Green hydrogen is usually discussed in terms of production, infrastructure, cost, and demand. But international hydrogen markets also depend on something less visible: whether companies can trust the organizations they work with, the sustainability claims attached to the product, and the information moving through the supply chain. That was the focus of a recent Net Zero Compare conversation with Dr. Lisa Drees, a postdoctoral scientist at Ruhr University Bochum. Her research examines platform-based ecosystem governance, trust between traditional and digital firms, and trust in global green hydrogen supply chains.

Her central point is that digital traceability can support trust, but it cannot replace the conditions that make trust possible in the first place. Regulation, common standards, reliable data, infrastructure, commercial relationships, and clear governance all matter. Technology can improve how information is stored, shared, and assessed, but it cannot compensate for an immature market or unreliable inputs.

🎥 Watch the Full Interview: In the full Net Zero Compare interview, Dr. Lisa Drees explains why trust remains one of the less visible challenges in emerging hydrogen supply chains. The conversation covers digital traceability, standards, verification, cooperation between companies, infrastructure uncertainty, and the tension between transparency and commercial confidentiality. Watching the full discussion provides additional context on how these issues interact in practice and why digital tools need to be considered alongside governance and real-world business relationships.

Why Trust Matters in an Emerging Hydrogen Market

Trust becomes necessary when companies have to make decisions under uncertainty, and hydrogen remains a market with many unresolved questions. Companies are still trying to determine how much hydrogen will be needed, which applications will drive demand, where production will take place, how hydrogen will be transported, and which infrastructure projects will actually move forward. Funding and policy decisions can also change the economics of a project before the supply chain is fully established.

Drees' research distinguishes between these broader market uncertainties and the more specific trust questions that arise between individual organizations. Before companies can rely heavily on sophisticated digital trust systems, there first needs to be enough certainty that the underlying supply chain will exist. Production, infrastructure, transport routes, buyers, financing, and demand all need to develop alongside the digital systems intended to support them.

International Supply Chains Add Another Layer of Uncertainty

International hydrogen markets can connect companies that have never worked together and may be located thousands of kilometers apart. A producer in Australia, for example, could eventually supply hydrogen to an industrial buyer in Germany. The two companies may have no shared history and limited opportunity for direct interaction, which makes it harder to judge whether the other party is reliable.

Businesses therefore look for signals such as previous projects, reputation, demonstrated expertise, certifications, contractual protections, and direct personal contact. Digital technology can support that process by carrying information between organizations, but it does not remove the importance of the organizations behind the data. That is especially true while the market is still developing, when conferences, workshops, direct meetings, and industry networks remain important for identifying partners and building relationships before long-term supply chains are fully established.

No Single Technology Can Solve the Trust Problem

Drees' research suggests that hydrogen supply chains are unlikely to have one digital solution that addresses every trust issue. Different technologies serve different purposes. Traceability systems can help companies understand the origin and characteristics of hydrogen, digital certificates can provide evidence behind sustainability claims, and distributed ledgers can make recorded information more difficult to alter. Digital twins and scenario-planning tools can also help companies model infrastructure, supply, and demand under different assumptions.

This approach is explored in more detail in a paper co-authored by Drees, The Role of IS in Trust Building: Affordances for the Global Hydrogen Supply Chain. Based on interviews with hydrogen supply-chain experts in Germany and Australia, the researchers identify five areas where information systems can support trust: transparency and traceability, economic risk coordination, scenario planning, knowledge sharing and learning, and communication.

These functions reflect the broader challenge facing the market. Hydrogen supply chains bring together established industrial companies, startups, researchers, infrastructure operators, and technology providers with different kinds of expertise and different information needs. For that reason, Drees and her research colleagues are exploring the broader idea of a trust management system rather than assuming that one technology can solve the whole problem.

Traceability Depends on the Quality of the Underlying Data

One of the clearest limits of digital sustainability systems is the difference between protecting data and proving that the data was correct in the first place. A blockchain-based system may make stored information difficult to change after it has been recorded, but that does not prove that the original information was accurate. Companies still need to understand where the information came from, who supplied it, what expertise or track record that organization has, and what verification process supports the claim.

This becomes particularly important when companies are trying to prove that hydrogen is renewable or low-carbon. Relevant data may include the source of electricity, production process, emissions, origin, and other sustainability attributes. Without agreed definitions, formats, and calculation methods, companies can produce different results even when they appear to be reporting the same thing. The same problem already appears in broader sustainability reporting, where organizations may calculate avoided emissions or other environmental indicators using different assumptions and methodologies. Standard formulas, inputs, definitions, and reporting structures would make hydrogen claims easier to assess and compare.

More Data Does Not Automatically Mean Better Transparency

Transparency is not simply a matter of collecting as much information as possible. If companies upload large volumes of data without clear rules about what matters, users may find it harder rather than easier to evaluate a sustainability claim. Useful transparency depends on structure, consistency, and relevance.

Companies need agreement on which attributes should be reported, how they should be measured, what evidence is required, and how the information should be presented. This is why common standards matter so much in emerging sustainability markets. A digital platform can organize information, but it still needs an agreed framework for what that information means and how users should interpret it.

Technology Cannot Replace Governance and Business Relationships

There are different views on whether technologies such as blockchain create trust or make trust unnecessary. In theory, an immutable record can reduce certain types of uncertainty because information cannot easily be changed after it has been entered. But that solves only one part of the problem. If there is no common standard for what should be entered, the system can preserve inaccurate or incomplete information just as effectively as accurate information.

