total investment value recorded in 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2023 combined.

It’s worth conducting a preliminary analysis of the status and potential of deep tech development in selected European countries and regions. Among publications and reports, there are no studies specifically focused on Poland. Therefore, given Poland’s position and potential in Central and Eastern Europe, the decision was made to conduct pilot research in this ecosystem.

4.2. The Current State of Deep Tech in Poland

The study allowed for a focus on identifying key trends, challenges, and development opportunities for deep tech from the perspective of Poland—a country that ranks among the leading European economies in terms of growth pace and GDP increase. Although the analysis conducted was pilot in nature, it enables the creation of a comprehensive picture of the current situation, serving as a starting point to highlight areas that require deeper analysis or development to achieve the desired goals.

According to the respondents, it is difficult to consider the level of deep tech development in Poland as satisfactory. This opinion seems objective, as despite many strengths of the Polish economy, innovation activities have tended to focus more on “high-tech” rather than “deep tech” innovations.

The vast majority of respondents indicated that Poland’s position is clearly below the potential and level represented by other European Union countries (Figure 4). Ten people stated that this deficit is minor, but a similar number (9 people) believed it to be significant. A different view was held by 9 respondents: one person opined that Poland significantly outperforms other countries, while 8 others indicated that Poland is at a similar level to EU countries. Three respondents had no opinion on the matter. As can be seen, opinions are somewhat divided. It can be assumed that this largely stems from some ambiguity and the lack of a clear definition of “deep tech.” The reviewed reports assessing the level of deep tech innovation development in Europe indeed do not recognize Polish deep tech innovations as significant or attracting investor interest.

It can be considered true and consistent with the analyzed reports that the deep tech innovation market in Poland is only beginning to take shape and develop, focusing on leveraging the scientific and research potential that Poland possesses. In a way, this is reflected by the research areas identified by respondents as having a high potential for success in deep tech. Among the most important achievements noted over the past five years, respondents highlighted:

• Quantum technologies;
• Third-generation solar cells;
• Advanced 3D printing;
• Artificial intelligence tools such as products from OpenAI, co-founded by Poles;
• Real-time operating systems.

Interestingly, respondents also pointed to Poland’s acquisition and hosting of the NATO DIANA accelerator in Kraków as an achievement. This may confirm that the ecosystem support—represented here by incubators, accelerators, strong academic centers, research institutions, and favorable policies and regulations—is recognized as crucial for the development of deep tech innovation.

Some respondents, however, expressed that they could not identify any particular successes. This may not stem from a pessimistic view but rather from an awareness of what deep tech innovations should truly represent. There was also the opinion that only in the last five years has the process of forming and building a deep tech ecosystem begun through various activities, meetings, and conferences, making it difficult to point to concrete successes so far. This uncertainty in reporting successes is also confirmed by the fact that six respondents (19% of those surveyed) left the question unanswered, possibly reflecting the ambiguity mentioned above.

Responses regarding the state of deep tech regulations in Poland reflect caution and pragmatism on this topic (see Figure 5). Nearly half of the respondents (15 people) indicated that the regulations are neutral. Twelve people stated that the regulations are not fully supportive. Two respondents said the current regulations are favorable, while one person each gave extreme answers, stating that the regulations are either very friendly or very unfriendly.

It should be acknowledged that this balanced assessment (neutral and indicating some mismatch) is objective and reflects the actual situation. It would certainly be valuable to further inquire about the specific regulatory challenges perceived by innovators, startup founders, scientists, and researchers. It is important to be aware that regulations can act both as a supporting factor and a barrier to development due to high technological uncertainty, long development cycles, and potential social impacts. Reports on deep tech innovation development typically consider and compare two perspectives: Regular Tech versus Deep Tech. Therefore, respondents were asked to share their opinions on the comparison of development conditions for deep tech and traditional innovations in Poland (see Figure 6). The vast majority indicated that it is more difficult for deep tech initiatives to develop in Poland than for innovations related to Regular Tech (20 respondents, or 65% of the sample, expressed this view). Eleven people stated that conditions are worse for deep tech, and 9 said the conditions are significantly worse. Seven respondents saw no difference in this regard. Two people indicated that deep tech does not face worse conditions, and one person stated that the conditions are definitely not worse. One person had no opinion on the matter. This distribution of responses aligns with the view that Poland is still in the process of creating a foundation, including an ecosystem conducive to deep tech development.

