An Assessment Methodology for International Hydrogen Competitiveness: Seven Case Studies Compared

Abstract

Currently, the global energy structure is undergoing a transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, with the hydrogen economy playing a pivotal role. Hydrogen is not only an important energy carrier needed to achieve the global goal of energy conservation and emission reduction, it represents a key object of the future international energy trade. As hydrogen trade expands, nations are increasingly allocating resources to enhance the international competitiveness of their respective hydrogen industries. This paper introduces an index that can be used to evaluate international hydrogen competitiveness and elucidate the most competitive countries in the hydrogen trade. To calculate the competitiveness scores of seven major prospective hydrogen market participants, we employed the entropy weight method. This method considers five essential factors: potential resources, economic and financial base, infrastructure, government support and institutional environment, and technological feasibility. The results indicate that the USA and Australia exhibit the highest composite indices. These findings can serve as a guide for countries in formulating suitable policies and strategies to bolster the development and international competitiveness of their respective hydrogen industries.

1. Introduction

Climate change is widely recognized as one of the most pressing issues confronting humanity [1]. Carbon dioxide emissions persist in their upward trajectory, driven by the relentless expansion of the human population and the ongoing evolution of anthropogenic activities [2]. According to the IEA, global carbon emissions reached an all-time high, surpassing 37.4 billion tonnes in 2023 [3]. To slow this growth trend, the international community has established carbon reduction goals through various global climate protection accords, including the Paris Agreement, and has expedited efforts to facilitate the transition towards a low-carbon economy [4]. In the energy sector, achieving carbon reduction targets necessitates a sustainable energy transition, with hydrogen garnering attention as a promising alternative energy source [2,5,6]. Hydrogen plays a crucial role in the transition to a more sustainable future, and has the potential to substantially mitigate the adverse effects of climate change [7]. Consequently, the development of the hydrogen industry is widely considered one of the key strategies for achieving carbon reduction targets [8,9,10].

Hydrogen is a clean renewable energy carrier [11]. Hydrogen can be produced from natural and various industrial sources, including water electrolysis, fossil fuels, biomass, industrial byproducts, and mineral resources. These diverse raw materials form a substantial base for the generation of hydrogen. The current landscape of hydrogen production encompasses multiple methodologies, such as steam–methane reforming, electrolysis using renewable energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen, biohydrogen production, and photoelectrochemical water decomposition. Each of these techniques contributes to the extensive and evolving field of hydrogen production [12]. Among these, green hydrogen, also referred to as clean hydrogen, is produced through water electrolysis using electricity generated from renewable sources; on the other hand, grey hydrogen is derived from methane vapor reforming, while blue hydrogen is obtained by combining grey hydrogen production with carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies [13]. This paper does not consider hydrogen production from nuclear energy due to its currently underdeveloped state [14]. The challenges associated with nuclear energy hydrogen production include the economics of production, marketability, and safety during transport; moreover, there has been an ongoing academic debate about whether hydrogen produced from nuclear energy can be classified as clean hydrogen. As the primary focus of this paper is to study the international trade competitiveness of hydrogen for the purpose of emissions reduction, we have chosen to concentrate on low-carbon hydrogen sources. Furthermore, hydrogen production using nuclear energy has only been implemented in a few countries and has not yet been widely adopted. Including this form of energy in the proposed framework for calculating the competitiveness of hydrogen-producing countries may limit its applicability and hinder its ability to provide valuable insights into the future development of hydrogen in other countries. The Hydrogen Council highlights the transformative potential of hydrogen production from electricity, noting that it will interconnect and profoundly reshape existing electricity, gas, chemical, and fuel markets [15]. This is due to the versatility of hydrogen, which can be produced using electricity and subsequently utilized directly or converted into fuels, chemicals, and electricity [2,8]. Moreover, hydrogen finds applications across a broad spectrum of industries [2,16], offering advantages in efficiency, economic effectiveness, and safety [17,18]. First, hydrogen serves as a crucial carbon reduction pathway that can effectively improve cost effectiveness and accelerate carbon abatement in deep decarbonization processes across industries such as steel, shipping, aviation, and ammonia production [2,16,19,20]. For instance, hydrogen steelmaking reduces carbon emissions by over 90% compared to traditional steelmaking methods [21]. Over the next three decades, hydrogen is projected to assist carbon-intensive industries in reducing their cumulative carbon dioxide emissions by 80 billion tonnes [22]. Second, hydrogen is regarded as a feasible energy carrier and storage medium [23]. The intermittency and variability of renewable energy sources present challenges to the energy system [11,24]. However, hydrogen storage offers a solution by enabling the conversion of surplus renewable energy into hydrogen for storage purposes. When required, the stored hydrogen can be reconverted into electricity or other forms of energy, facilitating the balancing and regulation of the energy system [25,26]. This form of energy storage and system regulation has the potential for integration with various energy combinations [27]. Hydrogen has applications in the residential sector as well, particularly for heating purposes [2,28,29,30,31]. This functionality is currently in practical use across several countries [10,32,33,34]. Therefore, hydrogen offers numerous advantages, including abundant sources, carbon reduction potential, sustainability, and versatility.

The global hydrogen industry is currently undergoing rapid development and expansion. Major economies worldwide have accelerated their efforts to establish and structure their hydrogen industries, resulting in a more distinct and well-defined industrial landscape [5]. The IEA has revealed that 42 countries and territories worldwide have now implemented hydrogen policies, while an additional 36 are in the process of developing them. Notably, several early adopters are revising their initial strategies and setting more ambitious targets [35]. Countries have demonstrated a strong inclination to develop a global hydrogen market and actively engage in international hydrogen trade. The US Department of Energy projects a significant increase in domestic hydrogen demand, reaching 10 million tonnes per year by 2030, 20 million tonnes per year by 2040, and 50 million tonnes per year by 2050. Concurrently, the cost of hydrogen production is expected to fall to USD 2/kg by 2030 and further to USD 1/kg by 2035 [36]. Similarly, the RePowerEU plan sets a target of producing and importing 10 million tonnes of renewable hydrogen annually by 2030 [37]. The European Union will provide financial support for the development of the hydrogen sector through various projects, including the European Hydrogen Bank and the InvestEU programme [38,39]. Following the footsteps of Europe and the US, Japan’s Green Growth Strategy Through Achieving Carbon Neutrality in 2050 aims to achieve domestic hydrogen production of 3 million tonnes per year by 2030 and 20 million tonnes per year by 2050 [40]. Similarly, South Korea’s Hydrogen Economy Promotion And Hydrogen Safety Management Act sets the ambitious goal of replacing imported crude oil with imported hydrogen by 2050 [41]. In terms of concrete project implementation, more than 680 large-scale hydrogen projects have been initiated worldwide to date [42]. Notable examples include the world’s largest low-carbon hydrogen production facility being developed by ExxonMobil in Texas [43], Europe’s largest industrial hydrogen plant being constructed by Spain’s Iberdrola Electricity Company in Puertollano [44], and the world’s first offshore hydrogen plant, planned by French company Lhyfe [45]. Direct investment in hydrogen continues to grow, with regions around the world increasingly allocating resources to develop this clean energy source. The Hydrogen Council emphasizes that North America leads in terms of committed investment, with a figure of USD 10 billion, followed by Europe at 7 billion, the Middle East at 5 billion, and China at 6.3 billion. Notably, China has the highest growth rate, exceeding 200%. Among these investments, the largest scale of government funding programs includes the IPCEI in Europe, the Production Tax Credit, and the Carbon Capture and Storage Credit in the US [46]. By the end of 2022, global direct investment in hydrogen reached nearly USD 250 billion [15,47], and this total is projected to increase to USD 500 billion by 2030, representing a 100% increase compared to 2020 [15]. This growth is further evidenced by the expansion of hydrogen infrastructure, with the pipelay rate of planned hydrogen pipelines expected to increase from 30% in 2023 [46] to 40% by 2050 [15,35]. Looking ahead, hydrogen is expected to play a significant role in the global energy landscape. By 2050, it is estimated that hydrogen will account for 18% of the world’s end-use energy demand, create 30 million jobs, reduce $C{O}_2$ emissions by 6 billion tonnes, and generate a market value surpassing USD 2.5 trillion [48,49]. The global hydrogen market shows great promise and is anticipated to continue its expansion, with the development and utilization of hydrogen becoming a crucial pathway for energy transition in many economies as well as an important aspect of international competition [11].

