Article

Efficiency Measurement and Trend Analysis of the Hydrogen

Energy Industry Chain in China
Pengcheng Zhang 1,2, *, Boliang Lu 1 , Yijie Qu 1 , Haslindar Ibrahim 3, * and Hao Ding 2

1 School of Economics, Management, and Law, Shandong Institute of Petroleum and Chemical Technology,
Dongying 257000, China
2 School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Dongying 257099, China
3 School of Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Gelugor 118000, Malaysia
* Correspondence: 2001007@[Link] (P.Z.); haslindar@[Link] (H.I.); Tel.: +60-19-9370074 (H.I.)

Abstract: Hydrogen energy, characterized by its abundant resources, green and low-
carbon attributes, and wide-ranging applications, is a critical energy source for achieving
carbon peaking and carbon neutrality goals. The operational efficiency of the hydrogen
energy industrial chain is pivotal in determining the security of its supply chain and its
contribution to China’s energy transition. This study investigates the efficiency of China’s
hydrogen energy industrial chain by selecting 30 listed companies primarily engaged
in hydrogen energy as the research sample. A three-stage data envelopment analysis
(DEA) model is applied to assess the industry’s comprehensive technical efficiency, pure
technical efficiency, and scale efficiency. Additionally, kernel density estimation is utilized
to analyze efficiency trends over time. Key factors influencing efficiency are identified, and
targeted recommendations are provided to enhance the performance and sustainability of
the hydrogen energy industrial chain. These findings offer valuable insights to support the
development and resilience of China’s hydrogen energy industry.

Keywords: hydrogen energy chain; efficiency; three-stage DEA; kernel density estimation;
carbon neutrality

Academic Editors: Ruipeng Tan and 1. Introduction

Mengmeng Xu
Hydrogen energy, as a secondary energy source with abundant sources, zero-carbon
Received: 7 February 2025
emissions, and broad application potential, is an important component in the development
Revised: 24 March 2025
of a modern energy system, playing a pivotal role in establishing a new power system
Accepted: 28 March 2025
Published: 2 April 2025
dominated by renewable energy and facilitating the transition of energy-consuming sectors
toward green and low-carbon solutions. This is integral to building a clean, low-carbon, safe,
Citation: Zhang, P.; Lu, B.; Qu, Y.;
Ibrahim, H.; Ding, H. Efficiency
and efficient energy infrastructure and achieving the goals of carbon peaking and carbon
Measurement and Trend Analysis of neutrality. In response to global climate challenges, transitioning the energy structure
the Hydrogen Energy Industry Chain toward renewable sources is crucial for achieving sustainable energy development [1], with
in China. Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140. hydrogen energy serving as a key renewable energy source.
[Link]
Since 2018, China’s annual hydrogen output has consistently exceeded 20 million
Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. tons, showing a steady growth trajectory. In 2023, the yearly hydrogen production reached
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. 36.82 million tons. According to the China Hydrogen Energy Alliance, demand is projected
This article is an open access article
to reach 37.15 million tons by 2030. In addition, the China National Coal Association
distributed under the terms and
predicts that the hydrogen market is expected to expand significantly, with an estimated
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license
value of 754.2 billion yuan by 2050, highlighting substantial development opportunities.
([Link] The hydrogen energy industry is broadly divided into three segments: upstream
licenses/by/4.0/). hydrogen production, midstream hydrogen storage and transport, and downstream ap-

Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 [Link]

Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 2 of 28

plications (such as hydrogen refueling). Each link consists of a series of sub-sectors with
significant economic potential. According to the Ping An Securities Research Institute, by
2030, the market sizes for upstream production, midstream storage and transport, and
downstream applications are projected to reach 100 billion yuan, over 200 billion yuan,
and 1 trillion yuan, respectively, positioning the hydrogen energy sector as a major “blue
ocean” market.
Despite the promising outlook, key challenges persist. Many critical technologies
are still monopolized by foreign entities due to the stringent technical requirements, com-
plex production processes, and high costs of essential materials and equipment, as well
as significant technological gaps protected by strict intellectual property rights. At the
same time, the upstream hydrogen cannot be fully absorbed, while the downstream hy-
drogen remains insufficient, mainly due to the unresolved challenges related to hydrogen
storage and transportation. Therefore, it is particularly important to establish hydrogen
pipelines, connect upstream hydrogen production with downstream hydrogen produc-
tion, and simultaneously improve the efficiency of the upper, middle, and downstream
industry chains.
China currently lacks an adequate hydrogen storage and transportation network, and
downstream applications remain heavily focused on hydrogen fuel cells and their associ-
ated transport carriers. The scale and maturity of these applications are still limited, leaving
substantial room for development. Policy initiatives continue to accelerate the development
of green hydrogen. The Medium and Long-Term Plan for the Development of Hydrogen
Energy Industry (2021–2035), released in March 2022, defines the strategic positioning of
hydrogen energy in China’s future energy structure, sets phased development goals for the
hydrogen industry, and puts forward a range of application scenarios. This marks the first
national medium- and long-term plan for China’s hydrogen energy sector.
In August 2023, the National Standards Commission, along with the National Devel-
opment and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology,
the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, the Ministry of Emergency Management, and
the National Energy Administration, jointly issued the Guide to the Construction of the
Hydrogen Energy Industry Standard System (2023 version). This document systematically
establishes an industrial chain standard system covering hydrogen production, storage,
and transportation. It aims to raise the technical threshold for hydrogen energy prod-
ucts, reduce costs across the industrial chain, and promote high-quality development of
the hydrogen energy industry. This guide is China’s first national-level framework for
standardizing the hydrogen energy industry.
Given these opportunities and challenges, it is crucial to promote the effective and
orderly development of the hydrogen energy industry. To this end, this paper focuses
on China’s hydrogen energy industrial chain, particularly analyzing three key stages: up-
stream hydrogen production, midstream hydrogen storage and transportation (including
tankers and pipeline conveyance), and downstream hydrogen applications (such as fuel
cell systems and hydrogen refueling station construction). A three-stage data envelopment
analysis (DEA) model is employed to accurately measure the production efficiency across
the entire hydrogen energy industry chain and at each stage, providing a comprehensive
evaluation of actual production efficiency. Furthermore, kernel density estimation is used
to analyze trends in efficiency changes at each stage, offering precise policy support for
the development of the hydrogen energy industry. Finally, this study emphasizes that
addressing technological bottlenecks, optimizing the upstream, midstream, and down-
stream segments, and improving the efficiency of the entire hydrogen energy value chain
are essential for achieving high-quality industry development.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 3 of 28

2. Literature Review
Under the dual-carbon target, the development of the hydrogen energy industry
chain represents a strategic opportunity. While short-term issues, such as high costs and
inadequate infrastructure, continue to constrain industrial development, the hydrogen
energy sector is poised to become a crucial generator of economic growth in the long run.
To strengthen China’s hydrogen energy industry and supply chain and secure leadership in
hydrogen energy development, technological innovation is key to industrial development.
Achieving cost reduction is essential for securing market competitiveness. The stability
and resilience of industrial and supply chains are prerequisites for the rapid growth of
the hydrogen energy sector and the high-quality development of the regional economy.
Establishing robust evaluation systems enables objective assessments of regional economic
development and supports informed decision making.