The steady development of entrepreneurship and innovation in Poland has also led to the emergence of various sources of funding for pro-innovation activities. Among the main sources of financing for deep tech innovations currently available in Poland, respondents indicated (Figure 7) that the most popular method of funding advanced innovations are grants from public funds, mentioned 27 times. Not far behind, venture capital funding was indicated 25 times. Support from business angels was pointed out by 17 respondents. As sources financing deep tech in Poland, 10 people mentioned private funds from founders and researchers. In the “other” category, respondents listed the stock exchange as well as both domestic and foreign investors, and equity capital.

The deep tech ecosystem in Poland is still at an early stage of development, and there is a need to undertake many specific actions regarding internationalization, interdisciplinarity, and legal regulations. However, this does not change the fact that it can be characterized by significant growth potential. The vast majority of respondents (21 people) indicated that the greatest opportunity for deep tech development in Poland is the scientific and research potential (Figure 8). Next, access to EU funds was mentioned by 12 respondents. Tied with 11 mentions each were two options: growing investor interest and the geopolitical situation and global changes (e.g., technological development, increased investment in innovation, demographic and social changes). One person identified regulatory changes as an opportunity.

4.3. Barriers to the Development of Deep Tech in Poland

The development of the deep tech sector and its innovations also faces a number of obstacles. To understand why the potential of deep tech in Poland is not fully utilized, the next section of the research was devoted to this issue. Its goal was to identify and analyze the main barriers that hinder the development of deep tech innovations in our country. Based on the collected responses, a comprehensive picture of the challenges faced by entrepreneurs, scientists, and investors involved in the development of this sector was obtained. The identified barriers will help us better understand the current situation and formulate specific recommendations that will contribute to removing existing limitations.

This section included two questions. First, respondents were asked to indicate all the barriers they knew of that exist in the development of deep tech in Poland. Respondents could select any number of options from a range of available choices and could also provide their own answers. The results of the identified barriers for deep tech are presented in Figure 9.

Looking at the chart, it can be observed that the respondents divided the barriers into three groups based on the number of mentions. The most frequently indicated barriers, which received the highest number of responses and stand out compared to the others, include:

• A general reluctance of investors to support deep tech (21 mentions);
• A low culture of innovation in Poland (18 mentions);
• A lack of dedicated sources of funding (14 mentions).

The second group of less frequently indicated barriers to deep tech development (between 6 and 12 mentions) includes:

• Difficulties in securing funding in subsequent development phases and challenges with international expansion (12 mentions each);
• Challenges in commercializing developed solutions (11 mentions);
• Bureaucracy in operational activities and high employee employment costs (9 mentions);
• Lack or insufficient deep tech-focused ecosystem and inadequate cooperation between universities and business (8 mentions);
• Lack of appropriate knowledge and experience (7 mentions);
• Lack of research infrastructure (6 mentions).

In the group with the fewest mentions from respondents (each receiving only 4 responses) were:

• Complicated and unclear legal regulations;
• Lack of experts/employees;
• Insufficient support from educational institutions;
• Shortage of qualified workers.

The response “Other,” which allowed respondents to add to the proposed list of barriers, was selected by only one person, who indicated that, in their opinion, a barrier could be the long time required to formalize the start-up’s operations (company registration and obtaining necessary permits). None of the respondents chose the options “Hard to say” or “Difficulties in attracting talent.” Two respondents indicated that there are no barriers to the development of deep tech in Poland.

Since the above question allowed multiple answers, respondents who indicated several barriers were also asked to rank their importance or identify the one they considered the most significant. In this question, eight respondents did not provide any answer. Three respondents stated that there are too many barriers in their opinion, making it difficult to propose a hierarchy or select a single most important one. The remaining respondents identified the most significant barriers as (Figure 10):

• Insufficient collaboration between universities and business (7 mentions);
• Low culture of innovation (4 mentions);
• Lack of adequate knowledge/experience (2 mentions);
• Difficulty in commercializing developed solutions (2 mentions);
• Bureaucracy in running operational activities and difficulties with foreign expansion (2 mentions);
• Difficulty in commercialization (1 mention).