The people and organizations behind the technology therefore still matter. Hydrogen markets remain relationship-driven, and companies want to know who they are entering into contracts with, whether the other party has relevant experience, and whether that organization is likely to meet its commitments. Digital tools can strengthen those relationships by improving access to information and reducing specific risks, but they do not make governance, verification, or direct commercial relationships unnecessary.

Cooperation Currently Matters More Than Competition

Hydrogen supply chains are likely to involve producers, technology companies, logistics providers, traders, infrastructure operators, certification organizations, and industrial buyers. Many of those organizations may eventually compete while also needing to cooperate. Drees initially expected to see more of this tension in her hydrogen research, but the current market appears to show relatively strong cooperation.

One reason is that many participants recognize that the market still needs to become more established before competition becomes the dominant concern. Companies need infrastructure, financing, policy certainty, demand, and successful large-scale projects before they can compete aggressively for market share. For now, many organizations are more focused on helping the wider market develop, although that balance is likely to shift as hydrogen supply chains mature.

Transparency and Confidentiality Have to Be Balanced

Even when companies see value in data sharing, they still have legitimate reasons to protect commercially sensitive information. Too little disclosure can make sustainability claims difficult to verify, while too much can expose valuable business data and discourage companies from participating in shared systems. There is unlikely to be one ideal level of transparency for every participant because producers, buyers, technology providers, intermediaries, regulators, and certification bodies may all have different views on what should be shared.

That makes governance essential. Regulators and industry participants will need to determine which information is genuinely necessary for certification and sustainability purposes while allowing companies to protect data that is not required for those objectives. The same issue also connects to broader debates around digital sovereignty and control over commercially important data, particularly as more business-critical information moves through shared digital platforms.

Common Standards Are Essential for an International Market

Standards and regulation came up repeatedly in the conversation because international hydrogen markets need a shared understanding of what qualifies as renewable or low-carbon hydrogen, what information should accompany it, how emissions should be calculated, and what type of certification should be accepted. Without that common framework, different markets can develop incompatible systems that add administrative work without improving trust or comparability.

Drees pointed to sustainable mobility as an example. Countries can implement European requirements using different data attributes or formats, which limits interoperability even when the systems are intended to serve the same broader objective. A similar situation in hydrogen could create substantial inefficiencies. Because hydrogen is expected to move across borders, producing and importing countries will need certification and data systems that can work together. Technology can carry the information, but it cannot decide what information should count.

What Corporate Buyers Should Ask Suppliers

For procurement and sustainability teams, the discussion also produced several practical questions. The first is whether there is credible evidence supporting the environmental characteristics of the hydrogen being purchased. That could include certification or another form of documented proof showing why a product qualifies as renewable or low-carbon. The specific technology used to provide that evidence matters less than whether the evidence itself can be trusted.

Buyers should also examine the supplier's previous experience, including relevant projects, expertise, previous customers, and a track record in hydrogen or related industries. Contract terms matter as well because hydrogen markets are still developing and prices or market conditions may change substantially between signing an agreement and receiving the product. Drees highlighted the potential value of contractual mechanisms that recognize that uncertainty and distribute risk in ways that support wider market participation. Taken together, these factors show why procurement decisions cannot be reduced to checking whether a supplier has a sustainability certificate.

Physical Infrastructure Comes Before Digital Traceability

Digital systems cannot trace a supply chain that does not yet exist. Hydrogen requires production facilities, energy inputs, ports, pipelines or other transportation systems, storage, buyers, and long-term investment. If companies do not know which countries will supply hydrogen, which ports will handle it, how much demand will materialize, or which projects will receive financing, there is a limit to what digital tools can accomplish.

This has already affected technology providers entering the hydrogen market. Some startups developed platforms or traceability tools based on expectations that hydrogen supply chains would scale relatively quickly. When infrastructure development, funding, or demand moved more slowly, those technologies had fewer opportunities for real-world deployment. The tools may still prove useful later, but their value depends heavily on the timing and maturity of the market.

Political and Funding Uncertainty Remain Major Barriers

Political priorities can shift, changing the level of support for renewable energy and hydrogen projects. Funding can be reduced or delayed, and large infrastructure projects can fail to move forward as expected. Those developments affect the entire market, from startups waiting for customers to infrastructure operators deciding whether to commit capital.

Buyers may also postpone procurement decisions if they are uncertain about regulation, supply, or availability. For companies developing digital technology for hydrogen, this creates a particular problem because they may have functioning software but no mature supply chain in which to deploy it. In that sense, technology readiness and market readiness do not necessarily move at the same speed.

The Same Technology Can Serve Other Sustainability Use Cases

The slower development of hydrogen markets does not necessarily make these technologies irrelevant. Many of the same capabilities, including traceability, verification, data exchange, and product-level sustainability information, can be useful elsewhere. Drees pointed to areas such as deforestation requirements, recycled plastics, and digital product passports as examples where similar technologies could potentially be applied.

For technology providers, designing systems that can be adapted across different regulatory and sustainability use cases may reduce dependence on the timing of one emerging market. That can be particularly useful when the technology is ready before its original target market and when similar traceability or reporting requirements already exist elsewhere.

Conclusion

Digital certificates, distributed ledgers, traceability platforms, digital twins, and other systems can make hydrogen information easier to share, protect, and assess. Their usefulness, however, depends on credible data, common standards, physical infrastructure, clear rules, and organizations willing to participate. A technically strong system will still fall short if the underlying market, data, or governance framework is not ready.

For business decision-makers, the practical lesson is to look beyond the technology itself. Hydrogen traceability still depends on reliable inputs, comparable methodologies, credible suppliers, appropriate certification, and governance that defines what information should be shared. International hydrogen markets will develop only if those elements move forward together, and the harder task may be creating a market in which the available digital tools can actually be used effectively.