Ethical Quantum Computing: “Nobody said it was easy"

Ethics, some say, is the task of finding the balance between personal integrity, universal morality, and everyday actions.

Setting aside the thorny issue of whether or not a universal morality truly exists, the question of ethics is particularly relevant to emerging technologies today where technical excellence is not enough if the underlying objective is misguided. As Peter F. Drucker, author and business management guru, is alleged to have said¹:

“There is nothing worse than doing the wrong thing well.”

Doing the “right thing”

Several new commentaries on ethics in quantum computing have entered the public debate this year. They range from thoughtful reports from august institutions such as UNESCO⁸, to wider journalism from Forbes Technology Council², for example. Broadly-speaking, these commentaries form part of a wider public debate about governance and accountability for quantum technologies. The subtext seems to be, perhaps, a need to learn lessons from AI governance failures: how could that inform quantum computing development?

There’s no doubting the promised transformative potential of this technology, and it remains a promise, for now, for society at large. However, a growing concern for many is that the development of this technology, and access to it, could all too easily become concentrated on the hands of governments and powerful corporations.

Unequal access to quantum computing capabilities, some say³, potentially creates a so-called "quantum divide" between nations and organisations. Of course, transparency and accountability in the development and application of quantum algorithms, and decision-making systems, runs parallel to the very same concerns facing AI algorithms today. The dual-use applications of quantum technology are of particular concern to many, where beneficial quantum tech could also be, and is designed to be, used in controversial ways including surveillance, intelligence gathering, or military purposes.

Managing this is quite clearly necessary. It will never be easy. But then, to misuse Coldplay’s lyrics:

“…nobody said it was easy…” (The Scientist, by Coldplay)

Back to the start

Among the commentaries, reports and opinion pieces on quantum technology ethics this year, the UK’s National Quantum Computing Centre (NQCC) “Action Plan” for Responsible and Ethical Quantum Computing (REQC) is quite notable⁴. It is perhaps one of the most comprehensive attempts by a national quantum organisation to address the societal, ethical, and governance implications of quantum computing.

Rather than focusing solely on technical progress, the plan seeks to guide the development and deployment of quantum technologies in ways that are beneficial, trustworthy, transparent and accountable. That’s the hope, at least.

At its core, the Action Plan recognises that quantum computing is approaching a critical transition point. Much of the last decade has focused on scientific research and hardware development, but organisations are now increasingly beginning to prepare for operational deployment of quantum computing. The NQCC argues that this shift makes it essential to consider how quantum computing could affect society and how institutions can build safeguards before the technology achieves widespread adoption.

The foundation of the Action Plan is the NQCC's “Quantum STATES” framework. The acronym STATES stands for…wait for it…: Societally beneficial; Trusted; Accountable; Transparent and explainable; Equitable, fair and inclusive; Safe, reliable and secure. A clunky acronym, perhaps, but I for one appreciate the effort to shoehorn-in some quantum physics parlance here.

The principles evoked by Quantum STATES are deliberately broad and mirror many of the concepts that have emerged in responsible AI innovation initiatives. They have been adapted specifically for the quantum computing context. Interestingly, they’re not presented merely as aspirational values but, instead, the Action Plan attempts to translate them into practical actions, governance processes and engagement activities over a five-year period. This practical approach is arguably its strength.

Responsible innovation can’t be achieved solely through internal policies. It also needs industry engagement, community education and ongoing research into emerging ethical challenges. The Action Plan appears to recognise this and in this sense it goes back to start from first principles: its strategy is organised around three pillars:

1. 1. Research-led thought leadership
   2. Enabling the ecosystem
   3. REQC at the NQCC

A key goal of the Action Plan focuses on integrating REQC into the NQCC's internal governance and project management systems. This includes incorporating ethical considerations into project management, staff training programmes, personal objectives and reporting mechanisms. This may appear administrative, but it is arguably one of the most important aspects of the plan. Many organisations may say how ethical principles matter to them, without ever changing operational processes to realise them. By embedding responsibility considerations directly into project approval – and that means access to NQCC’s quantum computing resources – the NQCC aims to make ethics a routine, necessary part of decision-making. In other words, REQC considerations will enter into access applications, collaborative research arrangements and procurement processes (the “carrot”) to require responsible practices among collaborators and users of its facilities (the “stick”).

Other goals address the challenge of understanding how quantum computing might influence society. Here, the NQCC intends to develop impact assessment tools that evaluate the implications of quantum computing use cases. They aim to identify measures to minimise harm while, at the same time, maximising positive outcomes.

The plan emphasises supporting quantum computing applications that align with the UK's National Quantum Strategy⁵ and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals⁶. This goal is quite significant. Many proposed quantum computing applications remain speculative, and so, by creating a formal assessment methodology, the NQCC hopes to build a framework that can evolve alongside progress in quantum tech.

Interesting, another stated goal is to focus on helping the wider quantum sector adopt responsible practices. This goes beyond the “carrot-and-stick” approach noted above. Planned activities include conducting research on ethical issues, providing technical leadership, supporting the Responsible Quantum Industry Forum⁷, and developing skills and awareness across the ecosystem.

The reality is that many questions surrounding responsible quantum innovation remain unresolved. Unlike AI governance, where significant regulatory and academic infrastructures already exist, responsible quantum computing is still an emerging field. The NQCC aims to position itself as a leading source of expertise and guidance in this area.

Overall Assessment

Overall, the NQCC's REQC Action Plan is a thoughtful document that demonstrates institutional leadership in an area that has often received less attention than quantum hardware and algorithm development.

Its greatest strength lies in moving beyond abstract ethical principles and identifying concrete actions that organisations can take. The plan is also notable for acknowledging uncertainty. Rather than claiming to possess all the answers, it recognises that many ethical, societal and environmental implications of quantum computing remain open questions requiring ongoing study. This humility, in my view, lends credibility to the document.

Potential challenges remain. The Action Plan contains relatively few measurable targets or timelines, making future evaluation of success more difficult. Many actions are framed in broad terms, and their effectiveness will ultimately depend on implementation and sustained commitment.

Nevertheless, the document establishes a starting point and, perhaps, a valuable model that other national laboratories, research institutions and quantum companies may choose to follow.

As quantum computing moves from research laboratories toward practical deployment, the NQCC's Action Plan represents an important contribution to ensuring that technological progress is accompanied by responsible governance, societal awareness and public trust.

References

[1] Drucker, Peter F. “Managing for Business Effectiveness.” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 41, No. 3, May–June 1963, pp. 53–60.

[2] Pravir Malik, Forbes Councils Member, for Forbes Technology Council

COUNCIL POST, 10^th July 2026: https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2026/07/10/the-future-of-quantum-computing-depends-on-trust-security-and-ethics/

[3] Benedict Lane, Anushka Mittal and Ariana Torres-Knoop: “Allocating Access to Quantum Computing: A Legal-Ethical Framework”. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.17597

[4] National Quantum Computing Centre (here): “Responsible and Ethical Quantum Computing” Action Plan - REQC

[5] National quantum strategy: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-quantum-strategy

[6] United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals

[7] Responsible Quantum Industry Forum: https://www.nqcc.ac.uk/infrastructure/responsible-quantum-industry-forum/

[8] “The ethics of quantum computing”, 1^st January 2026: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000398114