Due to the varying resource endowments and development costs associated with the hydrogen industry in different countries [23,50], there are significant differences in hydrogen supply, demand, and price, which will inevitably lead to a substantial demand for hydrogen trade and provide the ground for the international trade in hydrogen [35]. Economies with limited renewable energy resources but strong energy demand, such as Japan, South Korea, and parts of Europe [6,51], will prioritize the use of renewable electricity for decarbonizing their power systems, resulting in a shortage of clean hydrogen production capacity and higher costs. Conversely, South America and the Middle East, which have abundant renewable energy resources, will have clean hydrogen production capacities far exceeding their needs and relatively low clean hydrogen costs due to low green power prices and generation at the scale of clean hydrogen production. By 2030, the gap between the regions with the highest and lowest costs of clean hydrogen production is expected to reach approximately 15 times [51], considering scenarios in which producers in some regions receive subsidies through incentives. By 2050, as incentives are withdrawn and the cost of renewable hydrogen continues to decrease, the global price of clean hydrogen will level off, although the gap will still be around 2.5 times [51]. In regions with favorable resource conditions, low investment and operation costs, and a mature industrial chain, the cost of clean hydrogen is projected to reach about USD 1.5/kg, with the lowest expected to reach USD 1.2/kg. However, countries with limited renewable energy resources will continue to lack a cost advantage, and the cost of clean hydrogen in these regions will remain above USD 3.5/kg [35,51]. Consequently, the mismatch between supply and demand, coupled with the substantial price differences, makes extensive inter-regional long-distance hydrogen trade an inevitable trend.

Based on the price differences resulting from supply and demand imbalances, international hydrogen trading has taken place gradually in recent years, with several trading outcomes already being realized. For example, significant progress was made in demonstrating international hydrogen trade during 2020. The Advanced Hydrogen Energy Chain Association for Technology Development (AHEAD) successfully transported and traded hydrogen from Brunei to Japan using containers exploiting liquid organic hydrogen carrier (LOHC) technology [52]. In September 2020, Saudi Aramco and Japan collaborated on the successful trade of 40 tonnes of blue ammonia, which consists of hydrogen and nitrogen, sent from Saudi Arabia to Japan for use in zero-carbon power generation [53]. In September 2021, Japan and Australia collaborated on the Hydrogen Supply Chain project, in which hydrogen is produced through coal gasification in the Latrobe Valley, transported to the port of Hastings for liquefaction, and then shipped to Japan, marking the beginning of large-scale global hydrogen trading [54]. In addition to these existing achievements, countries have signed agreements to promote the sustainable development of the hydrogen trade. Several countries and organizations have issued hydrogen bilateral and multilateral cooperation agreements and initiatives, including the Hydrogen Initiative of the Clean Energy Ministerial, Clean Hydrogen Mission, and Global Partnership for Hydrogen of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) [55,56,57], which have together played a positive role in promoting the development of the global hydrogen industry and market cultivation. Germany and Saudi Arabia have agreed to cooperate closely in the production, processing, application, and transport of green hydrogen [58]. Elsewhere, the Netherlands and Portugal have signed a memorandum of cooperation [59]; the Port of Rotterdam has signed a memorandum of cooperation with Chile to export green hydrogen to the Netherlands and all of Europe in the future [60]; the Port of Rotterdam and Port of Pecém are participants in a signed cooperation agreement joining the bilateral trade cooperation between Brazil and the Netherlands to co-promote offshore wind and green hydrogen production [61]; Japan and the UAE have signed a memorandum of cooperation [62]; and Masdar City in the UAE has entered into a cooperation agreement for green hydrogen production with Siemens and Marubeni to set up a hydrogen production demonstration plant in Masdar [63]. By 2050, the hydrogen trade is expected to cover the world, with more than 40 different potential trade routes having a trade capacity of more than 1 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) and the largest exceeding 2000 MTPA. By 2050, the market is expected to mature and become significantly more liquid [51]. The potential for hydrogen international trade is immense.

In the face of the growing hydrogen industry and international hydrogen trade, it is imperative for countries to determine their position in the global hydrogen competition, which will provide a scientific basis for the subsequent development of relevant policies and strategies for the advancement of their own domestic hydrogen industries. In this regard, scholars have conducted numerous studies. The literature published on the Web of Science core collection over the past five years was econometrically analyzed using VOSviewer software (version 1.6.20.0) on 1 March 2024. The keyword co-occurrence method was applied, with a special focus on “international hydrogen trade” and “international hydrogen competitiveness”. The results are presented in Figure 1 and Figure 2; the yellow color of the blocks signifies closer proximity to the present date.

As illustrated by Figure 1, from the perspective of international hydrogen trade, the current mainstream research trend no longer solely involves trade in gaseous hydrogen; today, it encompasses the entire hydrogen industry chain. This includes hydrogen and hydrogen-based compounds as well as hydrogen-related products, equipment, technology, and infrastructure such as hydrogen refueling stations and pipelines. Additionally, energy policies and multidimensional studies on the international hydrogen trade are gradually becoming research hot spots. Zhao et al. [64] proposed the concept of hydrogen credits and suggested establishing a framework for hydrogen credits similar to carbon energy trading in the international market. Max et al. [65] proposed a model for an integrated natural gas and hydrogen market, analyzing the impact of technological and economic costs on the structure and price of the emerging low-carbon hydrogen market. Heuser et al. [66] proposed a global methodology for the allocation of hydrogen. Al Ghafri et al. [67] assessed the liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade route from Australia to Japan from the perspectives of economic feasibility and emission intensity, revealing the feasibility of a complete hydrogen supply chain based on the transport of LNG. A multitude of studies examining the technical and economic aspects of large-scale green hydrogen production have demonstrated that geopolitics has a significant impact on the hydrogen market [68,69,70]. Parsa [71] used the gravity model to analyze the impact of research and innovation on bilateral hydrogen trade. Johnston et al. [19] devised an open-source model comparing the costs of routes from key potential hydrogen exporters to their main potential import markets. The aim was to assist hydrogen trade stakeholders in assessing the costs of transporting various forms of hydrogen, highlighting both fixed and variable costs, including port fees, possible canal tolls, and the impact of fuel costs on trade costs. Eric et al. [72] proposed a framework for decision-making regarding hydrogen trade exports based on technological, economic, and environmental dimensions, aiming to help many countries utilize their hydrogen potential to achieve sustainable energy security. A recent study by Brändle et al. [73] proposed a methodology for estimating the global cost of low-carbon hydrogen production and supply from renewable energy sources and natural gas. Pflugmann et al. [74] highlighted the crucial role in the development of European hydrogen applications that will be played by international trade in renewable hydrogen between European Union member states and non-member states. Moreover, these studies reveal that different countries play distinct roles in the global green hydrogen market, which are contingent upon their respective renewable energy and water resource endowments as well as their capacity to establish hydrogen infrastructure [75].

