A new research project examines how organizations, regulators, and technical experts coordinate the transition to quantum safe cryptography. The study draws on a structured workshop with public sector, private sector, and academic participants to document how governance, security, and innovation systems shape cryptographic migration planning.
The paper focuses on the Netherlands as a case study. The authors frame the transition to quantum safe systems as a socio technical process that involves institutions, standards bodies, and operational decision makers alongside cryptographic engineering work.
What the research set out to do
The study aims to describe how different actors participate in preparing for quantum related cryptographic risk. Researchers organized a participatory mapping workshop where attendees identified relevant organizations and discussed their roles, relationships, and influence within the national ecosystem.
Participants included representatives from government agencies, standards organizations, industry, and research institutions. The workshop produced a shared map of actors involved in policy development, technical guidance, deployment planning, and risk communication.
How the mapping exercise worked
Researchers used qualitative methods centered on group discussion and structured mapping. Participants placed actors into categories based on function, such as regulation, standardization, implementation, and research. They then described how information and responsibility flow across these groups.
The process surfaced areas where coordination relies on informal relationships. It also highlighted points where decision making authority and accountability remain diffuse across institutions.
Governance and coordination themes
The study identifies regulators as central drivers of national direction through policy signals and compliance expectations. Standards bodies shape technical alignment by publishing guidance and cryptographic specifications. Industry groups contribute deployment experience and operational constraints. Academic institutions supply research and technical validation.
The mapping shows that coordination across these groups often develops through workshops, advisory forums, and professional networks. The authors document gaps where roles lack formal definition, particularly around long term ownership of migration planning and cross sector communication.
Relevance for security teams and planners
The research provides a structured view of how non technical factors influence cryptographic transition work. For cybersecurity professionals, the actor maps offer context for understanding who sets direction, who interprets standards, and who supports implementation at the national level.
By documenting governance structures alongside technical preparation, the study positions quantum safe migration as an organizational challenge as well as a cryptographic one. The authors present the work as a reference point for future planning discussions in other national and sector specific contexts.