2.1. Resilience and Security Levels of Industrial and Supply Chains

Industrial and supply chains are the lifeblood and cornerstone of economic develop-
ment, playing a critical role in ensuring stable growth and meeting societal demands. The
resilience of industrial and supply chains refers to their ability to prevent disruption, re-
store their original state, or achieve renewal and upgrading after experiencing internal and
external disturbances and shocks [2]. This resilience is fundamental for adapting to rapid
changes in global and domestic environments, mitigating risks, and maintaining continuity
in operations. The intrinsic link between resilience and security levels in industrial and
supply chains is significant. Resilience serves as the foundation for achieving a high level of
security, while security acts as a prerequisite for further enhancing resilience [3]. Therefore,
resilience and security levels in industrial and supply chains are interdependent, forming a
symbiotic relationship that ensures stability and adaptability.
The measurement of resilience and security levels in industrial and supply chains has
gained significant attention in academic and policy research. Policy incentives, including
subsidies, tax incentives, and regulatory guidance, play a crucial role in promoting the
development of hydrogen energy. For instance, direct subsidies for upstream hydrogen
production and downstream hydrogen utilization can effectively increase both supply and
demand within the hydrogen energy sector. Using methods, such as the entropy approach,
to evaluate indicators and analyzing comprehensive resilience scores in six southern cities,
studies have revealed that enhancing resilience in industrial and supply chains is a complex
and systematic project, requiring comprehensive planning, coordinated advancement, and
targeted interventions to address the diverse internal and external challenges faced by
industrial and supply chains. Feasible paths to enhance resilience include leveraging the
advantages of the new national system, building a unified national market, and promot-
ing the digitalization and green transformation of industries. Effectively utilizing open
cooperation platforms is crucial for improving the completeness and stability of national
industrial and supply chains, as well as for enhancing control over their openness [4].
Although significant progress has been made in research on industrial chain resilience,
studies specifically focusing on the resilience of hydrogen energy industry chains remain
limited, representing a key direction for future efforts.

2.2. Research on Measurement of Industrial Chain Efficiency

2.2.1. Definition and Dimensions of Industrial Chain Efficiency
Industrial chain efficiency refers to the overall performance of an industrial chain in
economic activities [5]. It manifests specifically in the ability of various node enterprises
within the chain to achieve effective resource allocation, efficient production operations,
and the delivery of products that meet market demands. This efficiency acts as a crucial
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 4 of 28

indicator for measuring the overall operational status of an industrial chain, reflecting the
relationship between inputs and outputs [6].
The primary aspects of industrial chain efficiency include production efficiency, allo-
cation efficiency, technical efficiency, and market efficiency. Production efficiency refers
to the ability of production links within the chain to convert inputs into outputs. It en-
compasses technical efficiency, equipment utilization rates, and labor productivity, where
high efficiency indicates the capacity to produce more products or services with the same
input or to use fewer resources for an equivalent output. Allocation efficiency measures
how effectively resources are distributed among various node enterprises to meet market
demands. Efficient resource allocation ensures that products and services meet consumer
preferences and demands, thereby enhancing the overall competitiveness of the industrial
chain [7].
Technical efficiency reflects the chain’s capability to adopt and integrate advanced
technologies into the production process, thereby improving production efficiency, reduc-
ing production costs, and enhancing overall benefits. Market efficiency pertains to the
chain’s ability to acquire resources, sell products, and respond to market changes in the
marketplace [8]. Efficient market operations ensure market competitiveness, responsive-
ness to changes, and growth in market share. In addition, in a perfectly competitive market,
enterprises at various nodes within the chain achieve optimal resource allocation and maxi-
mize production efficiency, which serves as a benchmark for evaluating industrial chain
efficiency. Beyond economic benefits, improving industrial chain efficiency also involves
maximizing social welfare, including minimizing environmental impacts and enhancing
societal well-being [9].
Enhancing industrial chain efficiency requires a multifaceted approach. Technological
innovation, such as adopting advanced technologies and conducting independent research
and development, can improve production efficiency and product quality. Optimizing
resource allocation reduces production costs and enhances the overall efficiency of the
industrial chain. Strengthening market operations by expanding market reach, increasing
market share, and boosting competitiveness enhances market efficiency. Improving col-
laboration mechanisms between upstream and downstream enterprises fosters resource
sharing and complementary advantages, thus enhancing overall performance.
Industrial chain efficiency is a complex concept encompassing production, alloca-
tion, technical, and market efficiency. Achieving higher efficiency requires comprehensive
consideration of multiple approaches, including technological innovation, resource opti-
mization, strengthened market operations, and improved collaboration mechanisms [10].