Due to the importance of issues related to barriers in the development of deep tech, it is also worth analyzing the respondents’ answers to the first question of this section with regard to two key ecosystem actors. The perspectives of deep tech start-up founders and representatives of incubators and accelerators supporting these projects were therefore selected. The collaboration between these two key stakeholders, especially in the early stages of deep tech project development, can be considered crucial. This cooperation often involves the development and validation of the technology itself, building subsequent MVPs and prototypes, analyzing commercialization pathways, and identifying sources of capital. The results of the analysis allowed for the identification of the most significant barriers to deep tech development indicated by each of these groups—these results are presented in Figure 11. Among the founders (15 responses), seven such barriers were identified. The most significant barriers to deep tech development included:

• General reluctance of investors to support deep tech (11 responses);
• Low culture of innovation in Poland (10 responses);
• Difficulty in commercializing developed solutions (7 responses);
• Lack of dedicated funding sources (6 responses);
• Difficulties with foreign expansion (5 responses);
• Lack of experts/employees (4 responses);
• Problems obtaining financing in subsequent phases (4 responses).

From the perspective of representatives of incubators and accelerators (8 participants in the study), 10 key barriers were identified (Figure 12). The results in this group were more dispersed and were as follows: lack of dedicated funding sources and general reluctance of investors to support deep tech (6 responses), lack or insufficiency of an ecosystem focused on deep tech (4 responses). Two responses each were received for: lack of research infrastructure, lack of appropriate knowledge and experience, insufficient collaboration between universities and business, low culture of innovation in Poland, difficulties obtaining funding in subsequent development phases, challenges with foreign expansion, and high employee hiring costs. Additionally, 2 respondents indicated that they could identify no major barriers and believe that such barriers do not exist.

Representatives of incubators/accelerators did not indicate difficulties in commercializing developed solutions or the lack of experts/employees as barriers—issues that founders, on the other hand, recognized and considered quite significant. According to the study, founders did not identify the following barriers as important: lack or insufficiency of an ecosystem focused on deep tech, lack of research infrastructure, lack of appropriate knowledge/experience, insufficient collaboration between universities and business, and high employee hiring costs.

An interesting fact is that for four barriers, both founders and representatives of incubators/accelerators agreed, and these were indicated by both groups as key barriers:

• General reluctance of investors to support deep tech;
• Low culture of innovation in Poland;
• Lack of dedicated funding sources;
• Difficulties in obtaining funding in subsequent development phases.

4.4. Collaboration in the Ecosystem

The deep tech ecosystem is a complex organism that connects various stakeholder groups—from decision-makers to entrepreneurial scientists. For the functioning and development of deep tech innovations and achieving ambitious goals, good collaboration and the exchange of knowledge and experience are crucial. Therefore, the third section of the survey focused on analyzing the level of cooperation and networking within the emerging Polish deep tech ecosystem. This analysis allowed for an assessment of whether the Polish deep tech ecosystem is sufficiently well-connected internally and whether mechanisms supporting collaboration between individual ecosystem actors can be identified.

In the first question of this section, respondents were asked to evaluate cooperation and mutual support based on their own experiences and observations. The questions covered four selected areas of collaboration. A scale from 1 to 5 was used, where 1 corresponded to a negative assessment of cooperation and 5 to a very good one (Figure 13). The responses obtained in the four examined areas were as follows:

1.

The level of cooperation between different entities within the deep tech ecosystem in Poland

The majority of respondents rated the cooperation as good (48.4% of responses) or very good (3.2% of responses). Nearly one-fifth of respondents (19.4% of responses) chose a neutral answer, which is equivalent to indicating they have no experience in this area. A negative assessment of the level of cooperation was given by 29% of respondents, with 25.8% rating the cooperation as poor and only 3.2% as very poor.

2.

The level of deep tech support from the academic environment in Poland

Respondents evaluated the level of support offered by university environments quite negatively—61.3% of respondents expressed a negative opinion on this matter, with 29% rating it as poor and 32.3% as very poor. Only just over one-third of respondents spoke positively about the support provided, with 32.3% rating it as good and only 3.2% as very good. A small number of respondents also indicated that they had no experience in this area to make an assessment.

3.

The level of support for deep tech from the government, its dependent entities, and regulatory institutions in Poland

Negative opinions also prevail in this area among the survey participants—35.5% of respondents rated this aspect poorly, and another 16.1% rated it very poorly. Only one in five respondents (19.4%) rated it positively, with just 3.2% rating it very positively. One in four respondents (25.8%) had no opinion on the matter.

