Pioneering Responsible Global Governance for Quantum Technologies
31 May 2024 09:00h - 09:45h
Table of contents
Disclaimer: This is not an official record of the session. The DiploAI system automatically generates these resources from the audiovisual recording. Resources are presented in their original format, as provided by the AI (e.g. including any spelling mistakes). The accuracy of these resources cannot be guaranteed.
Knowledge Graph of Debate
Session report
Full session report
Shamira Ahmed leads discussion on equitable global governance of quantum technologies
Shamira Ahmed, a Policy Leader Fellow at the European University Institute and the Executive Director of the Data Economy Policy Hub, sets the stage for a nuanced discussion on the responsible global governance of quantum technologies. She introduces the session, explaining the collaboration between the EUI, SciencePol, UNESCO, and the Data Economy Policy Hub in co-creating a policy brief that aims to ensure that advanced technologies benefit everyone equitably and mitigate associated risks. The policy brief, based on UNESCO’s Information for All program, focuses on the impact of technological change on inequalities, summarised through the “Five A’s of Technology”: availability, affordability, awareness, accessibility, and ability.
Ahmed highlights the historical context of technological advancements, noting that the G7 countries have reaped exponential benefits from technological advancements throughout the industrial revolutions, while other countries have lagged behind. The policy brief’s conceptual framework addresses how technological change affects inequalities through jobs, goods, services, and international institutional frameworks. It also examines the emerging quantum economy, identifying four main trends: state-led investment, private investments, geopolitics, and emerging governance, with a particular focus on the concentration of investment in G7 countries and a few emerging players like India, China, Russia, South Africa, and the Philippines.
The panellists bring a range of perspectives to the discussion. Xianhong Hu from UNESCO emphasises the importance of early engagement with quantum technologies and the application of ethical frameworks developed for other technologies. Neil Abroug from France’s Investment Strategy discusses the implementation challenges of France’s national quantum strategy, highlighting the need for international cooperation and the balance between enabling scientific research and controlling technology for security reasons.
Pieter Vermaas argues for a global governance approach that facilitates the distribution of knowledge, personnel, and quantum technology across borders, warning against technological or moral isolation. Marieke Hood from GESDA speaks about the Open Quantum Institute launched within CERN, which aims to make quantum technology available for international cooperation and to ensure that its applications support sustainable development goals.
Pierre Noro from Science Po discusses lessons from blockchain governance models and AI regulation debates, suggesting that quantum governance should mitigate centralisation and enable global frameworks and multi-stakeholder governance to distribute rewards fairly.
The session concludes with a call for further discussion in a subsequent session, with an emphasis on the importance of ethical principles, international cooperation, and partnerships as crucial for addressing scientific, technological, and industrial challenges and for ensuring that quantum technologies do not become a source of increased global inequality.
Session transcript
Shamira Ahmed:
joining us on our session for Pioneering Responsible Global Governance for Quantum Technologies. My name is Shamira Ahmed. I am a Policy Leader Fellow at the European University Institute, and I’m also the Executive Director of the Data Economy Policy Hub. The Data Economy Policy Hub is the first independent think tank that’s founded by an Indigenous African woman in South Africa. As part of this policy brief, it’s co-created by the EUI, SciencePol, and UNESCO, and it’s based on the Information for All program. And the main premise of the policy brief is to highlight some of the key priority areas of the Information for All program area in UNESCO, and it’s basically to ensure that advanced technologies are beneficial for everyone, and we ensure the opportunities and benefits are shared equitably, and also we mitigate the risks associated with these advanced technologies. And it’s based on our forthcoming policy brief on Information for All through Responsible Quantum Governance. And with me today, I have three panelists in person and two online, and they will share some of their experiences from implementation, international coordination, ethical governance, and also experiences from UNESCO’s work on global governance for frontier technologies such as AI. And before we start our conversation, I’d like to set the scene for the policy brief, and also for the some of the discussions that we’ll have. So the key premise of the policy brief is to highlight that technological change is often the most important part of the process, and it’s important associated with inequality through the ages and if you look at this graph it shows that real GDP per capita has increased over the years and it’s associated with different industrial revolutions and we have a core group of countries in the world that have benefited exponentially from technological advancements throughout the industrial revolutions and then there are a few periphery countries which is basically other countries that are not part of the core that have not experienced the same increases in GDP per capita and the core countries are mostly Europe and its offshoots United States of America, Australia and Canada and it also includes Japan so basically the G7 has experienced exponential benefits from technology technological change through the years and the rest of the world has not and this is based on UNCTAD’s technological and innovation report it’s a 2021 report so the conceptual framework for our policy brief is based on the fact that technology technological change affects inequalities through various aspects and here we summarize them mainly through jobs goods and services and if you look at the international institutional framework you can see it’s interrelated from policies actual technologies through to technological transfer learning and cooperation import exports value chains and this impacts inequalities within countries and inequality between countries and all of this is condensed into five main A’s of technology it depends on availability affordability awareness, accessibility, and ability, and we frame these five A’s into different categories and together, along with other criteria, they influence how different countries are able to adapt and adopt advanced technologies. And again, this is from the same report that focuses on frontier technologies and how different countries are able to adapt and use them for structure, economic transformation, and growth. So in terms of the emerging quantum economy that we are living in, or that’s evolving from our policy brief and our research, we found that there are four overlapping main trends that summarize the current and emerging quantum ecosystem globally. So there’s state-led investment, private investments, there’s geopolitics that’s mostly bridged between the North and the South, and there’s emerging governance. And most of it is through transnational quantum technology strategies at a national level. There are some regional strategies, and there’s also regulation from the trade side on global supply chains of semiconductor chips, for example, and other hardware that need to power quantum infrastructure. And this is just a summary of the four key areas we found. I won’t go into detail because of time constraints, but this is a schematic presentation of state-led investment on quantum efforts. And we see in 2023, based on the World Economic Forum’s report, it’s estimated at US$40 billion. And as mentioned in my first slide, there is a trend that is skewed towards the core countries, that’s mostly the G7. G7, and there are other key players that are emerging that are not part of the G7. But you can see it’s very concentrated within those core countries. But we have emerging players like India, China, Russia, South Africa, and the Philippines, for example. And that’s the brief presentation and framing of our discussions. So we will move on to our discussion points. Let me just stop sharing. And we’ll start with our online participants. We have Xianghong and Pierre-Noël. I’m just checking for Xianghong.