Figure 2 indicates that previous research has underscored the significance of investigating hydrogen technology as a means to enhance the global competitiveness of hydrogen. However, these studies offer limited quantitative evidence regarding the true effect of technological advancements on the development of hydrogen production. This shift can be attributed to development of hydrogen technology and continuous introduction of hydrogen policies and strategic backing from various countries, regions, and governments in recent years. Regarding international hydrogen competitiveness, several scholars have studied it from different perspectives. Alejandro et al. [76] calculated the overall renewable hydrogen potential of EU countries and potential EU trading partners based on renewable energy sources, natural resources, infrastructural potentials, and competing demand for renewable electricity. Hjeij et al. [2] proposed a conceptual model of an export competitiveness index for a sustainable hydrogen economy, applying an expert interview methodology to better understand the relationship between resource availability, economic and financial potential, political and regulatory status, industrial knowledge, and the enhancement of international hydrogen competitiveness. Another paper by Hjeij et al. [11] examined the relationship between resource availability, political status, economic potential, knowledge, and adaptability. They developed a framework for assessing the relative competitiveness of gas exporters as hydrogen exporters, arguing that Qatar can become a significant competitor in the global hydrogen market by investing more in research and development (R&D), particularly in carbon capture and steam methane reforming. Aditiya et al. [77]. conducted a study at three levels, namely, technological, social, and economic, assessing the prospects for hydrogen systems from the perspectives of domestic energy capacity, national wealth, society development, and R&D. They concluded that countries with an active hydrogen policy and high R&D capacity could lead the construction and implementation of the system, while those with strong primary energy supply capacity and economic advantages would be able to generate economic benefits for the country in terms of meeting energy needs and commercial resource requirements

Despite the significant number of meaningful studies conducted by scholars, there are still limitations in terms of research object, content, and methodology, which are primarily reflected below:

• The majority of studies concentrate on specific locations or countries, with examples and projects primarily based on observations in regions with well-established renewable energy technologies. These studies often overlook the competitiveness of countries with renewable energy potential in the emerging hydrogen market. Furthermore, they assess the competitiveness of global hydrogen market participants in the hydrogen trade using general terms, without specifically classifying countries according to their resource endowments and the development of their respective hydrogen industries. This lack of comprehensive analysis may impede future research on the dynamics of the hydrogen trade and the sustainability of hydrogen demand.
• Existing studies often overlook the impact of land and water resources on a country’s hydrogen competitiveness when considering factors affecting the hydrogen trade. This oversight may result in a lack of precision in policy recommendations derived from model-based assessment results.
• The existing literature on hydrogen competitiveness primarily employs subjective evaluation methods such as expert consultation and brainstorming, which rely on individuals’ subjective views and experiences. While some studies have used objective evaluation methods, such as constructing models, such research has mainly examined the cost of producing and transporting hydrogen, and has not specifically addressed the assessment and comparison of hydrogen’s international competitiveness.

To address these limitations, the present paper constructs an index and uses the entropy weight method to objectively and quantitatively analyze 21 variables across five dimensions: potential resources, economic and financial base, infrastructure, government support and institutional environment, and technological feasibility. The aim is to compare the international competitiveness of hydrogen in seven selected countries representing different types. The findings can provide valuable references for energy policymakers and researchers in countries that share commonalities with these seven types. The main contributions of this paper are as follows:

• This study lays the foundation for examining hydrogen competitiveness in potential hydrogen-exporting countries around the world. It analyzes the competitive potential of different players in the future hydrogen market by selecting seven countries with different characteristics from 21 specific perspectives. Countries around the globe can find commonalities in the development of the hydrogen industry and the hydrogen economy. The study provides further insights into potential cooperation between countries in the hydrogen sector and market dynamics, helping policymakers gain a clearer understanding of the future hydrogen market.
• The Hydrogen Export Competitiveness Index has been supplemented to account for the impact of supply drivers by including land and water resource variables. This allows for the simulation and investigation of different scenarios and case studies of international hydrogen competitiveness. Multiple scenario-based optimizations can be developed based on the model results to guide policymakers and policy efforts for different countries and players.
• The current and future global hydrogen economy, hydrogen market, and national strategies for hydrogen are analyzed to quantify the potential competitiveness of the hydrogen industry in each country from the perspective of international trade and to objectively position it. This approach distinguishes the study from previous hydrogen trade studies based on the cost perspective.
• For the first time, the entropy weight method has been employed to objectively assign weights in computing the index of international hydrogen competitiveness.

The model constructed in this study draws inspiration from the hydrogen export competitiveness index developed by Hjeij [2]. The present work incorporates elements from three primary categories: economic and financial factors, political and regulatory status, and industry knowledge. It considers the framework indicators proposed by Hieij in another paper [11], supplementing them with resource indicators, and takes into account the infrastructure indicators selected by Hassan [78]. By leveraging the strengths and addressing the weaknesses of previous frameworks, this study innovatively includes land and water resources as factors influencing the international competitiveness of hydrogen. The final set of indicators in this paper encompasses potential resources, economic and financial foundations, infrastructure, government support, institutional environment, and technological feasibility. Johnston’s [19] cost factor is included in this analysis, while demand costs are not; this is because of the lack of homogeneity in assessment methods of hydrogen demand costs and the fact that the cost perspective falls outside the scope of this paper. However, subsequent studies may explore this aspect in greater detail.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the methodology for calculating the composite index for the selected countries using the entropy weight method. This includes identifying the indicator categories, selecting the countries, inputting the data, and applying the entropy weight method to process the calculations. Section 3 presents the results and discussion, including the hydrogen export competitiveness index scores and comparisons. Finally, Section 4 provides our conclusions.

2. Materials and Methods

This section examines the measurement of a hydrogen international competitiveness index calculated using a system of five primary indicators: potential resources, economic and financial base, infrastructure, government support and institutional environment, and technological feasibility. This model considers economic and financial fundamentals in conjunction with Hjeij’s calculation of the hydrogen export competitiveness index [2]. The analysis incorporates additional factors, such as land area, water capacity, and port capacity. Infrastructure and policy regulation factors are evaluated based on two studies by Hassan [7,78]. Furthermore, this paper introduces a new consideration, namely, investment attractiveness. In this section, we select seven countries with distinct and diverse characteristics in order to provide insights in formulating their hydrogen policies for other nations with similar endowments and at similar stages of development.

2.1. Selection of Evaluation Indicators

Regarding indicator selection, this paper adopts the concept of ‘retention + supplementation’, combining the findings of previous studies [2,7,11,19,78]. Five primary indicators are selected: potential resources, economic and financial base, infrastructure, government support and institutional environment, and technological feasibility. These primary indicators encompass 21 secondary indicators to measure the composite index of hydrogen international competitiveness. The indicators are classified into positive and negative ones for different assignments. Positive indicators suggest that an increase in the indicator will enhance international hydrogen competitiveness, while negative indicators imply that a rise in the indicator will diminish international hydrogen competitiveness.

Table 1. Construction of Hydrogen International Competitiveness Evaluation Indicators (Part A).

Primary Indicator	Secondary Indicator	Calculation Method	Source of Data	Classification of Indicators
Potential resources	Land area (la)	Total area of national territory (2021)	World Bank [79]	Positive indicator
	Gas production (gp)	Total gas production (2021)	Hjeij et al. [2,11], World Bank, ESMAP [80]	Positive indicator
	Water capacity (wa)	Total renewable inland freshwater resources (in billions of cubic meters) (2020)	World Bank [79]	Positive indicator
	Local renewable resource utilisation (lrru)	Total renewable energy generation (2021)	Hjeij et al. [11], World Bank, ESMAP [81]	Positive indicator
	Solar potential (sp)	Average long-term theoretical solar photovoltaic potential in areas of countries using level 1	Hjeij et al. [2], World Bank, ESMAP [82]	Positive indicator
	Wind energy potential (wp)	Average mean power density at a hub height of 100 m in the 10% windiest areas of the country	Hjeij et al. [2], World Bank, ESMAP [83]	Positive indicator
Economic and financial base	GDP per capita (gc)	GDP per capita (latest available data for each country)	Hjeij et al. [2], World Bank [79]	Positive indicator
	Credit rating (cr)	Forward-looking macroeconomic modeling based on ratings of major credit institutions (2022)	Hjeij et al. [2], Tradinge Eonomics [84]	Positive indicator
	Hydrogen project (hp)	Number of projects commissioned to produce hydrogen for energy or climate change mitigation since 2000 (up to October 2022)	Hjeij et al. [2], IEA [54]	Positive indicator
Infrastructure	Geographical location (gl)	Average distance to hydrogen demand centers in 2050 (weighted by demand)	Schönfisch [65], Dhabi [85], cepii [86]	Negative indicator
	Ports (p)	Transport ports (2022)	IEA [87]	Positive indicator
	Existing pipeline length (epl) [11,88]	Length of existing gas pipelines standardised by country region	CIA [89]	Positive indicator

and

Table 2. Construction of Hydrogen International Competitiveness Evaluation Indicators (Part B).