2.2.2. Industrial Chain Efficiency Indicator System

The industrial chain efficiency indicator system serves as a vital tool for evaluating the
operational efficiency and effectiveness of an industrial chain [11]. This system encompasses
multiple aspects and dimensions to ensure a comprehensive assessment of industrial chain
efficiency. Key components of this indicator system are outlined below.
Overall efficiency indicators include the value-added ratio, operational costs, and
profit margins of the industrial chain. The value-added ratio measures the degree of value
creation from input to output, reflecting the chain’s overall value-generation capability. Op-
erational costs include production costs, transactional expenditures, and logistics expenses,
reflecting the economic efficiency of industrial chain operations. Profit margins, calculated
as the ratio of overall profits to total revenue, measure the economic benefits generated by
the chain.
Production efficiency indicators evaluate aspects, such as per capita output, equipment
utilization rate, and energy efficiency. Per capita output refers to the average value or output
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 5 of 28

created by each employee in the industrial chain, reflecting labor efficiency, while the
equipment utilization rate measures equipment usage efficiency, indicating the economic
returns on production equipment investments [12]. Energy utilization efficiency refers to
the ratio of energy consumption to output, reflecting the economy of energy usage.
Resource allocation efficiency indicators focus on the effectiveness of resource use
within the chain. These include the raw material utilization rate, which measures the
conversion efficiency of raw materials into final products, and the capital turnover ratio,
which reflects the efficiency of capital utilization. Additionally, the degree of supply
chain collaboration measures the level of coordination among upstream and downstream
enterprises, which directly influences resource allocation efficiency.
Technological innovation efficiency indicators address the role of innovation in enhanc-
ing efficiency and include metrics, such as the R&D input–output ratio, patent application
volume, and the speed of new product launches. The input–output ratio refers to the
proportion of R&D investment to technological innovation outcomes, reflecting techno-
logical innovation efficiency. Patent application volume measures the level of activity and
achievements in technological innovation within the industrial chain [13], while the speed
of new product launches refers to the time taken for new products to move from R&D to
market, reflecting the commercialization speed of technological innovation.
Market efficiency indicators measure the chain’s performance in market-related ac-
tivities. These include market share, which reflects market competitiveness [14]; customer
satisfaction, which measures the extent to which the chain meets customer needs; and mar-
ket response speed, which assesses adaptability to market changes or customer demands.
Environmental and social responsibility efficiency indicators emphasize sustainable
development and corporate responsibility. Resource consumption intensity (i.e., the num-
ber of natural resources consumed) and pollutant emissions (i.e., the amount of pollution
generated) evaluate the chain’s environmental impact, while the degree of social respon-
sibility fulfillment assesses its compliance with laws and regulations, the protection of
employee rights, and participation in community development [15].
The industrial chain efficiency indicator system provides a framework for evaluating
the operational status of an industrial chain. Indicators, such as the value-added ratio,
operational costs, and profit margins, offer insights into overall economic performance in
activities, revealing the industrial chain’s comprehensive capabilities in resource alloca-
tion, production operations, and market demand satisfaction. Production efficiency is an
important component of industrial chain efficiency, reflecting the industrial chain’s ability
to convert inputs into outputs during the production process [16]. Production efficiency
indicators, such as per capita output and equipment utilization rate, provide an intuitive
measure of the chain’s efficiency at the production level. Resource allocation efficiency
indicators, such as raw material utilization rate and collaboration degrees, involve issues
of resource coordination, information sharing, and benefit distribution among upstream
and downstream enterprises, identifying opportunities for optimization within the chain.
Technological innovation and market adaptability are important driving forces for sustain-
able development [17]. R&D input–output ratio, patent application volume, and product
launch speeds reflect innovation performance, highlighting bottlenecks and opportunities
to support targeted innovation strategies. Market efficiency indicators, such as customer
satisfaction and market responsiveness, measure the industrial chain’s performance in
meeting market demands and adaptability in a dynamic environment competition.
While scholars both domestically and internationally have achieved significant
progress in researching industrial chain efficiency and its influencing factors, studies
focusing on the hydrogen energy industrial chain remain limited. Given hydrogen energy’s
status as one of the most promising emerging industries, further research is needed to
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 6 of 28

refine measurement methods, develop robust indicator systems, and analyze the external
environmental factors affecting industrial chain efficiency.