Xianhong Hu:
Hi, good morning.
Shamira Ahmed:
Good morning. Can you hear us?
Xianhong Hu:
Yes, I hear you very clearly, and the COO as well.
Shamira Ahmed:
Thanks for joining us. So I’ll get right into the discussion. Xianghong, you have been working at UNESCO. And there’s a lot of areas where UNESCO has been actively involved in developing human-centered ethical principles to support global governance of advanced technologies. And UNESCO’s focus mainly on AI. Are there any lessons from UNESCO’s work on global AI ethics and governance that can be applied to the responsible global governance of quantum technologies?
Xianhong Hu:
Thank you. Thank you, Shamira, for this very, very important question. I also firstly like to say hello to everyone in the room and online. And this is a warm greeting from UNESCO HQ in Paris. And thanks to the technology, I can really attend this meeting without any feelings of distance. I also like to thank our partner, European University Institute, and also Sciences Po University. for initiating this joint policy brief, as Shamira well presented such a wonderful start to explore this emerging technology and it’s always implication to us. As Shamira mentioned that UNESCO has been an organization continuously exploring the implication of all kinds of technologies, whether they are digital or whether where they are emerging new ones, how they are implying to human society. For my program, Perseid Information Program, we are looking at mostly from this priority area, how they are going to impact our efforts building information and the knowledge societies in terms of information for development, how quantum can really be used to support a sustainable development and information literacy and the literacy competence in parts related to the quantum. The information privacy preservation, information ethics, maybe ethics is more at center of today’s discussion. Information and the accessibility, again, it’s another issue very important for quantum and the information and also the multilingualism is another aspect more related to artificial intelligence. But I think we should not just tackle the technology one and another, but I should have much more broader comprehensive view to look at all the technology, how they are impacting the human society. We should have a holistic approach, but also certainly we should have nuances in terms of regulation, et cetera. That’s why we are having this policy brief particularly looking to the technology for quantum. But certainly, as Shamira well said, we’re really building this work based on all the. previous work of all the international communities, we have developed so many ethical normative frameworks to govern and regulate different technologies. We should really take all the lessons and share all the good practice from before. As you know, in 2021, UNESCO’s 41th General Conference has endorsed the first global framework on ethics of artificial intelligence. It has framed the beautiful four fundamental values and principles. I believe they definitely are able to be applied in a way to quantum technology, but that’s really not enough. Quantum has its own different stakeholders, has its own different impact, have very different, even much bigger potential for the future. And now it’s really at the very beginning. Maybe that’s the first lesson I’d like to share, that we need to start as early as possible to look at how to predict, to foresee, to make our research more foresighted, that this technique might have a certain potential or risks to the society before they become reality. We can see some lessons. There are many risks we didn’t foresee in the past year. In my 20 years of observation of internet governance at OASIS, in 2003, 2005, we didn’t foresee the social media’s rising. If you see the OASIS action plan, there was no mention of social media. But then social media emerged so powerfully and spreading so fast. Now we are still tackling the issues of disinformation and the information bubbles and many others. impact on for democracy, for society. So I think that’s one lesson we are already taking. We need to start as early as possible. That’s why I really share EUI and also Session’s proposal, we should look at something on the quantum. Even we are still in the middle of implementing the ethics of artificial intelligence, but we already see the quantum is entering the horizon. So to be foresighted. And the second thing that I mean, I was also involved in UNESCO’s normative work. We have developed many principles, for example, internet universality, Rome principle, to apply the human rights, openness, accessibility, and multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance. We developed indicators to ensure those principles are being really upheld by the national governments and the stakeholder by the platform, et cetera. But I think on the quantum equally, I think in terms of principles and ethics, I don’t see there’s so much disagreement on this. In terms of in the area of AI, there has been 600 different frameworks, principles proposed by different countries, international organizations. If you look into the substance, they are more or less quite common. They are all talking about the privacy protection, for example, they’ll talk about the diversity. I mean, I believe that the way at a global level, we do agree already, agree to many principles. And the key issue is really about the implementation, how we apply those principles and ethics to the development of quantum to avoid the further divide, to avoid reinforcing the existing bias in a society, which are already very deep. So here, I think if through this, possibly I would like to see very tailored policy recommendations. to different stakeholders and also have a clear identification of the stakeholders who are in the, who should be on a table, who should be engaged. Since quantum is still quite new to many of our member states. And by talking about the multi-stakeholder approach again, it is an ongoing endeavor. Even in the current artificial intelligence governance, we see the inclusiveness of a multi-stakeholder. It is a, there’s a question mark, if you could see that it’s so, the technology is so concentrated in a few countries and the technical standards, I think, are dominated in a certain handful actors. We should try to avoid that to happen to the quantum technology. As well, I think it’s from-
Shamira Ahmed:
Thanks, Yanghong. Thank you. I think you’ve given us a comprehensive view of the current challenges. And just for time sake, I mean, we could go at length talking about all of these discussions. I’d like us to move on and expand on your discussions on implementation. And with us, we have Neil Arbog from the France’s Investment Strategy. I’d like to ask you from the implementation side, what challenges have you faced in the actual implementation of France’s national quantum strategy, particularly when navigating the tensions between national priorities and coordinating and leveraging regional strengths and collaborations? Because I know the European Union also has a regional quantum strategy. So how do you build robust transnational quantum ecosystems in that context?
