Test Engineer

What does the UK government's quantum standards push mean to the sector? The UK is right to make a standards move but the process is as important as policy By Marc Ambasna Jones 24 Jul 26 Reading time: 7 mins When the National Physical Laboratory launched the National Quantum Standards Network (QSN) in June, its chief executive Dr Peter Thompson said it would "accelerate technology adoption, boost UK competitiveness and support the safe and ethical development of quantum technologies." It's an ambitious statement and an attempt by the UK to set its stall out early in the increasingly fast-paced global quantum sector. Of course, the UK is no stranger to setting up standards bodies and frameworks. Stephen Temple, a senior civil servant at what was then the Department of Trade and Industry, was one of the founding figures of ETSI (the European Telecommunications Standards Institute) in 1988. He also co-authored the GSM Memorandum of Understanding, the agreement that locked European operators into a common mobile standard and set the template for every generation of mobile technology since. Also, the British Standards Institution (BSI) remains an organisational partner in 3GPP, which develops 5G standards today. The QSN is an attempt to repeat that kind of early, decisive engagement in a technology where the standards race is only just beginning. Backed by a £10 million government fund, it is bringing together DSIT, the BSI, UKRI's National Quantum Computing Centre and the National Cyber Security Centre. It is clearly the UK's attempt to write the quantum rules, or at least to ensure that British researchers, companies and institutions have a serious voice whoever does. Whether it achieves that will depend less on the network's existence than on how it is governed. The case for acting now is not hard to make. According to McKinsey's Quantum Technology Monitor 2026, private investment in quantum technology start-ups reached $12.6 billion in 2025, which is 6.3 times higher than the year before. In 2024, a third of investment came from public sources. By 2025, that share had fallen to 3%. Capital markets appear to have come to the conclusion that quantum technologies have legs. Markets need agreed rules, however, not just about safety or ethics, but about the mundane engineering basics that allow products to work together, be compared against each other and bought at scale with confidence. A quantum sensing company needs its instruments trusted and comparable. A quantum computing firm selling cloud access needs its security credentials verifiable against recognised benchmarks. Without that kind of agreement, procurement teams in defence, healthcare or finance will struggle to specify what they are buying. "For investors, the QSN is best read as a de-risking measure rather than a commercial catalyst" That is where standards come in. And that, says Professor Michael Lewis, professor of operations management at the University of Bristol Business School, is where the complications can start. "Firms with money have the laboratories, the installed equipment, the test data, the patents and the committee representation," he says. "They are simply better placed to shape the choices." Benchmarks, Lewis argues, are rarely as neutral as they appear. His example is the IEC/ISO JTC 3 committee currently drafting standards for quantum gravimeters based on free-falling cold atoms, a specification that inherently suits some sensing approaches over others. Engaging with a standards process costs time and money now, but the penalty for not engaging could be felt down the line. Building a product or business around the wrong architecture is costly and time-consuming to change. Lewis points to the history of US railroad gauges as a lesson in what disengagement costs. Southern lines that stayed out of the gauge-setting process were eventually forced to convert more than 11,000 miles of track over two days in 1886. There was no deliberate exclusion. The standard was set without them, and they had to live with it. The same dynamic operates at the level of consortium labels. Lewis notes that the colour television standard adopted by the FCC was branded under a neutral-sounding consortium name, but RCA held most of the controlling patents. A BSI or NQCC badge on a quantum benchmark carries the same structural risk: a wrapper that looks open but may encode advantage for whoever held the pen in the first place. Katia Moskvitch, communications director at quantum control systems company Quantum Machines, argues that the answer lies in keeping standards technology-neutral. This means focusing on common engineering challenges such as interfaces, control, and interoperability rather than any single hardware architecture. "Quantum computing is advancing across multiple hardware modalities," she says. "Standards should make it easier for different technologies to evolve together." It is a reasonable position. Whether the QSN is structured to deliver it is another question, and one the network's governance will need to answer. The international dimension adds further complexity. Three weeks before the UK's announcement, on 28 May, the OECD adopted what it describes as the first intergovernmental standard establishing shared principles for the responsible development of quantum technologies, with 38 member governments signed to it. The backdrop is not encouraging. According to OECD research published in January 2026, international collaboration on quantum research has already been declining. Cross-border co-authorship on quantum publications once approached 40% in some countries but has fallen across the board as geopolitical tensions, export controls, and research security concerns reshape how countries work together. The UK is entering a process already under strain. However, the OECD also identifies public procurement as one of the most powerful tools governments have to shape quantum development, using purchasing power to build early markets and set performance expectations before commercial standards exist. That points directly to what Lewis argues is the UK's strongest card, the government's £2 billion quantum computing procurement programme, backed by NPL reference testing. Anchor buyers, not committee secretariats, typically determine how standards bed down. Lewis points to AOL's position in the 56k modem standard and the film studios' role in shaping the DVD format as illustrations of how purchasing power, rather than committee representation, determines outcomes. For investors, the QSN is best read as a de-risking measure rather than a commercial catalyst. According to PitchBook data cited in McKinsey's Quantum Technology Monitor 2026, Series B and later-stage rounds now account for around 63% of venture quantum investment, which is a shift towards companies demonstrating commercialisation readiness. A UK quantum company that can show compliance with internationally recognised benchmarks is a stronger late-stage proposition than one that cannot. For start-ups, the picture is less straightforward. The cost of engaging with a standards process is real and falls disproportionately on smaller firms with limited time and capacity for committee work. If the QSN does not find a way to bring early-stage companies meaningfully into the process, it risks producing standards shaped by established players that newer entrants then have to retrofit to, paying later for not engaging now. That is precisely the dynamic Lewis warns about. The QSN sits alongside a parallel regulatory move the government announced in July. The Regulating for Growth Bill will introduce sandboxing powers allowing companies to test products in controlled real-world environments before full market approval. Quantum is not named explicitly, but the intent is there. Standards tell buyers what they are purchasing; sandboxing gives companies a faster, lower-risk path to demonstrating it works. Together they suggest at least some coordination across government. The government's claim (drawn from Oxford Economics research cited in its March 2026 quantum investment announcement) that quantum could add £212 billion to the UK economy and 100,000 jobs by 2045 is a projection, not a forecast, and rests on sustained productivity gains that are far from guaranteed at this stage. What is less speculative is that the decisions being made in standards bodies over the next three to five years will shape which hardware approaches, which national industries, and which companies find themselves well-positioned when the market reaches scale. The QSN is a sound move but whether it becomes a genuinely open process or a coordination mechanism for the already well-resourced will depend almost entirely on governance decisions that have not yet been made public.