2.2.3. Industrial Chain Efficiency Measurement Models

Industrial chain efficiency measurement models are essential tools for evaluating
and quantifying the performance of an industrial chain or its critical links. Among the
commonly used models is the data envelopment analysis (DEA) model, a non-parametric
efficiency evaluation method that uses linear programming to construct a production
frontier and assess the relative efficiency of decision-making units (DMUs). In industrial
chain efficiency evaluations, various enterprises, departments, or production links within
the industrial chain can be regarded as DMUs, with efficiency measured by comparing
input–output data. Common DEA models include the CCR model, which assumes constant
returns to scale and evaluates overall technical efficiency; the BCC model, which accounts
for variable returns to scale by decomposing efficiency into pure technical efficiency and
scale efficiency [18]; and the slack-based model (SBM), a more refined DEA variant that
addresses inefficiencies caused by input redundancy and output shortfalls. These DEA
models are advantageous as they do not require a predefined production function form
and are effective for multi-input, multi-output situations while providing directions and
magnitudes for efficiency improvement [19].
The stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) model is another important approach. This
parametric method incorporates assumptions about the production function and random
error terms to assess efficiency. Specifically, SFA evaluates the impact of each environ-
mental variable on the slack variable by considering the influence of external factors on
redundant variables. This approach is particularly valuable for improving evaluation accu-
racy by accounting for external influences and providing specific values and distribution
characteristics of efficiency losses [20].
For dynamic analysis, the Malmquist productivity index model is often applied. This
model evaluates changes in productivity over time by comparing the input–output data
of DMUs across different periods. It further decomposes these changes into technological
progress and variations in technical efficiency, making it an effective tool for tracking
efficiency trends and identifying underlying causes [21].
In addition to these primary models, methods, such as the analytic hierarchy process
(AHP), fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, and TOPSIS method, are used to eval-
uate and rank nodes or links within the industrial chain. These methods are useful for
identifying key efficiency bottlenecks and optimizing resource allocation [22]. The choice
of an appropriate model depends on the research objectives, data availability, and the
specific characteristics of the industrial chain. For example, the DEA model is suitable for
multi-input, multi-output analyses, while the SFA model may be more appropriate for
scenarios requiring consideration of random factors, and the Malmquist productivity index
model is effective for assessing temporal changes in productivity.
To ensure meaningful evaluations, accurate and complete data are essential. Prepro-
cessing steps, such as standardization and normalization, help address potential issues, like
missing data or abnormal values, thereby improving the reliability of the results [23]. Once
the evaluation is complete, interpreting and analyzing the evaluation results becomes criti-
cal for identifying efficiencies and formulating strategies for improvement. These insights
can guide industrial chain optimization efforts and inform management decision making.
The selection and application of industrial chain efficiency measurement models
require careful consideration of the research objectives, data characteristics, and industrial
chain characteristics [24]. Thoughtful use and integration of these models enhance the
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 7 of 28

evaluation process and support informed decision making, enabling industries to optimize
and achieve sustainable growth.

