Quantum information science, engineering, and technologies (QISET) is entering a new phase that is rapidly moving from lab-based experiments to real-world applications, with significant implications for federal and private-sector strategies and finances, according to experts at the Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP). This shift, often called Quantum 2.0, is not just a scientific milestone—it is a competitive race that is increasingly being fought at the state and regional level, with profound consequences for America's economic and national security.
In the first quantum revolution, Quantum 1.0, breakthroughs in quantum mechanics gave rise to lasers and transistors, technologies that underpinned modern computing and communications. Today, Quantum 2.0 focuses on advances in photonics, microelectronics, and specialized materials, with the potential to revolutionize computing, sensing, and networking. As these technologies mature, they are attracting attention from both government and industry, which are eager to harness their power for applications ranging from secure communications to advanced navigation and drug discovery.
To understand how the United States can maintain its edge, SCSP has launched a new limited newsletter, "Quantum States," which examines place-based quantum innovation across the country. The newsletter assesses states on metrics such as cited quantum research, patents, the number of pure-play and quantum-enabling companies, military research facilities, breadth of the quantum stack (computing, sensing, and networking), and quantum-related job openings. The findings highlight that a robust quantum ecosystem is not simply about hosting the most companies; it requires a cohesive, strategic effort that leverages local strengths.
Currently, California leads in most aspects of Quantum 2.0, including industrial capacity, talent pipelines, and market ecosystems. Other established hubs include New York, Illinois, Colorado, Maryland, and Massachusetts. However, several states are emerging as potential players, including Texas, North Carolina, and Florida, which benefit from a high number of PhDs awarded and the presence of quantum research centers at their academic institutions. This geographic diversification is critical because it spreads risk and fosters a broader innovation base.
The SCSP experts emphasize that the most successful quantum states build strong synergies between pillars of a quantum ecosystem: academia, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), national labs, startups, and private industry. Ultimately, true quantum hubs emerge where industry, academia, and government actively connect. This local approach to innovation is important because it can accelerate technology transfer, create high-quality jobs, and ensure that the benefits of quantum advancements are widely shared.
For federal policymakers, these insights suggest that a one-size-fits-all national strategy may be insufficient. Instead, targeted investments in regional ecosystems could amplify the impact of federal research dollars and strengthen supply chains. For the private sector, understanding where quantum talent and infrastructure are concentrated can inform decisions about research partnerships, manufacturing, and market entry. As other nations aggressively pursue quantum technologies, the ability of the United States to cultivate a diverse network of quantum hubs may determine its long-term competitiveness and security.
To learn more and for future editions of the Quantum States newsletter, visit scsp.ai.
