Piloting the Quantum Economy Blueprint Lessons from Saudi Arabia 2026

Delayed action on quantum readiness carries severe and compounding consequences. Just as the digital divide left 2.2 billion people offline,9 the quantum divide threatens to entrench lasting disparities. Unlike the digital divide, quantum readiness cannot be remediated through technology transfer later. Quantum technologies have significant dual-use potential, serving civilian and military purposes simultaneously. This has prompted major international powers to implement targeted export controls and tighten restrictions on international collaboration.10 Specialized talent pipelines, hardware supply chains and governance frameworks each demand years of concurrent development. They cannot be rapidly assembled once quantum systems achieve operational maturity. Countries that postpone building foundational capabilities therefore face a compounding risk: widening capability gaps, growing vulnerability as quantum computing threatens to break existing encryption protocols and permanent exclusion from shaping the international standards and norms that will govern the quantum economy.11 Quantum technologies present a distinct strategic challenge: policy imperatives emerge before technological maturity crystallizes. Unlike other emerging technologies, this urgency is not driven by consumer adoption or observable social risk. It is driven by the abrupt failure of cryptographic systems and critical infrastructure once quantum capability thresholds are crossed, with consequences that cannot be remediated by later intervention.12 Quantum strategies diverge sharply across countries, even as global investment accelerates. This reflects both uncertainty about which technical approaches, timelines and capability domains will prove most viable, and the reality that different national contexts will lead to distinct pathways.13 In such an environment, shared reference points become a strategic asset. International structured frameworks provide leaders from all countries with a common foundation for assessing quantum readiness, sequencing investments and aligning governance, supporting more efficient strategy development, ensuring national efforts remain internationally compatible and reducing the risk of a widening quantum divide. These shared frameworks address four imperatives faced by countries when developing their quantum strategies: 1. Acting despite technological uncertainty: Quantum technologies face open questions across multiple dimensions: underlying physics, technology development pathways and societal implications (Table 3). A shared framework enables nations to advance systematically while these questions remain unresolved, rather than becoming paralysed by uncertainty or rushing to lock in specific platforms prematurely. Shared frameworks for quantum strategies Key sources of uncertainty in quantum technology TABLE 3 Type of uncertainty Impact Underlying physics (scientific/ontological)Fundamental unknowns persist across all quantum technology domains. In quantum computing, questions remain around which qubit modalities (e.g. superconducting, trapped-ion, neutral atoms, photonics, topological) will ultimately prove viable, making early platform bets inherently high-risk. In quantum sensing, coherence time and real-world sensitivity limits remain unresolved. In quantum communications, photon loss and transmission distance remain open physical challenges. Technology development (engineering)Significant engineering challenges persist across all three quantum technology domains. Quantum computing faces hurdles in qubit control, cryogenic systems, materials, error mitigation and hardware–software integration. Quantum sensing confronts miniaturization and reliable field deployment. Quantum communications require scalable repeater networks and interoperability with existing infrastructure. Uncertainty around timelines, costs and performance constrains investment decisions across all domains. Societal effects (sociotechnical)Quantum breakthroughs carry broad societal implications across all three domains. Quantum computing threatens current cryptographic systems, with significant consequences for cybersecurity, privacy and economic structures. Quantum sensing raises concerns around precision surveillance and physical privacy. Quantum communications introduce questions around data and access equity. Geopolitical factors compound these uncertainties: export controls, talent mobility restrictions and strategic competition risk entrenching a quantum divide. Governance and regulatory frameworks remain underdeveloped across all domains. Source: Authors’ analysis based on Meckel, M. et al. (2025). The Goldilocks zone of governing technology: Leveraging uncertainty for responsible quantum practices. Quantum Economics and Finance. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2507.12957. Piloting the Quantum Economy Blueprint 7