Neuron Digital and BSI sign MoU to accelerate digital transformation and positive change across the Built Environment sector. 7 July 2026 - Neuron Digital and the British Standards Institution (BSI, abbreviated below) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to collaborate on initiatives that will drive positive change across the global Built Environment sector... 7 July 2026 - Neuron Digital and the British Standards Institution (BSI, abbreviated below) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to collaborate on initiatives that will drive positive change across the global Built Environment sector. The agreement will focus on the practical application of 'live' digital twins, data, artificial intelligence, and wider digital transformation to help improve asset performance, sustainability, and long-term outcomes across the built asset lifecycle. The collaboration brings together Neuron Digital's capabilities in ontology-based open platform, AI infrastructure and applied digital twins, with BSI's expertise in standards, assurance and sector knowledge, supporting a shared ambition to help organisations use building data more effectively and make better-informed decisions. By adopting an outcomes-first approach, the MoU will explore how connected information, smart technologies and trusted digital approaches can help the sector address some of its most pressing challenges, including reducing carbon emissions, building climate resilience, improving operational efficiency, and enhancing user experience. "We are proud to be working with Neuron Digital to support much-needed transformation across the sector," said Andy Butterfield, Managing Director, Global Built Environment at BSI. "By applying digital technologies through an outcomes-first approach, we have an opportunity to unlock greater value from building data, improve asset performance, and help deliver a positive impact for people and the planet." The Built Environment sector is undergoing rapid digital change as asset owners, developers, operators, and supply chain partners seek more consistent, reliable, and actionable data. Through this MoU, Neuron Digital and BSI intend to identify opportunities to support the responsible adoption of digital technologies and help create the conditions for innovation, trust and measurable impact across buildings, infrastructure and the wider built environment. "I am excited to explore how our combined expertise can support this next phase of digital transformation," added Shahm Barhom, Managing Director, Global Product Certification at BSI. "By bringing together innovation, assurance, and a shared commitment to better outcomes, we can help organizations build confidence in the technologies and approaches that will shape more sustainable, resilient, and efficient assets." Through this agreement, the two companies intend to create the trust required for widespread tech adoption, moving the industry away from static data management and toward real-time, interactive virtual modeling. "We want to bring trusted digital transformation to the built environment at scale," said Thomas Pang, CEO at Neuron Digital. "Neuron Digital's ontology-based 'live' digital twin turns building data into real-time, interactive scenarios. Through reliable AI, we are moving past simple insights into safe actions, enabling AI to actually operate the building, optimizing performance on an open platform that can be deployed anywhere." By bringing together innovation, certification, and automated technology, the collaboration aims to give organizations the ultimate confidence to adopt the tools shaping tomorrow's infrastructure. About Neuron Digital Neuron Digital is the trusted AI partner for the built environment - widely regarded as the world's most complex market. Currently operating in 800 landmark buildings across Asia and rapidly scaling to 1,000, Neuron Digital partners with Asia's top commercial developers and is proudly backed by global engineering leader Arup. KakaComputer deliver the market's most comprehensive and proven AI-powered smart building solutions. Going far beyond industry standards, Neuron Digital continuously pushes the boundaries of what's possible - unlocking unprecedented levels of intelligence, operational efficiency, and performance that redefine the future of intelligent buildings. About BSI: BSI is a business improvement and standards company that partners with more than 77,500 clients globally across multiple industry sectors. BSI provides organizations with the confidence to grow by working with them to tackle society's critical issues - from climate change to building trust in AI and everything in between - to accelerate progress towards a fair society and a sustainable world. For over a century, BSI has been recognized for having a positive impact on organizations and society, building trust and enhancing lives. Today, BSI engages with a 15,000 strong global community of experts, industry and consumer groups, organizations and governments to deliver on its purpose by helping its clients fulfil theirs. BSI is appointed by the UK Government as the National Standards Body and represents UK interests at the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the European Standards Organizations (CEN, CENELEC and ETSI). Its Valued Collaborators Where Tech Meets Wit and Wisdom