IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v206y2025ics0301421525002708.html

Limited scientific evidence for decarbonization of energy end-uses and the challenges to learning and empowerment of green hydrogen niches - insights from Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Aguilar, F. Ignacio
  • Hoicka, Christina E.
  • Seifitokaldani, Ali

Abstract

Supporting inappropriate uses for hydrogen can delay climate action and decarbonization efforts should limit hydrogen to difficult-to-electrify end-uses. The introduction of novel green hydrogen niches to markets requires learning about which end-uses are appropriate for hydrogen and the empowerment of these niches. This work identifies and collates scientific evidence of when to use hydrogen over electrification of end-uses. The hydrogen end-uses being empowered by legitimization through discourse and resource mobilization are assessed in investment advice, 11 government plans, and 47 policies in Canada. The findings confirm the inattention to when to electrify and when to use hydrogen, observed in the very limited scientific evidence of only two approaches to prioritization, the lack of harmonization between the approaches, and the lack of legitimization of this information. Although some hydrogen end-uses being empowered align with scientific evidence, the most appropriate set of hydrogen end-uses that could contribute to decarbonization are not being legitimized and empowered in Canada. More attention should be paid and resources allocated to developing and legitimizing robust and scientifically based evidence of when to electrify and when to use hydrogen for energy end-uses. This novel method is globally applicable to other emerging technologies and policy analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Aguilar, F. Ignacio & Hoicka, Christina E. & Seifitokaldani, Ali, 2025. "Limited scientific evidence for decarbonization of energy end-uses and the challenges to learning and empowerment of green hydrogen niches - insights from Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:206:y:2025:i:c:s0301421525002708
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2025.114763
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421525002708
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2025.114763?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    2. Droessler, Mark & Leach, Andrew, 2024. "Green with Envy? Hydrogen production in a carbon-constrained world," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    3. Bento, Nuno & Fontes, Margarida, 2019. "Emergence of floating offshore wind energy: Technology and industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 66-82.
    4. Lopolito, Antonio & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Sica, Edgardo, 2022. "The role of proximity in sustainability transitions: A technological niche evolution analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    5. Falko Ueckerdt & Christian Bauer & Alois Dirnaichner & Jordan Everall & Romain Sacchi & Gunnar Luderer, 2021. "Potential and risks of hydrogen-based e-fuels in climate change mitigation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(5), pages 384-393, May.
    6. Wenting Cheng & Sora Lee, 2022. "How Green Are the National Hydrogen Strategies?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-33, February.
    7. Plehwe, Dieter & Neujeffski, Moritz & Haas, Tobias, 2024. "Climate Obstruction in the European Union: Business Coalitions and the Technocracy of Delay," EconStor Open Access Book Chapters, in: Climate Obstruction across Europe, pages 320-346, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    8. Scholvin, Sören & Black, Anthony & Robbins, Glen, 2025. "De-risking green hydrogen? Insights from Chile and South Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    9. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    10. van Oorschot, Johannes A.W.H. & Hofman, Erwin & Halman, Johannes I.M., 2018. "A bibliometric review of the innovation adoption literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-21.
    11. Jordaan, Sarah M. & Romo-Rabago, Elizabeth & McLeary, Romaine & Reidy, Luke & Nazari, Jamal & Herremans, Irene M., 2017. "The role of energy technology innovation in reducing greenhouse gas emissions: A case study of Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1397-1409.
    12. Rosenbloom, Daniel & Berton, Harris & Meadowcroft, James, 2016. "Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1275-1290.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    2. Paula Kivimaa & Wouter Boon & Sampsa Hyysalo & Laurens Klerkx, 2017. "Towards a Typology of Intermediaries in Transitions: a Systematic Review," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    3. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    4. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    5. Almona Tani & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2020. "Policy Implications for the Clean Energy Transition: The Case of the Boston Area," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    7. Karoliina Isoaho & Jochen Markard, 2020. "The Politics of Technology Decline: Discursive Struggles over Coal Phase‐Out in the UK," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(3), pages 342-368, May.
    8. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    9. Gruber, Mario, 2020. "An evolutionary perspective on adoption-diffusion theory," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 535-541.
    10. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    11. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    12. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    13. Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2021. "A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: Regional differences in onshore wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Kejia Yang & Johan Schot & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Shaping the Directionality of Sustainability Transitions: The Diverging Development Patterns of Solar PV in Two Chinese Provinces," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    15. Berka, Anna L. & Hoicka, Christina E. & Sperling, Karl, 2025. "The political economics of civic energy: A framework for comparative research," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    16. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    17. Pel, Bonno & Raven, Rob & van Est, Rinie, 2020. "Transitions governance with a sense of direction: synchronization challenges in the case of the dutch ‘Driverless Car’ transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    18. Weiss, Daniel & Nemeczek, Fabian, 2021. "A text-based monitoring tool for the legitimacy and guidance of technological innovation systems," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    19. Khatoon, Tohmina & Kivimaa, Paula & Brisbois, Marie Claire & Saadi, Shah Abdul, 2024. "A global south perspective on the interplay between innovation policy mix and technological innovation systems dynamics: The case of Dhaka City's road passenger transport system," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    20. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics and neo-institutional theory," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:206:y:2025:i:c:s0301421525002708. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.