4.

Cooperation with other organizations in the industry

This includes cooperation among business environment institutions, incubators, accelerators, and universities. Cooperation in this area is rated significantly better by respondents. More than three-fifths of those surveyed positively assess cooperation among other ecosystem participants (58.1% rated it as good, with an additional 3.2% rating it very good). One-third of respondents disagreed, with 25.8% rating the cooperation poorly and 3.2% very poorly. Some respondents chose to remain neutral, indicating they had no opinion on this topic (9.7%).

In the second question of this section, respondents were asked to assess the role of selected ecosystem entities in terms of their impact on the development of deep tech innovation in Poland (Figure 14). Responses based on the respondents’ own experiences were as follows:

Start-ups: The vast majority of respondents consider start-up environments to be a key element of the ecosystem, with a significant influence on the creation of deep tech innovations (35.8% answered “rather yes,” and 38.7% answered “definitely yes”). Conversely, 12.9% of respondents rather do not see start-ups as a key element of the ecosystem. A similar number (9.7%) believe that this is definitely not an important role. 3.2% of respondents had no opinion on this matter.

Universities (primarily creators, inventors—scientists, PhD students, students): Over 50% of respondents strongly or very strongly associate universities with the ecosystem for deep tech innovation development in Poland (35.5% answered “rather yes,” and another 22.6% answered “definitely yes”). A considerably smaller portion of respondents do not associate universities with deep tech development (9.7% answered “rather no,” and 16.1% answered “definitely no”). 16.1% of respondents had no opinion in this area, which was also the highest percentage of undecided answers among all the entities analyzed in this question.

Research institutes and research units: Similarly to the above, these were also indicated by the majority of respondents as playing a key role in the development of the deep tech ecosystem as a source of knowledge and research (38.7% answered “rather yes,” and another 16.1% answered “definitely yes”). A different opinion was expressed by 35.5% of respondents (9.7% answered “rather no,” and 25.8% answered “definitely no”). 9.7% of respondents had no opinion on the role of this entity in the ecosystem.

Business incubators and accelerators: According to the respondents, this group is the most strongly associated with the deep tech ecosystem (61.3% of respondents rather link their role with deep tech development, and 16.1% definitely see this connection). However, 16% of respondents believe that this group of entities definitely does not have a key impact on the development of the deep tech ecosystem. 6.5% of respondents had no opinion on this matter.

4.5. Prospects for Deep Tech Innovation in Poland

The analyses conducted so far allow for a preliminary assessment of the current state of deep tech innovation in Poland. An attempt was made to identify both the strengths and challenges facing what is still an emerging deep tech ecosystem in Poland. The final part of the survey research focused on the prospects for future development of deep tech technologies and the sector in Poland. Drawing inspiration from the analyses of secondary data (an earlier stage of the research process: report analysis), as well as the last part of the survey, an attempt was made to identify the development prospects for deep tech in Poland.

In the first question of this section, respondents were asked who, in their opinion, should be the main financer and investor in deep tech in Poland. This open-ended question was answered by 29 respondents (Figure 15). Among the entities and/or sources of financing, respondents indicated:

• Venture capital funds and the private sector (10 respondents);
• Public funds of domestic origin (e.g., National Centre for Research and Development) (6 indications);
• Mixed public–private capital (4 indications);
• Grants (3 indications);
• EU funds (2 indications);
• Business angels (2 indications);
• Universities/institutes (2 indications).

The responses clearly indicate that the financial development of deep tech innovation in Poland is expected to be driven by public funds (regional, national, or European) as well as investments from venture capital investors. As can be seen, this diagnosis and the expectations do not differ from how deep tech ecosystems at a much more advanced stage of development operate.

It is worth noting that respondents also recognize a financing mechanism based on mixed private-public funds. Respondents consistently indicated that at the early stages of technology development, public funds (grants, support programs) should drive the growth of deep tech projects, aiming to achieve a critical mass of projects. At later stages, higher TRL levels (periods of increased funding demand), leading roles should be taken over by funds that are not subsidized by public money or should operate under strictly defined rules, such as EIF or EIC funds. This confirms the cautious assessment of currently existing VC funds in Poland that are funded or co-funded with public money.