Primary Indicator	Secondary Indicator	Calculation Method	Source of Data	Classification of Indicators
Government support and institutional environment	Hydrogen policy (hp)	Status of hydrogen policies and strategies at the national level (up to October 2022)	Hjeij et al. [2], CSIRO [90], World Energy Council [91]	Positive indicator
	Trading partners (tp)	Number of countries as trading partners in (2017)	Hjeij et al. [2,11], WITS [92]	Positive indicator
	Investment attractiveness (ia)	Total foreign investment	World Bank [79]	Positive indicator
	Regulatory quality (rq)	Awareness of government capacity to formulate and policies and regulations that allow and promote private sector development (2021)	Hjeij et al. [2,11], Hassan et al. [78], World Bank [93]	Positive indicator
	Corruption control (cc)	Perceptions of the extent to which control of corruption affects the exercise of public power in favor of private interests (2022)	Hjeij et al. [2], World Bank [93]	Positive indicator
Technological feasibility	R&D expenditure (re)	Expenditure on R&D as a percentage of GDP (latest available data for each country)	Hjeij et al. [2], World Bank [79]	Positive indicator
	Human capital (hc)	Tertiary-educated labor force as a percentage of the total tertiary-educated working-age population (latest available data per country)	Hjeij et al. [11], World Bank [93]	Positive indicator
	LNG capacity (lc)	Operational liquefaction capacity by country (April 2022)	Hjeij et al. [2], IGU [94]	Positive indicator
	Liquefied gas exports (lge)	LNG exports and re-exports of LNG by LNG exporting countries (2021)	Hjeij et al. [2], IGU [94]	Positive indicator

are two parts of a single table, which present the assessment system for international hydrogen competitiveness constructed in this paper. The reasons for selecting each of these five primary indicators are discussed below.

Potential Resources: Resource endowment directly affects the quantity and quality of hydrogen exported by a country [2]. Hydrogen is primarily produced from gas through steam methane reforming (SMR) or water electrolysis, relying on renewable energy sources and assisted by CCUS [13]. Gas reserves constrain the production of blue hydrogen and grey hydrogen, while different countries will hold varying positions in the global green hydrogen market due to their different water endowments and levels of renewable energy development [23]. These factors significantly influence the assessment of international hydrogen competitiveness.

Economic and Financial base: Sustainable economic development is a primary driver of energy demand growth; energy partially supports industrial development, which in turn leads to economic growth. Additionally, a country’s economic and financial foundation influences its government’s capacity to invest in the infrastructure and projects necessary for the development of the hydrogen industry. Countries with robust economies and well established financial systems can provide funding and investment support for hydrogen projects, thereby fostering technological innovation in the hydrogen industry and enhancing its competitiveness in the global market.

Infrastructure: Trading in hydrogen encompasses more than just the exchange of gaseous hydrogen; it is a comprehensive trade that covers all aspects of the hydrogen industry chain, including hydrogen and hydrogen-based compounds as well as hydrogen-related products, equipment, and technologies. Furthermore, it involves hydrogen infrastructure such as hydrogen refueling stations and transmission pipelines [23]. Consequently, a country with a well-developed hydrogen infrastructure, including a robust hydrogen supply chain, storage facilities, and refueling stations, will have the potential to support the scale-up and commercial operation of the hydrogen industry, thereby enabling the hydrogen industry to leverage its competitive advantage in the international market.

Government Support and Institutional Environment: This indicator refers to the level of national government support and the related policy environment for the hydrogen industry. A harmonious and stable political environment serves as the ballast for the smooth development of a country’s foreign trade, and plays a crucial role in facilitating international trade transactions; therefore, government support and a favorable institutional environment are essential in order for domestic hydrogen industries to enhance their international competitiveness.

Technological Feasibility: The hydrogen industry is a technology-intensive sector, involving multiple aspects such as hydrogen production, storage, transport, and fuel cell research and development, each of which requires technological breakthroughs and advancements. Therefore, countries with leading hydrogen technology, robust R&D capabilities, and strong industrial innovation capacity have a significant advantage in the competitive landscape of the hydrogen industry.

2.2. Research Objects

Due to geographic location and each country’s unique strengths in terms of domestic energy reserves, economic power, trade environment, and research capacity, different countries have varying needs in energy transition. There is an urgent need to systematically categorize countries involved in future energy transition to provide targeted recommendations. Therefore, this study selects seven different types of countries with distinct energy characteristics as representatives in order to examine their international hydrogen competitiveness and offer lessons for countries with similar characteristics.

Table 3. Basic overview of the situation in the seven countries.

Nations	Continent	Resource Advantage	Economic Condition	Geographical Advantage	Institutional Advantages	Technical Advantage	Other Advantages
Australia	Oceania	Rich in natural gas, wind, solar energy	Twelfth largest economy in the world	Close to Asian and European hydrogen markets	Detailed hydrogen strategy, favorable and stable trade environment	Strong scientific research	Advantageous for the development of green hydrogen
UAE	Asia	Rich in oil and gas resources	Strong economy	Easy access to transport	Has released a national hydrogen strategy	/	Large state-owned enterprises are taking the lead in developing the hydrogen industry
Qatar	Asia	Rich in gas resources	Strong economy	Convenient transport	Has signed relevant co-operation agreements	/	Willingness to develop blue hydrogen
Chile	South America	High potential for renewable energy development	/	Good Trade Location	Set Carbon Neutral Targets	/	Advantage of Developing Green Hydrogen
China	Asia	High hydrogen production	/	Proximity to major hydrogen markets	Government to develop long term plans	/	/
U.S.	North America	Rich in natural gas	World’s No.1 economy	Near major hydrogen markets	Development of a clear plan for hydrogen development, strong investment	Strong scientific research	Hydrogen industry development over a long period
Norway	Northern Europe	strong hydroelectricity	High GDP per capita	Convenient transport	Leading hydrogen strategy, hydrogen trade taking shape	Strong scientific research	Faster development of hydrogen infrastructure

outlines the basic situation of the seven countries.

From the southern hemisphere, Australia and Chile are included in this study. Australia, a traditional resource exporter with abundant gas resources and wind and solar resource conditions that are among the highest in the world [80], provides strong support for the development of both blue hydrogen and green hydrogen industry [5]. Australia has been leading the way in hydrogen roadmaps and strategies since 2019 [95] while continuing to advance renewable energy. Relying on its gas export business, Australia has a mature energy export chain and stable trade partnerships. Additionally, Australia’s proximity to countries with fast-growing demand for hydrogen, such as Japan and South Korea, provides a locational advantage [5]. Australia’s formulation of a comprehensive hydrogen strategy [96] and the long freight routes characterized by its vast geography are considered ideal conditions for hydrogen-powered freight transport [5]. As a result, Australia is actively developing its hydrogen industry and aims to become one of the top three hydrogen export bases in Asia by 2030. It is expected that by 2030 Australia’s clean hydrogen exports will reach 2 million tonnes/year, with most of them using ammonia as the carrier and Asia as the main destination [6,78]. Australia is currently the most active potential exporter of hydrogen, as evidenced by the announcement of over 80 projects or collaborations related to the global trade in hydrogen or ammonia between 2020 and 2021 [85]. Australia currently has 113 hydrogen projects registered on the National Hydrogen Project Register, and its hydrogen industry is growing rapidly [96].