2.3. Current Status, Trends, and Countermeasures of Hydrogen Energy Development

The development of hydrogen energy is recognized globally as a critical pathway
toward achieving sustainable and clean energy transitions. Hydrogen energy is considered
one of the cleanest energy sources with immense development potential, with widespread
application across various sectors. Developed regions, such as the United States and
the European Union, have integrated hydrogen energy into their energy development
strategies. Similarly, China regards hydrogen energy as a strategic emerging industry, with
the sector experiencing accelerated growth [25]. This development aligns with China’s
overarching goals of “carbon peaking” and “carbon neutrality”, as well as its medium- to
long-term energy development plans.
In terms of hydrogen production technology, the resilience and efficiency of the
hydrogen energy industry chain and supply chain hinges on advancements in production
methods [26]. Current hydrogen production technologies include those based on fossil
fuels, natural gas, and water electrolysis [27]. Among these, water electrolysis is viewed as
the mainstream hydrogen production method of the future due to its immense potential to
harness renewable energy sources, like wind and solar power. Renewable energy-powered
water electrolysis provides a pathway for effectively utilizing renewable energy while
addressing issues of energy consumption, representing a sustainable and clean energy
solution with significant potential for further development.
The hydrogen energy industries of China, Germany, Japan, the United States, and
other leading nations exhibit distinct characteristics and advantages. China has made re-
markable progress in hydrogen energy technology research and development, particularly
in solid-state hydrogen storage materials, achieving a globally competitive position. The
industry has demonstrated strong performance in scaling up production, increasing output
value, and diversifying technological approaches, supported by robust policy measures.
Japan has a large number of hydrogen energy-related patents and occupies an important
position in the global hydrogen energy market due to its technological leadership and
comprehensive industrial chain. Germany has a strong industrial base and world-class
enterprises, excelling in electrolyzer technology and making notable progress in hydrogen
strategy formulation, market expansion, and international cooperation. The United States
has a relatively high proportion of hydrogen production and consumption, with enterprises
actively engaging in hydrogen energy technology innovation.
Table 1 presents a comparative analysis of hydrogen energy industry policies in China,
Japan, Germany, and the United States. Overall, while each country prioritizes different
aspects of hydrogen energy development, they all emphasize fostering innovation in
the sector. Their strategies include implementing scientific and technological innovation
policies, providing tax incentives and subsidies, and investing in personnel development
and recruitment to drive hydrogen energy industry growth.
To promote the high-quality development of the hydrogen energy industry, several
countermeasures have been proposed. China is refining its strategic planning for the
hydrogen energy industry by coordinating efforts across regions and different segments
of the industry chain. These measures include establishing and improving management
organizations, refining standard systems, and advancing infrastructure development, such
as constructing hydrogen refueling stations with reasonable supporting measures and
moderate advancement. In addition, the focus is on fostering research on core technologies,
expanding diverse application scenarios, and achieving multi-energy integration and
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 8 of 28

complementarity [28]. These efforts aim to create a robust, sustainable, and efficient
hydrogen energy ecosystem capable of meeting long-term energy goals.

Table 1. Comparison of hydrogen energy industry policies in China, Japan, Germany, and the
United States.

Item China Japan Germany United States

U.S. Hydrogen Economy
Planning for the Roadmap-Reducing
Industrial German National
Hydrogen Energy Sixth Energy Basic Plan Emissions and Driving
planning Hydrogen Strategy
Industry (2021–2035) Hydrogen Growth
Across the United States
Hydrogen Integrate into energy
energy-related A series of fiscal and transformation and
Publish the Deflation
corporate income tax tax policies, such as environmental
Reduction Act, a tax
Tax incentives reduction and the “hydrogen energy protection policies,
credit for clean
exemption, industry promotion and indirectly support
hydrogen production.
value-added tax tax system”. the hydrogen energy
incentives. industry.
Funds support the Funds support project
research and research and
Direct funding development of new development,
subsidies, R&D energy technologies, Set up special funds, demonstration
Subsidies subsidies, project the promotion of provide loans, applications, and
construction demonstration enterprise costs, etc. infrastructure
subsidies, etc. projects, and construction of the
infrastructure hydrogen energy
construction. industry.
Strengthen higher Japan pays attention to Set up scholarships,
Support the
education and education investment provide research
cultivation of talents in
Technical talent vocational education, and cultivates local positions, and attract
the hydrogen energy
and train hydrogen hydrogen energy and train hydrogen
industry.
energy professionals. technology talents. energy talents.
Carry out hydrogen
Carry out hydrogen energy technology Carry out hydrogen
Carry out hydrogen
energy technology exchanges and project energy technology
energy trade and
International exchanges and cooperation with the research and
technical cooperation
cooperation project cooperation European Hydrogen development and
with Australia and
with many countries Energy Alliance, EU project demonstration
other countries.
and regions. member states, and with many countries.
other countries.

