With governments positioning themselves for technological leadership and investors weighing long-term bets, the politics of quantum are rapidly evolving. In this second part of her interview, Dr. Celia Merzbacher unpacks the financial, diplomatic and regulatory challenges that will shape the next decade of quantum innovation. From public-private partnerships and export controls to workforce readiness and international collaboration, Merzbacher argues that turning scientific promise into economic power will require both strategic investment and coordinated global action.

This interview was conducted by Jesse Samasuwo (Senior Policy Manager, Apolitical) and edited by Rui Yi Ang (BSc in Politics and Philosophy, LSE and Communications Intern, Apolitical).

Funding quantum ad-ventures

Samasuwo: Are there any models or programs that you consider a ‘gold standard’ for combining public and private investment in the quantum computing industry?

**Merzbacher: **That's a great question. On the one hand, I think the UK National Quantum Technologies programme is well thought out and does a good job of incorporating the development of applications and new mission developments over time. I'm following that with a lot of interest.

However, I don't know how much those programmes incentivise the private sector to get capital off the sidelines. In the U.S., while private capital is available, it often pursues near-term returns, with AI currently attracting a significant amount of investment.

Quantum is still viewed, I think, as a relatively long-term prospect, although some quantum sensing applications are entering the market. But these applications do not represent as large potential markets as quantum computing does, which poses a challenge for attracting investment. I find some European approaches, such as committing to purchasing quantum computers for public use and testing, to be interesting examples of how to advance the field.

Samasuwo: What role do you believe policymakers and governments play in supporting investment in quantum computing?

**Merzbacher: **Here in the U.S., several programmes are being launched. The Department of Defence's Office of Strategic Capital offers a loan programme for various strategic technologies, including quantum computing. That’s a key example of an initiative that aims to provide some of the support necessary for these capital-intensive businesses.

In addition, the National Quantum Initiative is set to be reauthorised and updated. This is occurring in an environment where spending is being curtailed and priorities for the current Congress and administration are being implemented. Quantum is generally seen as a critical and emerging technology from a bipartisan perspective, but there are differing philosophies on the government’s role and investment levels, especially when it comes to developing a technology for commercial applications.

It would help for the government to be an early customer where it makes sense. We are in a sort of “chicken and egg” scenario where some use cases and applications— whether that’s in health, transportation or electric grid management— could have real impact. However, it’s likely to be some time before these technologies are ready for deployment; continued R&D is needed.

Superpositioning roles: governments, researchers and investors

Samasuwo: Does government have a bigger role to play in using quantum computing or supporting investment in other sectors?

**Merzbacher: **The government acts as a customer for military and defence technologies, but in areas like energy and transportation, it's more complex. Overall, they own some systems and technologies and purchase a lot of computing capabilities and resources. These are all potential customers and it's crucial for the government to recognise this as an opportunity for early use.

Over the past few decades, the government here in the U.S. and probably elsewhere, has gone from being the leading customer to aligning with other buyers. They want to buy off-the-shelf solutions as cheaply as possible when it comes to computing capabilities. If there isn’t a specific need aligned with government-owned and operated projects, they are more likely to be just one of many customers.

Samasuwo: Given the small network of researchers and investors focused on this space, how does collaboration work? Is there a trend toward international collaboration or do you find it to be more nationally siloed?

**Merzbacher: **In academic research, basic researchers naturally collaborate globally. They are quite mobile, often taking jobs at universities in other countries while continuing to partner with their former colleagues. I recently attended a meeting in California with around 15,000 quantum physicists from around the world, which highlights the international nature of basic research. This layer of research is very international, with open publishing being the norm.

As you move toward more application-oriented research, there are concerns about research security. In the U.S. and elsewhere, we must consider where openness may create risks, leading to a more complicated situation that isn't unique to quantum research. Once you reach the stage of commercial development, the focus shifts to proprietary work, resulting in significantly less sharing, except with trusted partners. However, those partnerships can still be international in scope.

Samasuwo: Do you believe we are witnessing a shift away from open global collaboration more broadly?

**Merzbacher: **The export controls announced by the U.S. in September 2024 mean that if certain capability thresholds are crossed with a quantum computer, an export license will be required. An exception may be made if the destination country has similar controls in place. In this way, the US was trying to build a community of like-minded countries willing to implement similar controls, with the strongest controls imposed on adversary countries. The intent was to maintain the ability to collaborate and share technology while ensuring that, if we send something to another country, it won’t reach an adversary. That's the point of export control: to prevent the flow of technology to adversaries, not to your friends.

While there are valid due diligence questions about who has ownership and control of the information that you're sharing, those concerns aren’t exclusive to quantum technology. It’s about adopting best practices. Just like cybersecurity, change your password from “1234” and we'll all be a little bit safer.

Bringing coherence to the quantum conversation

Samasuwo: In your experience, do you think there’s a general awareness of quantum computing’s potential applications across various government sectors, or is that something that still needs to be developed?

**Merzbacher: **I believe that's part of QED-C’s responsibility. We recognise the importance of being a trusted voice for the quantum community. It is important to share the potential applications of this technology broadly, whether in the public or private sectors, highlighting societal, commercial and national security benefits and pointing out spaces where people can stay informed. More organisations can help communicate to various audiences, some of whom may be harder to reach. The topic can be intimidating and it can be challenging to put into easily understood language.

We need to reach a point where we can discuss capabilities clearly. Then, potential customers and users can see how quantum computing may be useful in their business or sector. I’ve met with various groups, including those from the mining, telecommunications and banking sectors, who are all facing computer-related challenges. Conversations are beginning to take place and I encourage end users to participate in these discussions because the earliest cases are likely to be more application-specific rather than general purpose. As a result, if an organisation or sector explicitly communicates their needs, saying, "If you could do this, we would buy it", then they'll be among the first to benefit. They can literally “pull” the technology from the developers, who want to create solutions that can be sold. Quantum companies are currently having these discussions directly with potential customers. QED-C is helping to amplify these conversations by gathering the end users together, as we have done in our quantum use cases studies and the reports that you’ll find on our website.

Samasuwo: What top priorities should governments and industry focus on to support the growth of the quantum computing industry in the next couple of years?

**Merzbacher: **I would like to see governments take a proactive approach to move research investment results out of the lab and into the hands of those who can make them useful. Whether that involves promoting spinouts and startups, I think it is crucial to reduce friction in the tech transfer collaborations between the researchers and the private sector. While there are policies in place that permit this, we need more than just permission; we need real incentives.

Another important component is the private investor community and how to incentivise their involvement. This might include tax policies, but it’s more than just a question of spending more money at our laboratories or our companies.

Some policies can also help remove barriers and enable collaboration across borders, allowing organisations to hire top talent without concerns over visa issues. Immigration policies, intellectual property protection, export control and tax policies— these are all tools that governments can use to make it easier for substantial investment in basic research to find its way into practical applications.

This interview is part of a series of expert perspectives on key quantum computing issues for policymakers. Learn about quantum computing in more depth, register for a place on upcoming cohorts of our course: Quantum Computing: Understanding the Technology and its Implications, developed in collaboration with Google Quantum AI. Read Part 1 of the conversation with Dr. Merzbacher

Sign up for a place on the next cohort