Chile has been striving to tackle its reliance on fossil fuels and is actively working towards transitioning to cleaner and more sustainable energy sources, with a particular emphasis on renewable energy. The country’s varied landscape, which includes underdeveloped regions and areas with substantial untapped solar and wind potential, presents promising opportunities to reap significant benefits through the development of sustainable energy sources [97]. Consequently, the country has set a goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2050 [98]. The production of green hydrogen is considered a key factor in achieving this goal. Furthermore, Chile is committed to reducing its dependence on fossil fuels, especially in the mining and transport sectors. In addition to having an abundance of renewable energy sources, Chile is well-positioned to develop a green hydrogen industry, with the advantages of access to export markets and the opportunity to be strategically located as a center for energy trade with Asia, Europe, the Americas, and the Pacific. In terms of the cost of hydrogen production, Chile and certain other regions such as the Middle East have a significant cost-competitive advantage. It is estimated that 33% of the hydrogen produced in the future in these regions will be priced at less than USD 1 per kilogram [51]. As a result, Chile is expected to become one of the largest green hydrogen producers globally in the medium term [99,100,101].

In the northern hemisphere, the USA, as a significant player in the global energy market, has long been involved in the race for cost-competitive hydrogen production. In November 2020, the Department of Energy released an updated version of its Hydrogen Program Plan, originally introduced in 2002. This plan is dedicated to technological research and development of the entire hydrogen industrial chain. It proposes promoting the research, development, and large-scale application of clean, economical, and reliable hydrogen technologies, with the goal of hydrogen meeting 14% of the nation’s energy needs by 2050 [102]. In the 2023 Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal, the U.S. government allocated USD 7 billion to establish seven regional clean hydrogen centers across the country. These centers aim to accelerate the development of the clean hydrogen market, enhance energy security, and boost the domestic manufacturing sector [103]. The United States boasts substantial expertise in underground natural gas storage infrastructure, furnishing it with an advantageous base for hydrogen integration [104]. The US has primarily focused on blue and green hydrogen R&D [105]. Notably, the US is home to the world’s largest green hydrogen facility, boasting a prodigious daily output capacity of 11 metric tons [106], exemplifying its strides in green hydrogen production.

As the largest supplier of natural gas to the EU, Norway faces the threat of rapid depletion of its gas reserves and a decline in the value of its exports, despite its substantial natural gas resources and well-developed gas infrastructure. Anticipating future declines in gas prices, Norway has already begun producing hydrogen [107] and leveraging its resource endowment and technological capabilities to develop blue hydrogen initially, with plans to gradually transition to green hydrogen exports. Norway’s abundant freshwater resources and nearly 100% green electricity supply enable it to produce competitive green hydrogen on a large scale [108]. Furthermore, hydrogen is considered to be more suitable as a transport fuel due to the cooler temperatures in northern Norway. Norway was among the first countries to introduce a carbon tax. In line with the Paris Agreement, Norway enacted the Climate Change Act in 2018, making its emissions reduction targets legally binding [109]. Under normal circumstances, this grants Norway a competitive advantage over the EU in hydrogen development due to its lower electricity prices.

This study also includes the UAE and Qatar, both important gas exporters among the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. The UAE possesses abundant hydrocarbon resources and a strong economy. As of 2020, the country’s proven oil reserves reached 97.8 billion barrels, making it the eighth largest in the world and accounting for approximately 5.6% of global oil production. Additionally, the UAE’s proven gas reserves stand at 5.9 trillion cubic meters, or 3.2% of the world’s total, ranking eighth globally [80]. In 2022, about 30% of the UAE’s GDP was directly related to the oil and gas sector [110]. In terms of infrastructure, the UAE’s Port of Fujairah is the world’s second-largest marine bunkering port, and is expected to become a future supply depot for derived fuels such as hydrogen and ammonia [111]. The UAE also shares an international gas pipeline with Qatar and Oman [112]. ADNOC, the largest national oil company in the UAE, is currently a major producer of hydrogen and ammonia, with hydrogen production exceeding 300,000 tonnes per year in the Ruwais. This production is set to increase to 500,000 tonnes per year in the future, and the company has plans to become the world’s leading hydrogen and ammonia supplier and exporter [49,113].

Qatar has collaborated closely with potential gas customers and technology suppliers since the 1990s, helping it to achieve a radical gas-driven transformation. With abundant wind and photovoltaic energy resources, the world’s third-largest gas exports [94], and early adoption of carbon capture technology, Qatar holds a significant advantage in all three methods of hydrogen production [6]. By 2021, Qatar was working with the UK and South Korea to develop hydrogen by signing agreements to expand hydrogen cooperation between the countries. Qatar’s GDP increased from approximately USD 6 billion in the late 1980s to about USD 236.26 billion in 2022 [114], indicating a strong economy. Today, Qatar already has an established green hydrogen plant, and is actively developing its hydrogen industry. Notably, we chose not to include Saudi Arabia in this study, which was for two primary reasons. First, Saudi Arabia has a large land area, and three of the countries already included in this study have land areas exceeding 2 million square kilometers. Our goal is to provide policy recommendations for countries with smaller land areas that aim to develop hydrogen and achieve an energy transition, rather than limiting our conclusions to countries with vast land areas. Second, Saudi Arabia shares similar energy characteristics with the seven countries studied in this paper. For instance, Saudi Arabia faces the same “resource curse” as the United Arab Emirates, which includes falling oil demand, declining oil prices, and diminishing financial wealth from oil. However, Saudi Arabia does not stand out as significantly as Qatar in terms of natural gas resources. Therefore, we have decided not to consider Saudi Arabia in this particular study.

China is included in this study primarily due to its clear advantage in dominating the existing global energy market and economy [23]. Currently, China is the world’s largest producer of hydrogen, with annual production of 33 million tonnes, accounting for one third of global demand [106]. It is predicted that China’s hydrogen demand will reach 35 million tonnes in 2030 and 60 million tonnes in 2050 [115]. China’s hydrogen supply capacity is strong, demand is high, and development prospects are broad. As early as 2006, China released the Outline of the National Medium and Long-Term Plan for the Development of Science and Technology (2006–2020), which put forward a guiding plan for production, storage, transmission/distribution technology, and fuel cell technology [116]. Since 2019, China’s hydrogen industry has entered a phase of rapid development. On 23 March 2022, China issued the Medium-Term and Long-Term Plan for the Development of the Hydrogen Energy Industry (2021–2035). This plan proposes the establishment of a 1+N policy system, clarifies the strategic positioning of hydrogen, and deploys key tasks for industrial development [117]. The hydrogen industry in China possesses immense development advantages.

2.3. Data Sources and Calculation of Indicators

The data collected in this paper are primarily sourced from the BP Statistical Review of World Energy (2022), the World LNG Report (2022) released by the International Gas Union (IGU), the World Bank, and the United Nations (UN) public database. To eliminate the one-sidedness of single indicators and objectively evaluate the international competitiveness of the hydrogen industry in the seven countries, we constructed a comprehensive index to measure the international hydrogen competitiveness of each country. This paper aims to address the problem by introducing a novel and sustainable research methodology. Currently, the primary focus of evaluation methods has shifted towards comprehensive assessment approaches that integrate multiple attributes and factors, with the entropy weighting method emerging as a prominent representative [118,119]. The entropy weighting method determines the weight of each index based on the degree of data differentiation and the entropy weight formula. Applying this method requires standardizing and processing the collected data, calculating the entropy of each indicator, and subsequently determining the weight of each indicator [120].

Table 4. Descriptive statistics for the indicators.

