Quantum computing is often framed as the next technology race after artificial intelligence, a narrative heavily reinforced by investment patterns. Governments worldwide have committed more than $40 billion to national quantum technology programmes, while venture capital continues to flow into a growing ecosystem of quantum startups. The assumption is that quantum will follow a similar arc to AI - rapid scaling, platform competition and escalating valuations.
This comparison deserves closer scrutiny. Quantum computing is fundamentally different from AI: it will remain capital-intensive, centralised infrastructure rather than a widely distributed digital tool.
Yet the trajectory of AI offers a cautionary example of what happens when transformative technologies scale faster than the frameworks designed to manage them. Unless those lessons are applied early, the quantum industry risks repeating many of the same strategic mistakes.
Quantum governance must start early
AI has largely been positioned as a general-purpose technology destined to permeate every device, application and workflow, which has helped accelerate its adoption. Quantum computing sits in a very different category.
Unlike AI, which can be deployed across widely distributed cloud infrastructure, quantum systems are capital-intensive machines requiring specialised hardware, cryogenic environments and highly specialised expertise. Most organisations will never operate a quantum computer directly. And for the foreseeable future, only governments, research institutions and a small number of major technology companies will be capable of building them.
That concentration of capability changes the governance equation. When powerful infrastructure is controlled by a small number of institutions, oversight cannot be treated as a regulatory afterthought. Governance needs to be built into the ecosystem from the outset.
AI’s recent proliferation shows why. Adoption surged across enterprises long before oversight mechanisms were mature. Recent research suggests 93% of organisations now use AI in some capacity, yet only around 7% have embedded governance frameworks into development processes, leaving many organisations scrambling to retrofit oversight, risk controls and compliance after deployment.
Enterprise leaders planning long-term infrastructure strategies must therefore pay attention to the way quantum technologies are funded, governed and deployed over the next decade, as this will shape how organisations access and rely on them in the future.
It’s important to note that governance failures in technology rarely begin with bad intentions. The early internet was built around ideals of openness and decentralisation, yet those principles were never structurally protected. Over time, economic incentives reshaped the internet around platform dominance and surveillance-driven business models.
AI followed a similar trajectory. Early discussions around ethics and responsible development were widespread, but once commercial deployment accelerated and investment surged, competitive pressure began to dictate the pace of development. Companies raced to scale models and release new capabilities faster than their competitors.
For quantum computing, the lesson is clear: principles alone are not enough. If transparency, public benefit and responsible development are to shape the technology’s future, those priorities must be embedded into governance frameworks, funding structures and policy from the beginning. Otherwise market incentives will define the outcome.
Diversify quantum’s funding base
Where the money comes from often determines how technologies evolve. In AI, enormous capital inflows created pressure to generate commercial returns quickly. That incentive structure drove the race toward larger models and faster deployment cycles.
Quantum computing faces a similar dynamic. Many of the largest funding streams currently originate from defence and national security programmes. This is historically common for foundational technologies, but development driven primarily by geopolitical competition will naturally prioritise applications aligned with those interests.
However, quantum has the potential to accelerate breakthroughs across healthcare, energy systems, climate modelling and advanced materials - areas where current computational limits still slow progress. If funding incentives narrow the technology’s focus too early, those wider societal benefits could be delayed or overlooked.
This trajectory is not inevitable. Governments can recognise the strategic value of quantum capabilities across a broader spectrum of civilian applications. And a growing class of mission-aligned investors, including philanthropic funds and family offices, is increasingly interested in technologies that combine long-term societal value with sustainable returns.
A more diverse funding ecosystem would allow quantum innovation to develop across a broader range of priorities.
Avoid the hype cycle
A key lesson from the AI boom is managing expectations. AI was often presented as a universal solution capable of transforming every industry simultaneously. While the technology has delivered significant breakthroughs, those narratives also inflated expectations and distorted investment decisions.
Quantum computing now faces the same temptation. It is frequently described as the technology that will break encryption, revolutionise drug discovery and transform climate modelling in a single wave of disruption. In reality, quantum computing is better understood as an accelerator for specific classes of complex problems - particularly those involving high-dimensional systems and advanced optimisation.
That still represents a major opportunity, but overstating timelines or capabilities risks undermining credibility before the technology reaches maturity.
Act while the window is still open
Quantum computing is still early enough in its development for governance to shape how the technology evolves. The frameworks, funding models and strategic priorities that guide its development need to be defined now, while the ecosystem is still forming.
AI offers a clear warning. Once technologies scale across industries, governance inevitably becomes reactive, attempting to catch up with systems that are already deeply embedded in the economy.
Quantum has not yet reached that stage. Governments, investors and the organisations building and adopting quantum technologies still have an opportunity to shape the rules, incentives and priorities that will guide its development.
The decisions being made today will determine how quantum computing is deployed - and whose interests it ultimately serves - for decades to come.