Respondents were also asked about the role deep tech developed in Poland could play in solving global challenges such as climate change, aging societies, or diseases. Twenty-seven respondents answered this question, and their answers are presented in Figure 16. As many as 85% of respondents (23 respondents) believe that deep tech will play a major role in addressing global challenges. This confirms the conviction that it is worth investing in the development of the deep tech ecosystem in Poland, as there is still a chance to play an important role in the face of the challenges around us. Only 2 respondents (7%) stated that deep tech will play a similar role as other industries, one respondent (4%) said it would play a basic role, and one respondent (4%) answered, “It depends on the context of the technology’s use.”.

The responses indicating that deep tech has a very significant impact on the challenges facing civilization (23 respondents, 85%) were further clarified and elaborated by respondents who pointed out, among other things, that:

• Deep tech, due to its strong foundation in research work, can seek tools to address civilizational challenges;
• Deep tech in areas such as biotechnology can contribute to the development of drugs against civilizational diseases;
• Deep tech innovations can generate ideas and patents that provide tools to combat civilizational problems, all thanks to their strong basis in knowledge.

These responses confirm a mature assessment and awareness of the opportunities that the deep tech sector creates not only for Poland but also for Europe and the world. It is also worth noting that respondents drew attention to the risks arising from the improper use of deep tech achievements.

The final question in the survey addressed what, in the respondents’ opinion, should be done to strengthen the Polish deep tech ecosystem. Thirty respondents answered this question, and among the most frequently mentioned opinions were:

• The need for a significant increase in funding for science and technology;
• Strengthening the promotion of deep tech and its role in the modern world, with a strong emphasis on existing solutions based on fundamental science;
• Creating conditions for development and presenting deep tech as a valuable and prestigious career and professional development path (e.g., for scientists, PhD candidates, engineers);
• Actions to develop cooperation between universities and industry, and vice versa;
• Offering valuable scale-up programs, as well as support from incubators and accelerators;
• Investing in expert personnel ready to support deep tech projects in commercialization and entering foreign markets;
• Education and creating conditions for individuals from academia to transition into business careers.

It is also worth highlighting one opinion that described in more detail the needs in this area. According to its author, increasing funding should be accompanied by legislative changes in Poland that promote and support activities involving above-average risks related to developing innovative technologies. This aspect is permanently embedded in innovative activities and is particularly important in the context of deep tech innovation; therefore, far-reaching legal changes should take place.

Referring to the actions proposed by respondents, which should be considered when developing the Polish deep tech ecosystem, they can be regarded as important. While they do not exhaust all the assumptions and actions that should be undertaken, they provide a reference point for further in-depth analyses.

4.6. Deep Tech and Sustainable Development in Poland

The term deep tech refers to advanced technologies based on fundamental scientific and engineering achievements, which are characterized by a high level of complexity, a long development cycle and a potentially groundbreaking impact on the economy and society (Section 2). Deep technologies are the result of intensive scientific research in fields such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, photonics, artificial intelligence, quantum computing and hydrogen technologies. Their significance goes beyond traditional innovation, as they enable the transformation of entire sectors of the economy towards sustainable and resilient development [25].

Poland, as a developing economy, ranked fifth in terms of growth rate in the European Union in the first quarter of 2025 [64]. Deep tech companies, regardless of the sector in which they operate, develop products that contribute to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [65,66] and solve critical problems facing humanity, such as climate change, resource scarcity, environmental degradation and economic instability, disease, food shortages, and security [67,68,69,70]. The development of the technological innovation sector is increasingly focused on solutions that support the implementation of the SDGs. Recent years have seen an increase in the number of research and development projects financed from national and European funds, including under successive operational programs and the Horizon Europe Framework Program (formerly Horizon 2020). These investments include technologies for clean energy, the circular economy, smart cities, and modern materials, demonstrating the growing importance of sustainable technological development in national innovation policy [71,72,73]. In Poland, important innovation support programs included the Innovative Economy (2007–2013) and the Smart Growth Operational Program (POIR) (2014–2020). The European Funds for a Modern Economy (FENG) Program (2021–2027) is a continuation of the two earlier programs. It supports entrepreneurs and institutions in research and innovation, implementation, research infrastructure, the use of advanced technologies, and green transformation. A total of approximately €7.9 billion has been allocated for the implementation of the entire FENG program [74]. The POIR program was the largest program in the European Union financing research, development, and innovation from structural funds. Its goal was to increase the innovativeness of the economy through business R&D. Approximately €8.6 billion in European funds was allocated for its implementation [75].