Secondary Indicator	Sample Size	Minimum	Maximum	Average	Standard Deviation	Median
la	7	1.15	942.00	392.09	455.83	74.35
gp	7	0.70	934.20	213.96	327.55	114.30
wa	7	0.06	2818.00	1055.73	1239.81	492.00
lrru	7	0.10	1152.50	269.19	450.14	28.50
sp	7	45.00	3867.00	811.00	1364.06	231.00
wp	7	310.00	3358.00	1078.14	1078.84	669.00
gc	7	12,720.20	108,729.20	59,928.44	35,864.69	64,491.40
cr	7	73.00	100.00	89.29	10.26	90.00
hp	7	0.00	164.00	74.00	62.011	59.00
gl	7	3411.67	14,273.89	8022.78	4181.47	6443.32
p	7	0.00	25.00	4.43	9.14	1.00
epl	7	0.00	1234.00	309.14	443.60	150.00
hg	7	2.00	5.00	4.14	1.22	5.00
tp	7	288.00	445.00	400.14	56.78	426.00
ia	7	2.38 × ${10}^9$	4.26 × ${10}^{11}$	1.08 × ${10}^{11}$	1.52 × ${10}^{11}$	2.5 × ${10}^{10}$
rq	7	−0.40	1.90	1.04	0.73	1.00
cc	7	0.00	2.10	1.14	0.68	1.10
re	7	0.33	3.46	1.74	1.05	1.83
hc	7	518.67	7227.93	3161.16	2394.62	2666.02
lc	7	0.00	88.10	37.24	44.17	5.30
lge	7	0.00	80.90	35.70	41.95	5.40

presents the descriptive statistics for the indicators.

Table 5. Steps for calculating the composite index of international hydrogen competitiveness.

Step Name	Formula
1. Data standardization $\left(Y_{ij}\right)$	$Y_{ij}=\frac{X_{ij}-min\left(X_{ij}\right)}{max\left(X_i\right)-min\left(X_i\right)}$
2. Calculating information entropy $\left(E_j\right)$	$E_j=-\frac{1}{lnm}{\sum }_{i=1}^m{P}_{ij}ln{P}_{ij},P_{ij}=\frac{Y_{ij}}{{\sum }_{i=1}^m{Y}_{ij}}$
	When $P_{ij}=0,P_{ij}ln{P}_{ij}=0$
3. Calculation of the weights of the indicators $\left(W_j\right)$	$W_j=\frac{1-E_j}{k-{\sum }_{j=1}^m{E}_j},{\sum }_{j=1}^m{W}_j=1$
4. Calculation of the composite index (IndexScore)	IndexScore $={\sum }_{i=1}^n{W}_i{C}_i,$ IndexScore $\in [0,1]$

presents the calculation concepts and formulas for the composite index of international hydrogen competitiveness.

In this study, the entropy weight method, an objective weighting approach, was employed to determine the weights of the five indicators. The data were standardized to calculate the information entropy and weights of each indicator, and the scores were subsequently computed.

Table 6. Information entropy and weights of indicators.

Primary Indicator	Secondary Indicator	Information	Weight
Potential resources	Land area (la)	0.673	0.006
	Gas production (gp)	−1.559	0.045
	Water capacity (wa)	−1.744	0.049
	Local renewable resource utilisation (ru)	−1.460	0.044
	Solar potential (sp)	−1.513	0.045
	Wind energy potential (wp)	−1.505	0.044
Economic and	GDP per capita (gc)	−1.954	0.052
financial base	Credit rating (cr)	−2.051	0.054
	Hydrogen project (hp)	−1.952	0.052
Infrastructure	Geographical location (gl)	−2.002	0.053
	Ports (p)	−1.158	0.038
	Length of existing pipeline (pel)	−1.704	0.048
Government support and	Hydrogen policy (hp)	−2.074	0.054
institutional environment	Trading partners (tp)	−2.109	0.055
	Investment attractiveness (ia)	−1.681	0.048
	Regulatory quality (rq)	−2.114	0.055
	Corruption control (cc)	−2.104	0.055
Technological feasibility	R&D expenditure (re)	−1.977	0.053
	Human capital (hc)	−1.953	0.052
	LNG liquefaction capacity (llc)	−1.734	0.048
	LNG exports (le)	−1.742	0.049

presents the information entropy and weights of each indicator.

2.4. Summary

This section introduces a novel hydrogen international competitiveness index which takes into account five key factors: potential resources, economic and financial base, infrastructure, government support and institutional environment, and technological feasibility. Seven representative countries were selected for the study. By calculating and analyzing the information entropy and weights of each index using the entropy weight method, the degree of influence of each of the five indicators on the composite index can be visually demonstrated.

3. Results and Discussion

This section commences with an in-depth examination of the composite index, followed by a comparison of differences in country scores under different primary indicators as well as the gaps in different countries for the same indicator. These results can provide policymakers with valuable insights to inform the development of more targeted and efficacious policies and strategies. The aim is to further enhance the development of the hydrogen industry and its competitiveness in the international market. This study can help countries to more deeply understand the current situation of their hydrogen industry while providing useful references and lessons for international exchanges and cooperation in the hydrogen industry.

3.1. Comparison and Analysis of Composite Indices

Our model calculates that the USA ranks first, with a score of 0.75, followed by Australia in second place with a score of 0.61. Norway holds the third position with a score of 0.49. China holds the fourth position with a score of 0.34, while the UAE, Qatar, and Chile rank fifth, sixth, and seventh, with scores of 0.33, 0.27, and 0.24, respectively.

Table 7. International hydrogen competitiveness composite index scores for the seven countries.

Country	Composite Index
U.S.	0.75
Australia	0.61
Norway	0.49
China	0.34
UAE	0.33
Qatar	0.27
Chile	0.24

presents the hydrogen industry competitiveness of each country in the form of a composite index score. Figure 3 provides a visual representation of the composite index for each of the seven countries.

In terms of data, the USA and Australia rank highest, with composite indices that are roughly twice the median, indicating their strong competitiveness. This can be attributed to high scores on the economic and financial base, government support and institutional environment, and technological feasibility indicators, all of which surpass those of the other five countries. Norway, China, and the UAE rank in the middle of the pack. While Norway’s score lags significantly behind the top two countries due to its lower technological feasibility, it maintains an advantage over the bottom four countries in terms of its economic and financial base as well as its government support and institutional environment, with no major deficiencies. China and the UAE each have only one notable weakness. Qatar and Chile, which rank sixth and seventh, respectively, do not have significant indicators of weakness; however, their composite scores are lower than those of the other five countries because both countries have more weaknesses compared to the others. Qatar scores the lowest on potential resources as well as on government support and institutional environment, while Chile scores the lowest on economic and financial base, infrastructure, and technological feasibility, resulting in a lower competitiveness index than the average of the seven countries.

The high rankings of the United States, Australia, and Norway align with the findings of Hjeij [2] and Johnston [19]. This can be attributed to the fact that the United States and Australia, as nations with advanced economies and forward-thinking policies, have been proactive in recognizing the crucial role of hydrogen in future decarbonization efforts and have initiated early planning and deployment. However, Qatar’s higher score on technical feasibility contradicts Hjeji’s findings [11]. This discrepancy may be explained by Qatar’s increased research and development expenditure, substantial investments in carbon capture and methane pyrolysis, and leading position in liquefaction capacity compared to the other six countries over the past two years, resulting in a higher technical feasibility score.

3.2. Analysis of Competitiveness Primary Indicators

3.2.1. National Dimension

This section compares the performance of each country horizontally in terms of potential resources, economic and financial base, infrastructure, government support and institutional environment, and technological feasibility based on their scores across the primary indicators. It is possible to comprehensively assess the current status and differences in the development of hydrogen competitiveness in each country. Figure 4 and Figure 5 illustrate the distribution of the different countries’ scores on the primary indicators.

