Since Japan promulgated the world’s first national hydrogen strategy in 2017, 28 national (or regional, in the case of the EU) hydrogen strategies have been issued by major world economies. As carbon emissions vary with different types of hydrogen, and only green hydrogen produced from renewable energy can be zero-emissions fuel, this paper interrogates the commitment of the national hydrogen strategies to achieve decarbonization objectives, focusing on the question “how green are the national hydrogen strategies?” We create a typology of regulatory stringency for green hydrogen in national hydrogen strategies, analyzing the text of these strategies and their supporting policies, and evaluating their regulatory stringency toward decarbonization. Our typology includes four parameters, fossilfuel penalties, hydrogen certifications, innovation enablement, and the temporal dimension of coal phasing out. Following the typology, we categorize the national hydrogen strategies into three groups: zero regulatory stringency, scale first and clean later, and green hydrogen now. We find that most national strategies are of the type “scale first and clean later”, with one or more regulatory measures in place. This article identifies further challenges to enhancing regulatory stringency for green hydrogen at both national and international levels.

No abstract

China’s Belt and Road Initiative is now the world’s largest infrastructure initiative, with long-term climate change effects, and the Green Investment Principles for Belt and Road (GIPs) have been promoted as a key instrument to green the Belt and Road. This article focuses on the question: What role do the GIPs play in building a green Belt and Road and addressing relevant regulatory challenges? Based on the theory of nodal governance, it is argued that the GIPs’ two-layered networks facilitate China to influence investment decisions over many countries along the Belt and Road indirectly through fund providers as key nodes to transition toward green investment. China also avoided direct interference with the domestic policies of host countries through the GIP network. As a framework agreement, the GIPs also provide opportunities for signatories to contribute to the design and negotiation of specific implementation standards, enhanced capacity building, and the prospect of more stringent and prescriptive environmental standards in the future.

No abstract

No abstract