From a policy perspective, China has introduced a series of measures to promote the
development of hydrogen energy, ranging from national top-level industrial planning to
provincial and municipal initiatives. These include subsidies for hydrogen production and
utilization costs, as well as funding projects for hydrogen energy technologies under na-
tional science and technology programs. Such efforts have driven technological innovation
in the hydrogen energy industry, while advancements in hydrogen energy technology have
further propelled the development of China’s hydrogen energy industrial chain. However,
research on quantitatively measuring the efficiency of the hydrogen energy industrial
chain and analyzing trends in efficiency changes remains limited. This gap highlights the
necessity of this study, which aims to provide intellectual support for the high-efficiency
development of China’s hydrogen energy industrial chain through quantitative research.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 9 of 28

3. Theoretical Analysis
3.1. Efficiency Affects the High-Quality Development of the Hydrogen Energy Industry
The efficiency of an industrial chain plays a crucial role in the high-quality devel-
opment of industries, including the hydrogen energy sector. One significant impact is
the enhanced ability to resist risks. Industries with high efficiency are better equipped to
handle external challenges, such as fluctuations in market demand and policy adjustments,
enabling them to maintain their competitive edge. Another critical aspect is resource
allocation efficiency. High efficiency in the industrial chain optimizes resource allocation,
streamlines processes, reduces production costs, and fosters innovation and upgrades
within the industry chain.
Compared to general industries, the hydrogen energy industry exhibits more distinct
characteristics across its upstream, midstream, and downstream segments. The production
efficiency of each segment determines the overall production efficiency level of the entire
chain. The efficiency of resource allocation determines the production efficiency of each
segment, which in turn affects production costs. When resource allocation efficiency reaches
its highest level, production costs are minimized.
In addition, industrial competitiveness is bolstered by high industrial efficiency. This is
reflected not only in superior product quality and pricing but also in enhanced innovation
capabilities and faster market responsiveness. Industrial chain efficiency can be measured
by producing products of the same value with smaller inputs or producing higher-value
products with the same inputs. Inputs mainly include human resources, capital, and
assets, while product value is represented by operating income and profits. The higher the
industrial chain efficiency, the higher the resource allocation efficiency, which also relies on
innovation capabilities and market responsiveness to sustain itself. Therefore, improving
the efficiency of the hydrogen energy industrial chain is integral to fostering sustainable
and high-quality growth.

3.2. Main Factors Influencing the Efficiency of the Hydrogen Energy Chain
The efficiency of the hydrogen energy industrial chain is determined by several key
factors. One major factor is technological innovation and R&D investment. Continuous
investment in research and development, coupled with technological breakthroughs, can
promote efficiency across all segments of the industrial chain, reduce costs, and strengthen
the sector’s overall competitiveness. Technological breakthroughs, such as water electroly-
sis for hydrogen production and fuel cell systems, are particularly critical for improving
the efficiency and sustainability of the hydrogen energy chain.
Another significant factor is the policy environment and market demand. Government
policies play a crucial role by offering incentives and promoting collaboration among up-
stream and downstream enterprises, thereby creating a cooperative and efficient ecosystem.
The policy environment operates by encouraging technological innovation and provid-
ing downstream consumption subsidies, exerting force on both the supply and demand
sides. This dual approach propels the iterative innovation of technology within the hy-
drogen energy industry and stimulates the upgrading of hydrogen energy consumption,
thereby attracting enterprises to invest in R&D funds and fostering a virtuous cycle of
industrial ecological development. At the same time, increasing market demand stimulates
the expansion of the industrial chain, facilitates product upgrading, and drives overall
efficiency improvements.
Thirdly, infrastructure construction and industry chain support are essential for ensur-
ing the efficiency and resilience of the hydrogen energy sector. Developing infrastructure,
such as hydrogen refueling stations, and enhancing hydrogen storage and transportation fa-
cilities are important components affecting the resilience of the hydrogen energy industrial
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 10 of 28

chain. At the same time, promoting the collaborative development of upstream, midstream,
and downstream enterprises, along with strengthening supporting industries, contributes
significantly to improving the efficiency of the industrial chain.