Analyzing the list of projects implemented with European Funds in Poland in 2021–2027 [76]. It was noted that out of 900 projects, 36% were deep tech projects (324 projects), of which 122 projects were assigned specific Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), while the remaining 202 projects were difficult to assign a specific SDG based on the description alone.

It can be seen that SDG 9 often appears as the sole objective of a project (73 projects with funding of nearly PLN 1317.2 million). It is also combined with SDG 2 and SDG 3 in projects—there were as many as 14 such projects, with funding amounting to PLN 1727.5 million, representing over 21% of the total funding for all projects. SDG 7, on the other hand, was implemented in projects together with SDG 13—the funding amount for these 26 projects was PLN 2239.3 million (almost 27.5% of the total funding amount). On the other hand, only 5 projects were implementing SDG 12 (funding amount PLN 52.1 million) and only 4 were implementing SDG 6 (funding amount PLN 6.2 million). In total, all 136 projects with identified environmental and sustainable development objectives received funding exceeding 65.5% of the total funding for all projects implemented with European Funds, which amounted to PLN 5342.3 million. A summary of the SDGs assigned to projects, together with the amounts of funding, is presented in Figure 17.

Funding is primarily focused on supporting innovation that promotes sustainable industrialization and infrastructure (SDG 9) alongside the promotion of prosperity and healthy living. The second largest share of funding goes to projects aimed at combating climate change and promoting stable and sustainable energy. Sustainable consumption and production ranked third in terms of funding, and sustainable water management ranked fourth.

Between 2014 and 2020, 42 projects were included in the list of projects co-financed by the Smart Growth Program (POIR). The largest number, 15 each, were projects related to SDG 9 and SDG 13. Their funding amounts were PLN 129.9 million and PLN 8.1 million (3.5%), respectively, which represent over 56% of the total funding for all projects. The second largest sustainable development goal in terms of funding was SDG 15. There were only six such projects, but their funding exceeded 33% of the total funding and amounted to PLN 77.14 million. Three projects implemented SDG 7 with funding of almost PLN 14 million (over 6%), while one project was unspecified in terms of sustainable development goals. The amounts of project funding and the SDGs assigned to them are presented in Figure 18.

An analysis of FENG and POIR projects revealed a clear shift towards deep-tech projects (critical technologies, clean-tech, digitalization) and support for projects with an impact on the green transition. POIR supported R&D broadly (projects with sustainable potential), but was not as clearly focused on ‘critical technologies’ or dedicated green transition instruments as FENG. For deep-tech projects strongly linked to SDGs (clean-tech, renewable energy, resource-efficient technologies, critical technologies), FENG seems better suited due to the current political priority (green and digital transformation) and the emergence of dedicated funds supporting critical technologies and scaling. On the other hand, for consortium-type R&D projects, prototypes and pilot projects, POIR (or mechanisms derived from POIR) offers proven financing paths and operational experience in the transition from research to implementation. As an emerging economy in the EU, Poland can benefit from synergies: national programs (FENG, POIR) that support the development of competences, infrastructure and TRL, and European programs (Horizon Europe) that enable internationalization, scaling, partnerships and financing of breakthrough innovations. For the deep tech sector, this is a strategic path: from national sources (FENG/POIR) to European support (Horizon Europe). In summary, the development of the deep tech sector can significantly contribute to the achievement of environmental and sustainable development goals.

5. Discussion

An analysis of documents reporting on the development of deep tech confirms the strong interest and ambitions of major economies to leverage the ongoing technological revolution to build competitiveness and independence on the international stage. Of course, key players in this race will be large countries and regions such as the United States, China, and the European Union. Other countries specializing in technology research are also joining the forefront, including the United Kingdom, Israel, Canada, Japan, and India. Europe, both EU member states and countries outside the formal EU framework, has another chance to ensure technological sovereignty, autonomy, and influence in the global economy. Recent analyses indicate significant activity by various European countries in efforts to develop deep tech. Notably, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, as well as the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, and Switzerland stand out in this regard. Europe, and especially the European Union, sees its strength in cooperation and synergy, but its power may lie in optimally utilizing the potential of each microregion and country.

