Pioneering Responsible Global Governance for Quantum Technologies

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.

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.