Abstract Quantum technologies are moving from laboratory research to real-world deployment, but progress rests on narrow, fragile, globally dispersed supply chains. We introduce the Quantum Criticality Index (QCI)—a tri-axial assessment of supply risk, substitutability, and strategic significance—augmented with an artificial neural network (ANN)-based trend-detection module and a forward-looking stress-testing component. A case study of molybdenum (Mo), essential for superconducting circuits, single-photon detectors, cryogenic hardware, and other dual-use, security-sensitive systems, demonstrates how the QCI pinpoints chokepoints that could hinder hardware trajectories. Building on these diagnostics, we translate risk awareness into action through a governance framework that links the stages of diagnosis, decision, and delivery. By coupling structured indicators with predictive analytics, the QCI provides policymakers and industry with an evidence-based tool that translates diagnostics directly into an operational policy roadmap for allied procurement, intellectual property governance, targeted licensing, and verifiable, sustainable supply-chain assurance. Crucially, QCI-enabled supply chain resilience can function as a hardware-oriented complement to Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) migration, together forming a twin-pillar security framework in which physical supply-chain assurance underpins the quantum ecosystem, while PQC protects data integrity and critical infrastructure against “harvest-now, decrypt-later” campaigns and systemic risks.
Abstract Quantum technologies are moving from laboratory research to real-world deployment, but progress rests on narrow, fragile, globally dispersed supply chains. We introduce the Quantum Criticality Index (QCI)—a tri-axial assessment of supply risk, substitutability, and strategic significance—augmented with an artificial neural network (ANN)-based trend-detection module and a forward-looking stress-testing component. A case study of molybdenum (Mo), essential for superconducting circuits, single-photon detectors, cryogenic hardware, and other dual-use, security-sensitive systems, demonstrates how the QCI pinpoints chokepoints that could hinder hardware trajectories. Building on these diagnostics, we translate risk awareness into action through a governance framework that links the stages of diagnosis, decision, and delivery. By coupling structured indicators with predictive analytics, the QCI provides policymakers and industry with an evidence-based tool that translates diagnostics directly into an operational policy roadmap for allied procurement, intellectual property governance, targeted licensing, and verifiable, sustainable supply-chain assurance. Crucially, QCI-enabled supply chain resilience can function as a hardware-oriented complement to Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) migration, together forming a twin-pillar security framework in which physical supply-chain assurance underpins the quantum ecosystem, while PQC protects data integrity and critical infrastructure against “harvest-now, decrypt-later” campaigns and systemic risks.
This manuscript maps secure-supply and criticality risks for quantum technologies deployed in extreme environments, linking upstream critical minerals and materials (CMMs) to downstream system performance, continuity of security, and mission assurance. It adopts a reproducible "Critical Level I" screening method to identify materials whose supply concentration, essentiality, and limited mitigatability can create bottlenecks for quantum deployment. The analysis is structured around two use cases: (i) niobium as a key input for superconducting quantum computing and related manufacturing and toolchain dependencies; and (ii) space-qualified superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors (SNSPDs), alongside adjacent single-photon detector platforms such as SPADs, where radiation, thermal cycling, vibration, and electromagnetic interference can degrade device metrics and, in communications settings, threaten continuity of security. The manuscript further situates these dependencies within U.S.-China strategic competition over critical materials, refining capacity, export controls, and overseas mineral acquisitions, while also connecting them to standards-first governance, post-quantum cryptography migration, and the emerging security logic of quantum networking. It argues that static national critical-minerals lists are insufficient for mission-relevant quantum technology and proposes a dedicated Quantum Criticality and Critical Minerals (QCCM) dashboard as a living decision-support tool for tracking concentration, substitutability, qualification bottlenecks, stockpiling gaps, and geopolitical stress signals across quantum platforms. The paper concludes with implications for substitution, diversification, stockpiling, shielding, qualification-by-design, and standards-aligned governance to support secure, sustained, and mission-relevant quantum deployment.
Quantum technologies are rapidly emerging as a transformative force with profound implications for critical infrastructures, national security, and global governance. Quantum computing, quantum communications, and quantum sensing promise unprecedented advances in data processing, secure communications, and environmental and infrastructure monitoring. At the same time, their disruptive potential introduces new ethical, security, and geopolitical risks, particularly for systems that underpin modern societies such as energy networks, telecommunications, finance, transportation, and defence infrastructures. This paper examines the governance of quantum technologies for critical infrastructures, moving from ethical impact assessment to the formulation of coherent national strategies. The study argues that the unique characteristics of quantum technologies — including their high degree of complexity, dual-use nature, and capacity to undermine existing cryptographic and security frameworks — require a shift from reactive regulation to anticipatory and responsible governance. Traditional regulatory approaches are insufficient to address the speed, uncertainty, and strategic relevance of quantum innovation. Instead, the paper emphasizes the need to integrate ethical impact assessment, risk analysis, and societal considerations at the earliest stages of research, development, and deployment. Ethical governance is presented not as a constraint on innovation, but as a foundational element for ensuring trust, resilience, and long-term sustainability. The analysis situates quantum governance within a broader geopolitical context, highlighting how major global actors are investing in quantum capabilities as strategic assets. This competition increases the urgency for coordinated governance frameworks that balance technological sovereignty, security, and international cooperation. Particular attention is given to the protection of critical infrastructures and the transition towards quantum-safe systems, especially in the field of cybersecurity and secure communications. Finally, the paper outlines the implications for national and European strategies, stressing the importance of multi-level governance involving governments, international organisations, industry, and research institutions. It concludes that only a holistic approach — combining ethical foresight, anticipatory governance, and strategic planning — can ensure that quantum technologies enhance societal resilience and security rather than exacerbate systemic vulnerabilities. In this sense, quantum governance becomes a central component of future national strategies for critical infrastructure protection and technological leadership.