Deep technology can play a decisive role in achieving ecological and sustainable development goals due to its capacity to address systemic and high-complexity challenges. Its interdisciplinary nature allows for integrating breakthroughs in materials science, biotechnology, photonics, and artificial intelligence to produce measurable environmental impact. Consequently, deep tech innovations operate not only at the technological but also at the socio-economic interface, offering new models for sustainable industrial transformation. From a sustainability perspective, deep tech contributes significantly to several key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), notably SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), and SDG 13 (Climate Action). Technologies such as advanced energy storage, hydrogen solutions, and nanomaterials for photovoltaic applications accelerate the global transition toward decarbonization. In agriculture and food systems (SDG 2), biotechnology and data-driven precision farming reduce environmental externalities by optimizing water and resource use. Furthermore, circular-economy-oriented innovations—enabled by molecular recycling, sensor technologies, and new materials—support SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), helping industries minimize waste and emissions.

According to this year’s report [78], covering 167 countries, Poland is for the first time among the top ten countries best implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Poland scored 82.08 points out of a possible 100, ahead of countries such as the United States (44th place; 75.19 points), Switzerland (26th place; 79.16 points), the Netherlands (23rd place; 79.98 points), Canada (25th place; 79.17 points), Japan (19th place; 80.66 points), Slovakia (16th place; 80.77 points), the Czech Republic (10th place; 81.94 points), and the United Kingdom (11th place; 81.85 points). Finland took first place in this year’s global SDG 2025 ranking with 87.02 points, and Sweden came second with 85.74 points. Germany came fourth with 83.67 points, France fifth with 83.67 points, and Poland came ninth.

An analysis of the cited European Commission reports and documents confirms the implementation of a number of measures aimed at building independence based on deep tech. EU and member state actions strongly link innovation and industrial strategy with climate policy. Many instruments are directly aimed at sustainable development: decarbonization, reducing the environmental footprint, circularity of raw materials, and social justice during the transition. These include regulatory measures such as the Green Deal [79,80], Net-Zero Industry Act [81,82], Renewable Energy Directive III (RED III) [83], Critical Raw Materials Act [84], battery regulation [85], the EU Hydrogen Strategy [86], and the Just Transition Mechanism [87]. Challenges related to achieving the SDGs include the pace of implementation, the need for significant infrastructure investments (typical of deep tech), competition with Asia and the US in terms of production scale, and the risk of fragmentation of national policies.

Research and analyses conducted indicate that Poland has significant potential for the development of deep tech innovations. On the other hand, it is clear that this sector is still at an early stage of development. Although over half of the respondents in the pilot study positively evaluate the level of cooperation among various elements of the deep tech ecosystem, nearly 30% provide a negative assessment. These results confirm the real situation, highlighting the need for increased funding for Polish science and the promotion of entrepreneurial attitudes that support the commercialization of research outcomes and inventions. Respondents indicate that the level of support from the academic community is far from sufficient. This applies both to the systemic and regulatory conditions in Polish science and to the factors motivating researchers to commercialize their research results. Over 60% of respondents in Poland negatively assessed the support from academia, and a significant portion of respondents did not express an opinion, which can be interpreted as a cautious, conservative stance in this area—hardly a positive sign. A similar picture emerges regarding state support. More than 50% of respondents assessed this support negatively or chose the cautious option “no opinion”. According to the respondents, the environment expects a pro-innovation policy from the state and regions, guaranteeing conditions and programs tailored to the challenges and conditions of innovation and the deep tech sector. Survey results also reveal a large gap in the understanding of deep tech, the role of various actors in innovation processes, and legal regulations, including academic policies promoting entrepreneurship and scientific creativity. The research points to a need for education in entrepreneurship, innovation, and the role of science-industry collaboration in the context of modern university operating models. One quite positive finding is the assessment of cooperation among ecosystem entities. Over 60% positively evaluate the networking and collaboration of ecosystem actors, though about 25% consider it suboptimal and in need of improvement. The most recognized element of the Polish deep tech innovation ecosystem, according to respondents, is business incubators and accelerators. Nearly 80% of respondents recognize the value experts bring when gathered around business environment institutions, as well as dedicated support programs. Such positive evaluations of incubators and accelerators likely stem from the noticeable diversity of support programs on the Polish innovation market. They are offering real assistance in developing prototypes, market validation of ideas, intellectual property protection, and designing commercialization pathways.