When analyzing the USA’s hydrogen international competitiveness scores on the five primary indicators, it is evident that the highest score is found on the indicator of government support and institutional environment, while the lowest score is observed on the infrastructure indicator. The US has a developed economy with diverse heterogeneous species, frequent trade activities, participation in several free trade organizations, and a leading number of trading partners among the seven countries. In terms of investment attractiveness, the US traditionally believes in liberal economic principles and less government intervention in economic activities. With its complete infrastructure, superior investment environment, and high administrative efficiency, the overall business environment leads to the world’s largest absorption of foreign investment. However, the country is at a disadvantage due to its relatively far distance from the international demand markets for hydrogen in Asia and Europe, resulting in a lower score on the infrastructure indicator.

Australia achieves the highest score on the indicator of government support and institutional environment, while scoring the lowest on potential resources. This can be attributed to Australia being the first country worldwide to introduce a renewable energy target (RET) [121]. Moreover, Australia participates in several multilateral trade agreements and currently maintains an open economy characterized by low tariffs, frequent trade, and numerous trading partners. In terms of investment attractiveness, state and federal government agencies such as the Australian Renewable Energy Agency have made specific funding commitments for hydrogen technology demonstration projects and feasibility studies, which are currently contributing to increased capital flows into the clean energy sector. In 2020, an Australian research organization called for governments, universities, and businesses to join forces to attract overseas capital to invest in Australia. Initiatives such as these serve to enhance Australia’s investment attractiveness [122]. Furthermore, Australia’s transparent regulatory environment and strong governance against corruption contribute to its high score on the government support and institutional environment indicator. However, Australia’s relatively low gas production, ranking seventh among the world’s top ten gas producers in 2022, influences its score on the potential resources indicator.

Norway, similar to Australia, attains the highest scores on indicators for government support and institutional environment. However, it ranks lowest on the potential resources indicator. This can be attributed to Norway’s limited geographical area and constrained solar resource potential due to its high latitude, resulting in short days, long nights, and reduced daylight hours, particularly during the winter months. Despite these challenges, the Norwegian government has prioritized the development of hydrogen in recent years. In 2018, the Norwegian Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Center was inaugurated, and the government has since released a national hydrogen strategy. Norway actively seeks collaboration with the private sector in the hydrogen industry and aims to establish five hydrogen centers in the maritime transport sector by 2025, leveraging the country’s convenient maritime transport and numerous trading partners. In late 2023, Norway and 22 EU countries signed a letter of intent pledging to support the development of the European value chain, with a particular focus on green hydrogen, and to invest billions of euros in this initiative. It is worth noting that Norway’s attention to anti-corruption is only marginally lower than that of Australia. Thus, Norway achieved the highest scores on government support and institutional environment indicators.

China achieves the highest score on the potential resources indicator but ranks lowest on the economic and financial base indicator. This can be attributed to China’s vast land area and abundant water resources. Although coal resources are currently utilized as the primary energy source for ensuring energy security, China is one of the most abundant countries worldwide in terms of solar energy potential, with areas rich in solar energy resources accounting for two thirds of the country’s total area, providing favorable conditions for solar energy utilization. Additionally, China’s extensive coastline and significant monsoon winds contribute to its relatively abundant wind energy resources, with the cumulative installed capacity of wind energy ranking among the highest globally, resulting in China’s top score on the potential resource indicator. Despite having the world’s second-largest economy, China’s large population and relatively low per capita GDP lead to a lower score on the economic and financial base indicator.

The UAE achieves the highest score on the government support and institutional environment indicator and the lowest on the potential resources indicator. As a financial, trade, logistics, tourism, and merchandise distribution center in the Middle East, the UAE has a free trade policy and ranks first among the seven countries in terms of its total number of trading partners. Simultaneously, the UAE is focusing on accelerating its energy transition. As early as 2008, when international oil prices peaked, the UAE deployed an energy transition strategy, committing to building the world’s first country to achieve zero carbon and zero waste standards. In October 2021, the UAE put forward the UAE Net Zero 2050 [123], becoming the first oil-producing country in the Middle East to announce a carbon neutral strategy. The UAE officially launched its National Hydrogen Strategy in July 2022 to promote the convergence of the hydrogen, gas, and electricity industries. The UAE’s low score on the potential resources indicator is attributed to its small size, limited total renewable inland freshwater resources, an energy mix that is currently dominated by hydrocarbon resources, and a relatively low rate of renewable energy generation.

Qatar achieves the highest score on the technological feasibility indicator and the lowest score on the potential resources indicator. Qatar possesses abundant gas resources, boasting the world’s third-largest gas reserves [124]. The country has established several LNG production lines and constructed four LNG projects, solidifying its position as the global leader in gas liquefaction capacity, resulting in the highest score among all indicators for technological feasibility. However, similar to most Gulf countries, Qatar faces scarcity of both land and freshwater resources, leading to the lowest score on the potential resources indicator.

Chile scores highest on the government support and institutional environment indicator and the lowest on the technological feasibility indicator. This can be attributed to Chile’s announcement of a long-awaited National Green Hydrogen Strategy in 2020, dedicated to the development of a green hydrogen industry. The country has implemented active fiscal and monetary policies to support private sector development and create a favorable regulatory environment. However, as a typical externally-oriented economy, Chile is highly dependent on imports of important energy products such as oil and natural gas. It has a weak liquefaction capacity and has been hampered by energy shortages. Furthermore, Chile spends the least on R&D compared to the other seven countries, resulting in its having the highest score on the government support and institutional environment indicator and the lowest on the technological feasibility indicator.

3.2.2. Primary Indicators Dimension

In this section, the primary indicators are used as analysis items to compare the scores of countries. This analysis provides an in-depth discussion of the differences in the current state of the hydrogen industry of the seven countries. The analysis reveals that each country possesses unique advantages and disadvantages, offering valuable lessons and insights for other countries to consider. Figure 6 presents a comparison of countries’ scores using the primary indicators as the analytical items.

The USA scores highest on the potential resources indicator, while Qatar and the UAE score lowest. This disparity can be attributed to the vast land area of the USA and its abundance of water and solar energy resources. In contrast, Qatar, as the smallest of the seven countries in terms of land area and being located in a desert region, suffers from a severe lack of water resources. The same size constraints result in its solar potential being significantly lower than that of the other seven countries, explaining its low score. The UAE also has a smaller land area compared to the remaining five countries, and has the fewest wind resources of the seven, contributing to its low score on potential resources.

The US achieves the highest score on the economic and financial base indicator, while Chile ranks the lowest. As the world’s largest developed economy with a leading GDP per capita, the US has allocated USD 7 billion in government funding to establish seven regional hydrogen centers across the country [103]. This investment has catalyzed the construction of several hydrogen projects and accelerated the development of a clean hydrogen market in the US. In contrast, Chile’s monolithic economic structure, weak industrial base, and poor external solvency place its credit at the bottom of the list among the seven countries, resulting in the lowest score.

Australia scores the highest on the infrastructure indicator, while Chile scores the lowest. As the most economically developed country in the southern hemisphere, Australia is the fourth-largest exporter of agriculture and the world’s largest exporter of a wide range of minerals. This significant international trade impact has led to the construction of numerous ports and an increased demand for natural gas, which continues to drive the planning and construction of gas pipelines. In contrast, Chile, located in South America, is the furthest away from the main hydrogen demand centers compared to the other five countries, resulting in the lowest scores on the infrastructure indicator.

Australia scores on the indicators of government support and institutional environment the highest, while Qatar scores the lowest. Since 2016, the Australian government has conducted hydrogen supply demonstration projects with Japan and South Korea and released a National Hydrogen Roadmap. In 2019, the government enacted the National Hydrogen Strategy, aiming to establish Australia as one of the top three hydrogen export bases in Asia, fostering a favorable policy environment for the development of the hydrogen industry. Moreover, Australia ranks 19th in Doing Business 2020, boasting a transparent and fair regulatory environment. Its zero tolerance policy for corruption also contributes to its having the highest score in corruption governance among the seven countries. As a leading LNG exporter, Qatar’s energy development focus remains on the gas industry, with less need for hydrogen compared to the other five countries. Currently, Qatar is planning to use hydrogen as a “backup” to provide energy for the country and has only entered into agreements to pursue the development of the hydrogen industry. Furthermore, Qatar’s low share of the world market and limited number of trading partners, excepting the oil and gas trade, result in its having the lowest score on the government support and institutional environment indicator.

