Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Technology and Politics: The USA National Quantum Strategy

Murat Kaçer

Published Mar 16, 2025• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Related papers

Quantum technologies and the National Quantum Initiative

Kenneth R. Brown

Quantum Engineering•Mar 1, 2019•4 citations

Quantum Computing: Bridging the National Security–Digital Sovereignty Divide

Anders Liman, Kate Weber

Abstract Quantum computing research and development efforts have grown dramatically over the past decades, led in part by initiatives from governments around the world. Government quantum computing investments are often driven by national security or digital sovereignty concerns, with the language used depending on the geography involved. For example, a focus on “national security” and quantum computing is prominent in the USA, while European countries regularly focus on “digital sovereignty”. These phrases are often loosely defined and open to interpretation, and they share some common motivations and characteristics (but also have important differences). This paper identifies specific governmental entities typifying the national security/digital sovereignty perspectives, along with these organisations’ respective roles within national and international policy engagement in quantum computing. It analyses governmental structures, historical developments and cultural characteristics that contributed to this national security–digital sovereignty divide. Building on this analysis, we use the history of other technologies to illustrate how we might adapt tested policy approaches to modern political dynamics and to quantum computing specifically. We frame these policy approaches so that they do not overemphasise “digital sovereignty” or “national security”, but rather address interests shared across both concepts, with a view to facilitating international collaboration.

European Journal of Risk Regulation•Jul 14, 2023•20 citations

Quantum Technology and Innovation Strategy

Toshio Tonouchi

IEICE Technical Report; IEICE Tech. Rep.•Mar 11, 2021•0 citations

Collision experiments utilizing trapped neutral OH molecules

Brian C. Sawyer, Benjamin Stuhl, Mark Yeo +3 more

Author Institution: JILA, National Institute of Standards and Technology and the; University of Colorado, Department of Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0440, USA; Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois; 61801-3080, USA; JILA, National Institute of Standards and Technology and the; University of Colorado, Department of Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0440, USA

Bulletin of the American Physical Society•May 28, 2008•0 citations

COLLISION EXPERIEMNTS UTILIZING TRAPPED NEUTRAL OH MOLECULES

Wang, Dajun, Sawyer, Brian C., Stuhl, Benjamin K. +3 more

Author Institution: JILA, National Institute of Standards and Technology and the; University of Colorado, Department of Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0440, USA; Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois; 61801-3080, USA; JILA, National Institute of Standards and Technology and the; University of Colorado, Department of Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0440, USA

•Jan 1, 2008•0 citations

The role of governments in quantum technology

Proceedings of SPIE

Photonics for Quantum (PfQ)•Jul 16, 2021•0 citations
Abstract Quantum computing research and development efforts have grown dramatically over the past decades, led in part by initiatives from governments around the world. Government quantum computing investments are often driven by national security or digital sovereignty concerns, with the language used depending on the geography involved. For example, a focus on “national security” and quantum computing is prominent in the USA, while European countries regularly focus on “digital sovereignty”. These phrases are often loosely defined and open to interpretation, and they share some common motivations and characteristics (but also have important differences). This paper identifies specific governmental entities typifying the national security/digital sovereignty perspectives, along with these organisations’ respective roles within national and international policy engagement in quantum computing. It analyses governmental structures, historical developments and cultural characteristics that contributed to this national security–digital sovereignty divide. Building on this analysis, we use the history of other technologies to illustrate how we might adapt tested policy approaches to modern political dynamics and to quantum computing specifically. We frame these policy approaches so that they do not overemphasise “digital sovereignty” or “national security”, but rather address interests shared across both concepts, with a view to facilitating international collaboration.