Respondents also recognize the role of the startup environment (over 70% of respondents), which largely benefits from support distributed by the aforementioned business environment institutions and government agencies. Activating the academic community remains a challenge. Respondents associate academia with the deep tech ecosystem significantly less often (over 50% indicated the academic environment). This strengthens the need for actions in promotion, as well as the adjustment of regulations and motivation of the academic environment to support the development of deep tech.

Deep tech, deeply rooted in the latest scientific, technological, and engineering advances, cannot develop without the activity of scientists, PhD candidates, and students. Academic ecosystems are the source of creating startups, spin-offs, and spin-outs, which attempt to validate the most ambitious and innovative scientific achievements. They also co-create the dynamically developing deep tech sector at the national, regional, and global levels.

It is worth noting that Poland has already implemented numerous initiatives to develop ecosystems that support technological innovation. Although Poland has a solid scientific and human resources base, it needs to integrate science and industry better in order to translate knowledge into marketable technologies. Technology transfer centres, business incubators and special-purpose vehicles (SPVs) focused on creating spin-offs and spin-outs operate alongside universities and research institutes. The market also offers a variety of financing options for innovative projects. The services provided by technology brokers, intellectual property protection experts and commercialisation advisors are constantly expanding and becoming more professional. The remaining challenge is securing sufficient funding for science and R&D to enable a critical mass of innovative projects to be achieved. It would also be worthwhile identifying and supporting scientists and solutions with high research potential that align with the country’s and Europe’s strategic goals. It is also essential to motivate scientists to take on the challenges associated with conducting research focused on the transfer and commercialisation of results.

6. Conclusions

The coming years of the 21st century will be characterized by the continued dynamic development of technology and innovation. Thanks to innovative solutions based on advanced scientific and engineering knowledge, new products, services, and markets will be created. The results of scientific research, as well as expert knowledge and experience, will enable us to respond to the challenges facing the modern world. Technological progress will strongly influence nearly every aspect of economic, social, and cultural life. This process is characterized by great dynamism but also a high level of uncertainty. Strategic forecasting and future analyses (foresight programs) indicate directions for technological development, but certainly do not predict all the possibilities, opportunities, and threats that accompany it. Deep technology is emerging as a strategic enabler of sustainable transformation, offering scientifically grounded solutions to complex ecological and societal challenges. Integrating it into energy, industrial and environmental systems provides new pathways towards carbon neutrality, resource efficiency and technological resilience.

It should be noted that the conducted research was pilot in nature. The non-random sampling and limited number of respondents may result in conclusions that are not fully representative. Despite these limitations, a thoroughly conducted research process allows for a diagnosis of how individual representatives of ecosystem actors perceive the opportunities and barriers of deep tech in Poland. Further, in-depth and extended research will enable verification of these observations. In the next phase of the research, it will be necessary to expand the sample size and conduct research across various target groups. It seems justified to reach respondents through university technology transfer offices and academic accelerators. In Poland, these entities serve as the focal point for information on ambitious research teams and projects implemented within the university environment. It would also be worthwhile to expand the analysis to include R&D projects developed in start-ups and companies.

Poland is not yet fully ready, but it has most of the key elements of the ecosystem that—with appropriate coordination of innovation policy, capital support and better knowledge transfer—can make it a regional leader in deep-tech innovation supporting sustainable development. The underfunding of science and research poses a fundamental challenge to the development of deep tech in Poland. To utilise increasing financial resources effectively, changes to research project management are also necessary. Crucial factors and challenges include risk tolerance, the courage to undertake ambitious research, and patience in awaiting results. Supporting the deep tech sector requires the strategic alignment of innovation policy, climate goals and industrial competitiveness. Governments and EU institutions should prioritize supporting interdisciplinary R&D and providing early-stage funding. It is also important to establish regulations that enable technological experimentation while accepting the associated high risks.

Universities should establish interdisciplinary deep tech centers specializing in areas such as materials, clean industrial electrification and AI for energy. They should also promote and maintain instruments that support the development of innovations ‘from lab to market’, including proof-of-concept grants, incubator programs and scientific spin-offs.

Summing up, the research has confirmed that Europe is undertaking a number of initiatives and providing incentives, including financial ones, for scientists pursuing deep tech development. Poland, like many other European countries, recognizes the importance of deep tech in building the continent’s technological independence. It is striving to strengthen the activity of scientists, interdisciplinarity, and the internationalization of research as key drivers of economic independence.