Neil Abroug:
So thank you very much for these questions. So one of the things we have identified when we began building the French quantum strategy is to be sure that we are complementary with our partners. We really see that we have some strengths in the French quantum ecosystem. In some type of quantum physics, not all the pillars. some of them, on the mathematical side, on also in industrial side, we needed to identify our strengths, our weaknesses also, and identify with which partner in Europe, outside Europe, we should work to build these technologies. So, one, it was one of the first works we had, and we signed very early in the beginning of the French quantum strategy that have been implemented in 2021, the first memorandum of understanding with the Netherlands, which we extended some years later to other countries like Germany, we also signed an agreement with the United States, we are in discussion with other partners to identify the complementarities in the supply chain. Sometimes there are things that in the French quantum ecosystem could be done in a sort of, in a manner, and we need also our partners to work with us to identify the problems which need to solve technically. That’s one of the first challenges. And in the real implementation now we have typically in the last months, implemented a call for proposal with the Netherlands, with Germany, we have the first projects that are now coming for us. So we will identify the most significant projects that would solve the difficult challenges, we have still scientific, technological and industrial challenges. to build a useful, large-scale, fault-relevant quantum computer. We are a lot of, I would not say a decade, maybe it could be earlier, but there are still a lot of challenges to build useful quantum technologies. And we need cooperation between countries. If every country work alone, no country can solve all the problems by himself. The challenge is very, very high, and we need cooperation. There are still scientific open questions. We need to answer them while we are trying to build a machine that doesn’t exist yet. One day, when it will be built, it will change a lot of economical sectors. If you imagine changing chemistry from trial error to predictive computation, that would change a lot of things. At the same time, while we need cooperation, we need also to prepare to the threat, to the risk that quantum technologies, quantum computers, but also quantum sensors and quantum communication could have if they are used by some organizations. Typically, if we have access to a sufficiently powerful quantum computer, it can break all our cryptography. If we can design very innovative materials, so innovative materials can be used for civilian applications, but also for military applications. So we need to control these technologies. One of the challenges for the last years was to set the right threshold. to control what needs to be controlled, and at the same time not to harm cooperation and scientific research, which is international. And now we have a regulation that is sound. French government have unveiled a control export regulation that has been agreed with our partners and different countries. United Kingdom have also implemented similar regulation and we hope in the upcoming months we will have shared rules for controlling quantum technologies. That would not harm cooperation, but having the threshold at the level from where quantum computers could become a threat for national and international security.
Shamira Ahmed:
Thank you, Neil. And I’d like us to now focus on some of the ethics and governance questions that Jiang Hong highlighted and you also have highlighted, Neil. And I have this question for Peter. You have been working on ethics and governance of emerging quantum regime. So we hear from Jiang Hong’s comprehensive intervention that we need to have anticipatory regulatory frameworks and oversight mechanisms. Because without these, it may result in the misuse of quantum technologies, which pose risks to privacy, human rights, social justice, particularly for developing countries. So based on your work, may you please tell us how we can foster more inclusive, human-centered and ethical transnational quantum ecosystems?
Pieter Vermaas:
Yes, thank you for the answer. I must say I’m still impressed by that first graph you showed. about the core countries and periphery, I think that’s the big risk. The big risk is that we continue with that division. And what I see in my work is that if you talk about global governance, it typically, then people are thinking, maybe Niels intervention also showed that a little bit, are thinking about limiting access, limiting the flow of knowledge, limiting the flow of talents, people from one country to another, and limiting the access of technology itself. What I think, what I see in my field is that actually what you would like to have is governance, which does the opposite, which enables the flow of knowledge, which enables that people can change states in their research, and also share the technology. And it sounds a bit counter to what the direction is now, that we want to limit it, want to export bands because it’s risky to share it. But building on our own rhetorics, I think we should share all these things, knowledge, people, and technology soon. If you argue that quantum computers can break encryption soon, and that we should very fast come up with solutions which include quantum technology, if you think about quantum key description, then from that argument, it follows that the whole world should do that. It’s not only that core group of countries which should switch to post-quantum encryption or QKD, it’s the whole world who should do that. The same for quantum computing. The model now is, okay, the quantum computer is somewhere hidden behind a fence, but others may possibly access it. Well, if our argument is that it’s really important for a state to have a quantum computer, to be sovereign, to deal with its societal challenges, then from that argument, it follows that we should make that technology accessible to the whole world, to every state, because also other states are entitled to their sovereignty and to dealing with their societal economic challenges. So I think that’s the big challenge of governance, that governance, global governance, I’m in favor, but careful that it’s not emphasizing what is happening right now, kind of technological or moral isolation, to break through that, and that would be great if UNESCO can help and other organizations can help, but that’s the real challenge.
