Author
Abstract
We evaluate six major clean-hydrogen policy interventions across four jurisdictions (US 45Q, US 45V three-pillars NPRM, EU Innovation Fund, EU CBAM, UK Track-1, China 14th Five-Year Plan) using a project-level panel of 1,354 announced hydrogen developments from the S&P Global Hydrogen Project Database (2010-2026). Treatment effects on cumulative cancellation probability are estimated using modern difference-in-differences estimators (Sun-Abraham IW, Borusyak-Jaravel-Spiess imputation, IPWRA matching, Synthetic DiD, Causal Forests, and Deaner-Ku hazard DiD) and accompanied by Rambachan-Roth honest-sensitivity bounds. Three substantive findings emerge. First, the magnitude ranking of policy effects (China 14th FYP > US 45Q > UK Track-1 > EU Innovation Fund) systematically follows the number of economic frictions each instrument addresses, not the per-unit monetary value of the subsidy. The China FYP estimate of -4.5 percentage points (honest-DiD breakdown M* = 1.5) exceeds the US 45Q estimate of -3.4 percentage points (M* = 0.2) despite comparable per-unit subsidy value, consistent with multi-friction mechanism dominance. Second, two informative nulls are identified: the EU Innovation Fund produces a precise null across six convergent estimators, and the EU CBAM produces a precise null across eight convergent estimators. The substantive interpretation is that the financing-constraint friction is not binding in the contemporary capital-abundant hydrogen environment, and that border-adjustment transmission to project-level investment decisions is weak in the early-implementation phase. Third, the US 45V three-pillars NPRM triple-difference estimate of +0.285 on US-Green cancellation hazard identifies friction amplification by policy design - the cleanest empirical test of perverse-direction sigma-channel effects in the sample. The methodological contribution is a pre-registered mechanism-falsifiability framework that disciplines mechanism interpretation against post-hoc rationalisation, combined with multi-method triangulation that strengthens both confirmatory and informative-null inferences. The policy implication is that reform of capex-grant instruments such as the EU Innovation Fund should incorporate offtake-commitment eligibility requirements, jointly addressing both financing and counterparty-risk frictions.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
Keywords
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
JEL classification:
- C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
- C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
- Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
- Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
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:pra:mprapa:129309. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.