The USA scored the highest on the technical feasibility indicator, while Chile scored the lowest. The mature market system and fierce competition in the US have led to the enhancement of human capital quality. Since 2021, the US government has focused on restructuring and optimizing its science and technology talent competition policy, which outlines provisions for creating a high quality and innovative talent system while increasing investment in human capital. Moreover, the US is rich in gas resources, and its LNG exports rank first among the seven countries, contributing to its having the highest score on the technical feasibility indicator. In contrast, Chile’s economy is based on four pillars: mining, forestry, fishing, and agriculture. It has the lowest GDP among the seven countries, and invests less in R&D compared to the other five. Chile’s gas resources are scarce, and it relies heavily on imports for its LNG needs. Consequently, its low scores on the liquefaction capacity and LNG export indicators result in the lowest technical feasibility scores compared to the remaining five countries.

3.3. Measures to Promote International Hydrogen Competitiveness

Taking the above analyses into account, this subsection proposes policy recommendations for these seven countries, as well as other countries with similarities to them, with regard to the characteristics of the different countries.

The US Department of Energy should collaborate with universities and research institutions to advance hydrogen technologies, while states should develop policy incentives that cater to local hydrogen industry needs. The US should sustain investments in research and development and hydrogen infrastructure to facilitate the transition from fossil fuels. Emphasis should be placed on developing cost-effective methods for hydrogen production and storage, optimizing manufacturing processes, and ensuring the reliability and safety of mature technologies. Additionally, projects should maintain the coherence and synergy needed to position green hydrogen as a central component of the US energy transition.

The Australian government can encourage community investment in hydrogen by implementing replenishment schemes through ammonia, mobility, and steel projects. It should also actively target hydrogen demand markets in Asia and Europe by allocating funds for potential storage sites and hydrogen transport infrastructure, and by strengthening trade ties with North American hydrogen markets.

Norway can decarbonize its offshore activities by producing blue hydrogen and utilizing its abundant electricity from hydroelectric and onshore wind power sources. As most of its rivers are already fully utilized, Norwegian policymakers should consider investing in offshore wind projects, supporting ongoing research, and aiding hydrogen producers in collaboration with transport and maritime sectors. Such initiatives would enhance the affordability and security of hydrogen supply and contribute to the growth of the hydrogen industry.

Chinese policymakers should leverage the country’s green hydrogen strengths and resources in the western region to support the hydrogen industry. Adhering to the green hydrogen orientation, following blue–green peer-to-peer and grey hydrogen exit principles, and developing a sound international trade chain for hydrogen are essential. Policymakers should also establish offtake contracts with hydrogen-exporting countries to distribute imported hydrogen in high demand areas. Additionally, China should engage in international technology exchanges and work towards increasing GDP per capita as a way to garner public support for the hydrogen industry.

The UAE should expand renewable energy production, incorporate desalination and petrochemicals into the use and promotion of clean energy, and develop large-scale conversion facilities. Corporate power purchasing agreements for renewable energy from SMEs should be established, along with price support mechanisms such as net metering, feed-in tariffs, real-time pricing, and capacity credits. The government should also initiate a hydrogen accelerator project to build electrolyzers for clean fuel production.

The Government of Qatar should formulate a clear national strategy to promote local hydrogen production and utilization, reduce legislative and administrative barriers, and expedite the implementation of regulations to support the hydrogen economy in urban areas. Tax incentives and standardization initiatives should be introduced to create a regulatory ecosystem conducive to hydrogen production, storage, transport, and use.

Chilean policymakers can leverage the country’s renewable energy strengths to scale up green hydrogen production. The focus should be on developing a hydrogen supply chain and optimizing the economy, working with technologists to establish large-scale carbon capture, storage and utilization facility plants, and building solar thermal power plants and megawatt-scale electrolyzer plants in the country. Chile should develop a hydrogen roadmap tailored to its energy development needs and promote trade exemptions to expand the hydrogen industry’s impact on the industrial, construction, transportation, and power sectors.

Overall, all countries should leverage their advantages and address the shortcomings of the hydrogen industry while strengthening international exchanges and cooperation to promote the healthy and orderly development of the global hydrogen industry. Figure 7 illustrates measures for promoting international hydrogen competitiveness for the seven countries.

3.4. Summary

Based on our comparative analysis of the indices, this section concludes that the US ranks highest. An examination of the country-specific dimensions reveals that the US, Australia, and Norway achieve superior scores on government support and institutional environment, China demonstrates a significant advantage in potential resources, and Qatar excels in technological feasibility. The primary indicator analysis indicates that the US holds a favorable position in potential resources, economic and financial base, and technological feasibility, while Australia possesses considerable advantages in government support and institutional environment, and infrastructure. This section concludes by offering targeted recommendations for these seven countries and other nations with similar national circumstances.

4. Conclusions

As hydrogen is considered to be the main source of energy for industry, countries lacking hydrogen due to insufficient renewable energy sources must considering importing it. Each country has its own focus and development strategy based on different resource endowments, economic volumes, policy environments, infrastructures, and technological conditions. Establishing a comprehensive open-source model for assessing the hydrogen international competitiveness is particularly important.

This study selected seven representative countries to build an open-source model comparing their international hydrogen competitiveness. The results show that the world’s strong international hydrogen competitiveness is mainly concentrated in developed countries such as the USA and Australia. Chile scores relatively low on the indicators of economic and financial foundation, infrastructure, and technological feasibility, indicating more room for development.

This study has also discussed hydrogen strategies in different countries. The index setting takes into account countries’ potential resources, economic and financial base, infrastructure, government support and institutional environment, and technological feasibility. The significance of this study lies in its ability to lay the groundwork for other countries that share the same strengths and weaknesses as the seven countries reviewed here in order to formulate hydrogen policies for developing renewable energy. It provides strategic decision-making inputs for countries seeking to gain a foothold in future energy competition and have a greater voice. The results emphasize the importance of synergizing policy support and national capacity assurance for the development of a competitive hydrogen economy. By implementing policy recommendations and strengthening international cooperation, countries can contribute to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and effectively achieve their energy transition and climate goals. Overall, this study successfully addresses the research questions and objectives of the theme, providing a comprehensive framework, and offering valuable guidance for policymakers in addressing the complexity of the emerging hydrogen economy.

Future research will need to focus on categorizing and classifying all countries worldwide in order to establish a hydrogen production–demand matching system. This will involve designing a global hydrogen market framework to facilitate efficient hydrogen commodity exchanges, creating target models, and assessing the hydrogen market size and resource flows. Such an approach will provide a more comprehensive analysis and decision-making framework for the development of the hydrogen industry and hydrogen trade in different types of countries. As most of the current data used in this study are from 2021, newer data will be necessary to optimize the model. Therefore, future research will involve incorporating more indicators as well as including detailed data on cost changes following technological developments, production costs, energy subsidies, interventions in the built environment and energy-intensive industries, roads, grids, and other relevant parameters. Additionally, geopolitical and non-economic factors will need to be considered. More data and indicators on hydrogen market dynamics should be added to improve the existing models. New methods should also be employed in future studies. For instance, a techno-economic bottom-up approach could be used to investigate future hydrogen demand. Furthermore, a combination of a multi-level perspective framework and an exploratory scenario framework could be utilized to analyze the key factors influencing the development of the hydrogen export industry in major participating countries in the hydrogen market, paired with an intuitive logic approach to the study.