Shamira Ahmed:
Thank you, Peter, and just hanging on your explanation and your emphasis on international cooperation, I’d like to ask Marike from GESDA on your mission in anticipating future scientific breakthroughs and activating science diplomacy to ensure it benefits all. So you initiated the Open Quantum Institute that was launched in March 2023 within CERN, so what are your thoughts on leveraging international cooperation to ensure that the benefits of quantum technologies are equitably distributed across the world?
Marieke Hood:
Thank you. Thank you very much, Amira. Thank you for the invitation. Yeah, GESDA is a private independent foundation which has a global scope, but was initiated by the Swiss government in 2019 to do exactly what we spoke about before, to bridge science and diplomacy and anticipate future scientific breakthroughs, so that we have a governance in place that is conducive to those breakthrough benefiting all. And that’s maybe a first point I would like to remind everybody in the room and online that what we are doing here and what we’re speaking today is actually about anticipation, because for the work of GESDA quantum computing, which is focused on quantum computing for this specific initiative, let’s be clear that quantum computers are not not ready yet. And I think that needs to be reminded to everyone that we anticipate that quantum computers will be ready at scale, ready to tackle real-world applications in 8 to 10 years, and that’s the most optimistic scenarios, apart from the security post-quantum cryptography applications that we spoke about before. So just a few lessons learned from this experience of creating, initiating, and launching the Open Quantum Institute. We launched it at CERN in March this year, March 2024. And that initiative actually came from both scientists and diplomats who wanted to ensure that this possibly disruptive technology, which will only be ready in, again, in 8 to 10 years, can benefit all in the best possible way. And so what the Open Quantum Institute does, it first looks at, I noted your five A’s, and the first focus of the Open Quantum Institute is working on availability. So creating a safe, controlled environment where international cooperation is possible, where involvement of the non-traditional quantum powers, all the countries around the world, can happen. And that’s why we have launched it within CERN. So making this technology available so that international cooperation can happen to explore especially the applications of quantum computing. And because we don’t really know what quantum computers will be strong at, what kind of problems they will be strong at solving. We have general types of problems we know that quantum computers will be good at, including material sciences, material science applications, chemistry applications. But how exactly we can make those applications work is not entirely known. And so the focus of the Open Quantum Institute within this international cooperation framework is to ensure that the applications that support the sustainable development goals and framework that will come beyond the sustainable development goals are also explored. So that we shift the focus of the international quantum community from applying quantum computers on to mathematical problems, which is mostly what the community does at this stage, towards focusing on problems that have real impact. And for that, what the Open Quantum Institute does is it works with the UN. organizations that are the owners of the SDGs, especially in the frame of public health applications concerning climate change mitigation, applications concerning food security, to translate the global challenges that these UN organizations have into computational problems, and then within those computational problems, understanding which ones would be applicable to quantum. So where quantum computing in the future might provide an advantage. In doing so, what we are doing is we’re actually mimicking what industry is doing. We know that some industries like, for example, the banking industry, also, of course, aeronautics, the defense industry, but automotive and some big pharma are looking already exploring applications of quantum computing that they will be able to leverage in the future. So what the Open Quantum Institute is doing is doing more or less mimicking the same approach, but for SDG-specific topics where there’s no financial, economic, geopolitical advantage in the short term. And for that, the multi-stakeholder approach is essential. So industry is involved. There’s more than 12 industry partners in this endeavor, amongst those that actually lead quantum computing research. Academia, same international academic organizations, but the diplomatic and governance angle is, of course, necessary. So Open Quantum Institute has been curating a group of 25 permanent representations here in Geneva to anticipate the future governance of quantum computing. So thanks very much.
Shamira Ahmed:
Thank you, Jackie. And we have one more intervention, and I’d like to expand on your discussion of different stakeholders. in more or less decentralized governance and how that applies to the emerging quantum regime. So with us, we have Pierre Anour from Science Po. Pierre, you have experience working on decentralized governance, where the transfer of control decision-making shifts from a centralized entity, and in this case would be the traditional quantum players. How would you say their lessons learned and what insights can be drawn from blockchain governance models and the current debates around AI regulation to inform the responsible global governance of quantum technologies?