While quantum technologies move out of laboratory research toward deployment, there are many examples of how post-quantum cryptography (PQC) migration and quantum networking can be considered ‘near-term’ governance stress tests. While this is happening, artificial intelligence is being increasingly applied in the design, calibration, and control of quantum devices and networks, which creates ‘quantum agent systems’ where agentic decision components interact with quantum computing, communication, and sensing capabilities. These two trajectories intensify ethical and societal concerns such as privacy and surveillance, cryptographic disruption, compound opacity and explainability limitations, bias and unequal benefit distribution, and dual-use and geopolitical escalation risks. This chapter brings together the provided quantum governance, quantum ethics, societal research, legal and AI governance literature to translate principles into practice. This chapter contributes (i) a governance target definition of quantum agent systems; (ii) a critical comparison of national, international, and organizational governance instruments; and (iii) a structured ESG assurance framework that links risks to stakeholders, governance mechanisms, assurance metrics, and expected outcomes. The chapter also identifies methodological limits and evidence gaps and highlights the need for early intervention, capacity-building, and intelligibility to enable inclusive oversight while technologies remain malleable. The contributions of this chapter provide a roadmap for responsible governance of quantum agent systems under uncertainty and contested trade-offs.
The anticipated development of cryptographically relevant quantum computing presents a strategic challenge to governments because contemporary public-sector information systems depend extensively on cryptographic mechanisms for confidentiality, authentication, integrity, and secure communication. The principal difficulty is not limited to replacing existing cryptographic algorithms; rather, it concerns the coordinated transformation of national information infrastructures, institutional policies, data-protection practices, procurement procedures, and long-term security architectures. This research and review article develops a policy-oriented framework for quantum-safe cybersecurity in government environments. The study adopts a conceptual methodology that synthesizes the supplied literature on predictive modeling, statistical decision-making, machine learning, and quantum-resistant national-security policy. Although several supplied studies originate in pharmaceutical stability prediction rather than cybersecurity, their methodological emphasis on prediction, modeling, optimization, and risk-oriented decision processes provides transferable analytical foundations for constructing migration and prioritization mechanisms. The proposed framework integrates cryptographic inventory, risk classification, data sensitivity assessment, migration prioritization, algorithm-agility requirements, governance controls, validation mechanisms, and continuous monitoring. The analysis indicates that quantum-safe transformation should be treated as a national digital-resilience program rather than as an isolated cryptographic upgrade. The paper further identifies implementation challenges involving legacy systems, interoperability, institutional coordination, resource allocation, and uncertainty concerning future quantum capabilities. The resulting framework provides a structured basis for government agencies to prioritize critical assets, reduce exposure to future cryptographic compromise, and establish adaptive cybersecurity governance.
Quantum computing poses a severe threat to standard digital security protocols, leaving artificial intelligence (AI) data pipelines and decision-support systems highly exposed. As large-scale quantum attacks become computationally feasible, the public-key cryptography currently securing data transmission will likely fail. This vulnerability threatens sectors heavily reliant on AI—including finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure escalating the probability of data breaches, integrity losses, and compliance failures. To address these interconnected security, governance, and ethical hurdles, this paper introduces the Integrated Quantum-Resilient AI Framework (IQRAI). IQRAI establishes a structured governance model combining proactive quantum risk assessments, post-quantum cryptography (PQC), and continuous security monitoring. A core focus of the framework is balancing cryptographic migration with strict ethical requirements, specifically data privacy, algorithmic transparency, fairness, and auditability. Furthermore, the study reviews ongoing global standardization efforts for PQC transitions to define baseline requirements for sustained system resilience. By comparing existing mitigation models across metrics of operational friction, implementation difficulty, and security yield, the research identifies a critical operational gap. The analysis demonstrates that merely swapping cryptographic algorithms is insufficient for achieving quantum-resilient AI; securing these systems demands a unified approach that links security engineering, ethical oversight, and regulatory adherence. Ultimately, this work delivers a strategic roadmap for organizations to systematically harden their AI ecosystems against quantum threats while maintaining operational trust and legal compliance.
Quantum computing creates a governance problem before it creates a cryptanalytic event. Information collected today may remain sensitive after a cryptographically relevant quantum computer becomes available, while long-lived operational technology and spacecraft may be unable to adopt new cryptography within conventional replacement cycles.This paper examines how operators of long-lived cyber-physical systems should prioritize post-quantum migration under uncertainty. It distinguishes the present confidentiality risk of harvest-now, decrypt-later collection from the prospective integrity and authentication risks that could follow scalable attacks against public-key cryptography.Building on Mosca's migration inequality, the paper introduces the Quantum Migration Priority Score, a transparent decision framework combining timing pressure, consequence, adversary exposure, and cryptographic agility. Illustrative applications to municipal water systems and proliferated low-Earth-orbit architectures demonstrate how migration priority depends on mission consequences, protocol boundaries, key management, supply-chain dependencies, and compensating controls.The paper concludes with a staged governance strategy centered on cryptographic inventories, crypto-agile procurement, testable migration pathways, accountable risk ownership, and explicit management of residual risk.