Pierre Noro:
Yeah, hi, everyone. Thank you very much for the invitation. Thank you, Shanira, for organizing this, and thanks to all the panelists for their wonderful contributions. It’s not very easy to be the one to have the last intervention on the panel. So just to touch upon the policy briefs that is at the origin of part of the conversation today, it is one of its key findings is that, of course, quantum technologies are set to change the balance of power and the flow of information between nations, between different regions, between societies, and there are both great opportunities and risks. We’ve already discussed them today, so I won’t go over them again, but really the question of access to these technologies that will necessarily be centralized, at least in terms of hardware, will lead to transformation of the balance of power and of international relations. So it’s necessary to really anticipate this and work on a framework ex-ante, knowing that what’s really difficult is, as Neil, for instance, was mentioning, those computers and a lot of those technologies are- in the emerging experimental form so far. And so it’s very difficult to think about the governance systems without knowing the governance system for technology in which you don’t have a clear and precise view of its impact. So I will really focus on how we, on some natural thinking with examples and decentralized governance and other forms of governance that actually try to mitigate the centralization of the infrastructure of the really materiality of computing and to really enable global frameworks and multi-stakeholder governance that both reduce, mitigates risks and arms. At the same time, it has the potential to distribute rewards somewhat fairly and more evenly throughout countries that would be able to develop those infrastructure and countries that will not have necessarily either the financial material or human resources capacity to have those infrastructures on their territory. So in terms of decentralized governance, it’s funny because it’s nearly the opposite of what we identify for quantum technologies, right? Like those technologies, especially when you think about blockchain, blockchain is not the only technology that has some decentralized governance, are really decentralized by design, right? And I will go even further is that they are engineered to give open access and to maintain open access to limited hardware resources in peer-to-peer networks. The goal of those technologies is to make sure that even if you are not able to become a node on a network, you will be able to access the pool of resources there. And so it’s all about creating innovative governance tools to distribute this power between the nodes, the ones that maintain the hardware. and the other many stakeholders. And so the first lessons that we can see here from this blockchain world is that we will need to acknowledge that there will be different type of stakeholders in those quantum ecosystems. And the same way that in the blockchain ecosystems, for instance, we define different nodes, different co-developers, for instance, people that will provide expertise and software ability, people that will be financial stakeholders, people that will be end users, and that once we recognize all of those roles, it’s already clear how we can associate with people and send them at the table both for the design of this governance and for operating it thereafter. But if I would say that there is one historical example in which there is a striking similarity, I would say it’s with early internet governance, right? There are chances that once, so in 8 to 10 years, if I’m taking my estimate, we will have some quantum computing centers, then it might resemble something not too far away from the mainframe era of information. And what’s really fascinating about the mainframe era is that there were very, very few computing centers, very geographically centered and concentrated. But there were agreements to give access to scientists, to researchers, to companies, to those limited computing resources. And so, and I will finish there, so, Shamira, don’t have to cut me. We can imagine and throw some policy and standards and sketch them out. And I really invite you to check out as soon as we published it, the policy brief, because it comes with its own policy recommendations. But we could imagine, since quantum technologies are for now heavily publicly funded, that publicly funded quantum computing would come with agreements would come with a standard with a certain percentage of usage that would be offered to non-quantum states. So really baking access to non-quantum power, to non-quantum power, sorry, building into those agreements an access to quantum resources for non-quantum powers could really be one way to drive by default and expanding this collaboration, this cooperative mechanisms that would have meant multi-stakeholder and multilateral cooperation. And one last one that I have in mind, but I mean it’s really aligned with the Open Quantum Institute, is really capacity building, right? Like we’ve identified that there are different kinds of stakeholders that will contribute to the success of this ecosystem. That it’s not just about the hardware and who has access to it. It’s also about the people that will be able to translate real-world problems into quantum problems. It’s also about software developers. And this is probably something that we can steward. This is something that we can support by, you know, by really creating training for training centers that would not be into global north countries.
Shamira Ahmed:
Yes, thanks Pierre for that interesting discussion. And again, we only have 45 minutes for this riveting topic. And I’d also like us to stay in the room. We are also coordinating with Quantum Delta in the next session to gain insights from our policy brief and as part of the session on shaping inclusive global action towards the governance of quantum technologies. So please stay in the room and we can have further discussions. But for now, are there any questions from the audience in the room or online? We have a few minutes. If you have any burning questions to ask our panelists or any comments you’d like to share. Yes, please go ahead.
Audience:
I’ll have mine on the One Goal initiative for governance. Speaking about sovereignty, what do you think about the possibility for private actors to gain sovereignty, to become opaque, et cetera? Thank you.
Shamira Ahmed:
Is your question directed at anyone in particular? I’ll take another question and then I’ll leave it to the panel to have a minute each, I guess, to answer. And I see a hand online.
Audience:
Hello, Atenas here. My question is actually directed to anyone in the panel. I wanted to know, as quantum technologies are evolving, they seem to, in the future, be creating another digital divide, as for developing countries who do not have the capacities to… And the technical capacities of quantum technologies. Can you hear me?
Shamira Ahmed:
No, you’re breaking up, but we’re actually out of time. You can stay on for the next session. I’m not sure if we can steal a bit of time from the next session to answer the question. I guess in one minute each, you can join the next session and we’ll continue with these discussions where you can contribute to the discussion. action points on emerging action for global quantum governance. But I guess we’re done, and we’re moving to the next session, where we’ll continue this discussion. So please stay online, and thank you in the room for your questions. We will discuss all these questions you’ve been asking in the next session. Thank you. And I’d like you to give a hand to my panelists for their contribution, but we’re still moving on to the next session, so it’s a continuation. Thank you.
Speakers
A
Audience
Speech speed
78 words per minute
Speech length
99 words
Speech time
76 secs
Report
During a captivating panel discussion, attendees addressed critical issues concerning governance models and technological inequalities. Central to the conversation was the ‘One Goal’ initiative, designed to streamline governance processes. However, the initiative sparked concerns about the prospect of private entities gaining excessive power, potentially undermining transparency and accountability in governance—the bedrock of any robust democratic system.
Atenas introduced a pressing question, highlighting the severe consequences of advancing quantum technologies and the risk of an ever-widening digital divide. Her point emphasized the importance of an inclusive strategy towards technological progress to avoid further marginalising developing countries from their more developed counterparts.
This divide, intensified by the lack of infrastructure and technical know-how in less affluent nations, could lead to their lagging behind in critical sectors such as cybersecurity, computing, and economic competitiveness—areas essential in today’s technology-centric global climate. Reflecting on these issues, the panel considered how quantum technology advancements might influence international cooperation and aid, necessitating a collaborative effort to prevent further disparities and ensure equitable distribution of technological benefits.
This would involve investments in education, infrastructure, and joint research to bolster capacities in developing regions. Further observations highlighted the intricate nature of governance amid technological innovation and the vital role policy plays in devising ethical and growth-supportive frameworks. Discussions also touched on the evolving concept of sovereignty in the digital age and the need for global governance to adapt accordingly.
In sum, the panel shed light on the challenge of regulating private sector influence in governance and mitigating the increasing digital divide precipitated by quantum technology advances. A consensus emerged advocating a proactive, inclusive strategy and structured support for developing nations, to ensure equitable participation in the quantum technology revolution.
MH
Marieke Hood
Speech speed
126 words per minute
Speech length
754 words
Speech time
359 secs
Report
The Global Science and Diplomacy Anticipation (GESDA) foundation, initiated by the Swiss government in 2019, exists as a forward-thinking ‘bridge’ combining the frontiers of scientific innovation with diplomatic efforts. Its core mission is to forecast and shape governance structures equipped to harness emerging scientific developments for global benefit.
Anticipation is key in GESDA’s governance strategy, with a prime focus on the evolutionary area of quantum computing. Quantum computers, though in developmental stages, are projected by GESDA to reach scalable operation and practical application within 8-10 years, save for post-quantum cryptography, which is already a priority.
This projection establishes the urgency for proactive strategies to ensure that technologies serve the common good when they materialise. In March 2024, the establishment of the Open Quantum Institute (OQI) at the renowned European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) marked a pivotal advancement.
The OQI, a testament to the synergy between scientists and diplomats, is dedicated to influencing the progressive course of quantum computing, a technology with transformative potential that requires further maturation. At its heart, the OQI fosters “availability,” striving to create an inclusive, secure forum fostering international quantum computing cooperation.
Its role is paramount in convening established and nascent entities in the quantum realm, offering an interactive platform within CERN’s collaborative infrastructure. Central to the OQI’s aims is the harmonisation of quantum computing capabilities with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and their successors, transcending traditional computations to resolve pressing global issues.
The OQI advocates a pivot towards utilising quantum technology for these challenges, a strategy that resonates with sections like banking, aeronautics, defence, automotive, and pharmaceuticals, which reap benefits from proactive stances. Partnering with United Nations organisations, the OQI facilitates the translation of SDGs into quantum computational challenges, pinpointing areas where quantum computing could provide substantial advantages.
The OQI’s composition is multi-faceted, encompassing industry leaders, academic networks, and diplomatic agencies, each contributing unique insights. Over a dozen industry partners, together with 25 permanent representations in Geneva, collaborate within the OQI framework, collectively driving the development of governance principles for quantum computing.
In essence, the OQI, under GESDA’s aegis, pioneers global collaboration in harmonising upcoming quantum technological breakthroughs with significant societal endeavours like the SDGs. By establishing a confluence of science, diplomacy, industry, and governance from the outset, the OQI aspires to direct the vast capability of quantum computing to outcomes that are universally favourable and equitable.
The collaborative model showcased by OQI and GESDA is emblematic of how anticipatory governance can effectively navigate the trajectory of technological advance for the benefit of global society.
NA
Neil Abroug
Speech speed
119 words per minute
Speech length
648 words
Speech time
327 secs
Report
France has acknowledged that to advance in the area of quantum technologies, it must leverage its own expertise in quantum physics, mathematics, and industry while pursuing international partnerships. Recognising its limitations, French authorities have sealed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Netherlands, followed by cooperation with Germany and the USA.
These efforts include collaboration on ensuring supply chain synergies and addressing technical challenges in quantum development. The focus has shifted to tangible actions, such as joint calls for proposals with the Netherlands and Germany to fund high-impact projects that contribute to the development of large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computers.
Despite the distance from this goal, significant strides are being made in surmounting scientific, technological, and industrial barriers. Understanding the far-reaching implications of quantum technology in transforming industries and posing security risks, France is proactive in developing and implementing quantum technology export controls.
These regulations strike a balance between mitigating misuse risks and promoting international cooperation without hampering scientific research. Furthermore, France has been influential in setting up a regulatory framework, which after international discussions, has seen the enactment of export controls that align with global partners.
The UK and other countries have adopted similar security measures. The ultimate intent is to create universally accepted quantum technology regulations that set a standard for identifying potential threats posed by quantum computing power, thus ensuring technological advancement without compromising security.
This strategic stance reflects a careful consideration of the potential and the risks associated with quantum technology, emphasising the need for managed and collaborative approaches internationally.
PN
Pierre Noro
Speech speed
156 words per minute
Speech length
1025 words
Speech time
394 secs
Report
The speaker expresses gratitude for being invited to the panel and conveys appreciation for Shanira’s organisational efforts, as well as for the insights from other panellists. As the concluding speaker, they address the impact of quantum technologies on the global distribution of power and information, stimulated by a policy brief that informed the day’s discourse.
A salient point raised is the centralisation of quantum technology hardware and the associated risks it poses to the global balance of power. The speaker emphasises the imperative to establish governance frameworks for these technologies in advance of their full development, acknowledging the challenge presented by their experimental status and uncertain future impact.
The connectivity between this governance issue and the principles of blockchain technology is then drawn; with a suggestion that decentralisation of governance could be a resolution to the centralisation seen in quantum computing infrastructure. An equitable access model to quantum resources for all, akin to the decentralisation of power through blockchain, is proposed to democratise the greater architecture of these systems.
In mapping out the quantum ecosystem, it’s compared to the diversified landscape of blockchain, highlighting roles ranging from hardware maintenance to software development, investment and end-use. The importance of including a spectrum of stakeholders in developing and operationalising a governance framework is underlined.
Reflecting on historical precedents, parallels are drawn between the nascent state of quantum infrastructure and the early days of the internet, where strategic agreements enabled widespread access to centralised computing resources. Such collaborative models, especially where public funding informs access, are presented as examples to consider in the context of quantum technology governance.
The speaker mentions an upcoming policy brief with tangible recommendations for the quantum ecosystem, one of which advocates for the inclusion of non-quantum states in frameworks related to publicly funded quantum technologies to foster international cooperation. This is seen as a way of capitalising on multistakeholder and multilateral partnerships.
The monologue concludes by recognising the importance of capacity building, calling for initiatives that will develop a diverse range of contributors trained in quantum technologies. These initiatives should extend beyond the Global North to ensure the inclusive and comprehensive expansion of the sector, preparing programmers, problem solvers, and innovators to leverage quantum applications for real-world issues.
In summarising, the speaker offers an informed perspective on the governance of quantum technologies, underlining proactive, decentralised frameworks that promote equitable access and resource distribution. Historical parallels provide instructive examples for contemporary challenges, indicating potential strategies for sound governance. The policy brief is anticipated to offer further guidance, and the significance of building capacities worldwide is accentuated for the quantum sector’s inclusive growth.
PV
Pieter Vermaas
Speech speed
130 words per minute
Speech length
425 words
Speech time
196 secs
Arguments
Global governance should facilitate the distribution of knowledge, personnel, and quantum technology across borders.
Supporting facts:
- Global governance is traditionally associated with restricting the flow of knowledge and technology.
- Governance mechanisms are needed that promote sharing and counter technological or moral isolation.
Topics: Global Governance, Quantum Technology Transfer, Knowledge Flow
Report
The discourse surrounding global governance in the realm of emerging quantum technology underscores an urgent need for frameworks that not only facilitate the dissemination of the technology but also the knowledge and human expertise associated with it. The prevailing consensus advocates for governance that acts as a conduit for the flow of knowledge, challenging the traditional barriers that have historically restricted the sharing of technological advancements and information.
This perspective aims to overcome the challenges of technological and moral isolation, contributing to the prevention of inequalities between nations. Proponents of this progressive approach underscore the positive impact of a governance system that fosters the exchange of quantum technology insights, personnel, and resources globally.
Such international collaboration is deemed critical for nurturing partnerships that align with Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 17 – Partnerships for the Goals and aid in redressing disparities in technological access, in accordance with SDG 10 – Reduced Inequalities. Pieter Vermaas emerges as a pivotal voice in this debate, challenging the prevailing trend of restricted access to quantum technologies.
Vermaas strongly advocates for a collaborative and open approach, arguing that the sharing of advancements and expertise in quantum technology is essential for global development and should not be obstructed by artificial barriers. Moreover, the momentum is building for a quantum ecosystem that is inclusive, ethical, and transnational.
Proponents call for governance structures that enable the uninhibited flow of knowledge and expertise related to quantum technology. They argue that if quantum computing is recognised as instrumental for state sovereignty and tackling societal challenges, its benefits should be universally accessible, reinforcing SDG 16’s emphasis on peace, justice, and strong institutions.
Synthesising these viewpoints reveals that the push for relevant global governance in the quantum science and technology sector is underpinned by a shared commitment to progress and responsibility. The consensus is that the transformative potential of quantum technologies should promote international collaborations over competitions, empowering all participants on the world stage to address shared challenges.
Such a collaborative global effort is expected to drive technological advancement and contribute towards a fairer, more equitable international community.
SA
Shamira Ahmed
Speech speed
139 words per minute
Speech length
1766 words
Speech time
761 secs
Arguments
Technological change is often associated with inequality.
Supporting facts:
- Real GDP per capita increases with technological advancements associated with various industrial revolutions.
- Core countries, mostly G7 nations, benefited more compared to others.
Topics: Inequality, Technological Change
It’s important to ensure that advantages of advanced technologies like quantum are shared equitably.
Supporting facts:
- Information for All program focuses on the equitable sharing of technology benefits.
- The forthcoming policy brief is on Responsible Quantum Governance.
Topics: Quantum Technologies, Equity
There are key priority areas for ensuring advanced technologies are beneficial for everyone.
Supporting facts:
- Policy brief co-created by EUI, SciencePol, and UNESCO.
- Adaptation and adoption of advanced technologies could aid economic transformation and growth.
Topics: Advanced Technologies, Beneficial Technology
An international institutional framework is crucial to address inequalities exacerbated by technological change.
Supporting facts:
- Framework spans policies, technologies, learning, cooperation, value chains.
- The five A’s of technology (availability, affordability, awareness, accessibility, and ability) are important to consider.
Topics: International Framework, Technological Change
Economic disparities exist between countries because of technological adoption and adaptation.
Supporting facts:
- G7 countries experience higher benefits from technological change.
- Periphery countries do not experience the same GDP per capita increases.
Topics: Economic Disparities, Technological Adoption
The emerging quantum economy has four main trends: State-led investment, private investment, geopolitics, and emerging governance.
Supporting facts:
- State-led investment in quantum technology estimated at US$40 billion in 2023.
- Emergence of both national and regional strategies for quantum governance.
Topics: Quantum Economy, Investment, Geopolitics, Governance
Anticipatory regulatory frameworks and oversight mechanisms are needed for emerging quantum technologies.
Supporting facts:
- Misuse of quantum technologies can affect privacy, human rights, and social justice.
- Emerging quantum technologies require proactive regulation.
Topics: Quantum Technologies, Regulatory Frameworks, Oversight Mechanisms
Quantum technologies pose risks to privacy, human rights, social justice, particularly for developing countries.
Supporting facts:
- Developing countries may be at a disadvantage in the face of advanced quantum technologies.
- There’s potential for misuse of quantum technologies leading to increased inequalities.
Topics: Quantum Technologies, Privacy, Human Rights, Social Justice, Developing Countries
International cooperation is crucial for equitable distribution of quantum technology benefits
Supporting facts:
- GESDA initiated the Open Quantum Institute within CERN in March 2023
- Anticipating scientific breakthroughs and activating science diplomacy are part of GESDA’s mission
Topics: International cooperation, Quantum technologies, Equitable distribution
Report
The interplay between technological advancements and socio-economic inequalities is evident in how technology-driven changes shape the global economic landscape. Historical evidence indicates that countries at the core of global influence, particularly the G7 nations, have disproportionately benefited from industrial revolutions, leading to substantial GDP per capita growth.
This has underscored a pervasive pattern of inequality, with technological advancements not being evenly distributed across nations and economies. Advocates for equitable development stress the urgent need to ensure the benefits of technological progress are shared more broadly, aligning with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities.
The rise of quantum technologies brings these discussions into sharp focus, with the potential for transformative impact that could further entrench disparities if governance does not consider equity and inclusion. International organisations, such as UNESCO, actively promote frameworks and policies aimed at a fairer distribution of technological benefits, exemplified by initiatives like the Information for All programme and the emphasis on responsible technology governance, highlighted in the forthcoming Responsible Quantum Governance policy brief.
The call for responsible governance gains traction through collaborations between entities like the European University Institute (EUI), SciencePol, and UNESCO, resulting in a policy brief that outlines how adopting and adapting advanced technologies can encourage economic growth and transformation. Additionally, the importance of establishing an international framework is highlighted as crucial in addressing the inequalities amplified by technological change.
Such a framework would encompass the “five A’s”—availability, affordability, awareness, accessibility, and ability—highlighting the complexity of technological access and utilisation in efforts to reduce inequality. Global economic disparities are pronounced in the context of technological shifts, with G7 countries experiencing greater benefits while peripheral countries face stagnation, as indicated by disparities in GDP per capita growth.
These dynamics define the emerging quantum economy, which has seen state-led investments amounting to an estimated US$40 billion in 2023, prompting the development of national and regional quantum governance strategies. The consequences of unregulated or poorly governed quantum technologies are profound, posing risks to privacy, human rights, and social justice.
These concerns are particularly significant for developing countries, which may be disadvantaged in the sphere of advanced quantum technologies. Proactive regulatory frameworks and oversight mechanisms are identified as necessary to prevent adverse impacts and ensure that quantum technologies serve the greater good.
The narrative weaves together both optimism and caution; the prospects of advanced technologies in propelling innovation and growth are tempered by the reality of potential divisiveness and inequality. International cooperation is seen as a beacon of hope in this regard.
Initiatives such as the Open Quantum Institute, launched by GESDA within CERN, exemplify the spirit of collaboration, with a focus on bridging technological divides through science diplomacy and the sharing of knowledge and resources globally. Influential figures, such as Shamira Ahmed, underscore the imperative of taking concerted action to ensure that the advantages of quantum technology become a catalyst for widespread progress rather than a privilege for a select few.
Her stance reflects a broader consensus that, although challenges lie ahead, through collaborative efforts, proactive governance, and adherence to inclusive and ethical principles, quantum technologies have the potential to anchor a more equitable future.
XH
Xianhong Hu
Speech speed
147 words per minute
Speech length
1093 words
Speech time
446 secs
Report
From the UNESCO headquarters in Paris, there was clear recognition of the efficient communication with on-site and remote attendees. Praise was directed towards the European University of Social Sciences and Political Sciences for their combined foray into a policy analysis initiative, focusing on the societal ramifications of newfound technologies.
The discourse at UNESCO honed in on the organisation’s Persée Information Programme and its dedication to exploring the societal effects of digital and quantum technologies. The programme’s agenda specifically targets the application of quantum technology in furthering sustainable development, along with fortifying information literacy within this arena.
The ethical considerations around the safeguarding of information privacy and accessibility were spotlighted, alongside the impact of AI on multilingualism. The Speaker highlighted UNESCO’s commitment to ethical guidelines, notably the new global framework on AI ethics, ratified during the 41st General Conference in 2021.
Despite this, the unique challenges and stakeholders introduced by quantum tech were signposted as requiring bespoke considerations. A proactive approach to the ethical and regulatory dimensions of quantum tech was advocated, heeding the lessons from the oversight of social media’s societal impact in early internet governance dialogues.
This narrative underscores the imperative for timely, insightful study into the perils and prospects of quantum technology, to foresee and forestall potential dilemmas. The reflection acknowledges the global, albeit fragmented, consensus on AI ethics, held together by shared values like privacy and diversity, despite the plethora of over 600 different frameworks.
Conclusively, a call to arms was issued for the cultivation of tailored policy recommendations, addressing the spectrum of stakeholders within the quantum technology landscape. The Speaker championed a nuanced, multi-stakeholder approach to avert future discord and to advocate fair governance in the quantum field.
This strategy is envisaged to counter the AI industry’s domination by a limited cohort of nations and corporations. Emphasising inclusivity, the prevention of societal biases and divisional rifts were presented as orthodox objectives in the design of policy for the quantum realm.
Related event
World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)+20 Forum High-Level Event
27 May 2024 - 31 May 2024
Geneva, Switzerland and online