4. Study Design
4.1. Measurement Modelling
Efficiency in the hydrogen energy industry is commonly evaluated using a DEA model.
However, the SBM-DEA model does not account for external environmental factors or
random disturbances, potentially leading to over- or underestimation of efficiency values.
To address this limitation, the three-stage DEA model proposed by Fried et al. [29] is
used. The three-stage DEA model refines the traditional DEA approach by conducting a
three-stage analysis to eliminate environmental factors and random noise effects, providing
a more accurate efficiency assessment for DMUs.
In the first stage, the CCR and BCC models, which are radial distance function models,
primarily focus on the proportional relationship between inputs and outputs. These models
assume the proportional changes in inputs and outputs but fail to account for all relaxation
variables comprehensively. Relaxation variables represent the extent of excessive input or
insufficient output and play an important role in efficiency evaluation. By incorporating
relaxation variables, the SBM-DEA model overcomes the limitations of the CCR and
BCC models, which assume equal proportional changes. This enables a more accurate
assessment of decision-making unit (DMU) efficiency. The SBM-DEA model not only
identifies DMUs but also determines specific inputs and outputs requiring improvement,
thereby enhancing the accuracy of the efficiency evaluations.
Consequently, the initial efficiency is assessed using the SBM-DEA model to evaluate
each decision-making unit. Relaxation variables are used to measure the degree of deviation
of DMUs from the frontier. Traditional DEA models (such as the CCR model and BBC
model) are radial models, which require the input and output to change in the same
proportion. The calculation results do not take into account the influence of relaxation
variables and are often limited by radial and angular measures, resulting in deviation in
the evaluation results. The SBM-DEA model addresses radial model slack variables by
integrating input–output slack variables into the scale objective function, as follows:
−
1 m Si
∗
1− m ∑i =1 xi0
γ = min (1)
1 s Sr+
1+ s ∑r =1 yr0

x0 = Xλ + S−
s.t. y0 = Yλ − S+ (2)
S− ≥ 0, S+ ≥ 0, λ ≥ 0
where S denotes the slack variables of inputs and outputs; λ is the linear programming
weight vector; m is the number of input indicators; s is the number of output indicators.
The objective function 0 < γ∗ ≤ 1, for the evaluated unit DMU. If γ∗ = 1, the DMU is
in the production frontier, in the DEA effective state, otherwise, the DMU is in the DEA
ineffective state, and there is room for optimization. S− and S+ represent the degree to
which the inputs and outputs can be improved, respectively.
The second stage employs stochastic frontier analysis to remove environmental factors
and random noise effects from efficiency values. Based on Fried et al. [29], regressions are
performed separately for each input slack variable, and the regression models for the input
slack variables and environmental influences are set up as follows:
 
Sij = f Zj β i + νij + µij , j = 1, 2, · · · n; i = 1, 2, · · · m (3)
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 11 of 28

2
σµi
ρi = 2 + σ2
(4)
σvi µi

where m is the number of input indicators; n is the number of decision units; Sij is the slack
h i
value of the i input for the j decision unit; Zj = Z1j , · · · , Z pj is the p EIF for the j
h i
decision unit; β j = β 1j , · · · , β pj is the to-be-estimated coefficient of the p EIF; νij is the
   
random error term, νij ∽ 0, σvi 2 ; µ denotes managerial inefficiency; µ ∽ 0, σ2 ; ν
ij ij µi ij
is independent of µij . A value of ρi close to 1 means that the main reason for the inefficiency
of the decision unit is managerial inefficiency, while a ρi value close to 0 indicates that the
inefficiency of the decision unit is due to the random error term.
The SFA model is regressed using Frontier 4.1, and based on the maximum likelihood
estimation results, µij is calculated using the following Equation (5):
h
i h
i
Ê µij νij + µij = sij − z j βi − Ê vij νij + µij (5)

The formulas for adjusting the inputs for the other decision-making units are
as follows: h  i 
x̂ij = xij − max j z j β̂i + max j µ̂ij − µ̂ij


(6)

where xij is the actual value of input i for decision cell j; x̂ij is the adjusted value of input i
for decision cell j; β̂i is the estimated value of the parameters of the environmental variables;
µ̂ij is the estimated value of µij . All decision units and random errors are adjusted to be in
the same environmental state.
In the final stage, the SBM-DEA model is applied again to reassess efficiency based on
the adjusted data, determining the true efficiency values of each decision-making unit.

4.2. Trend Modelling

Kernel density estimation is a statistical technique used to calculate the continuous
density of probability distributions of random variables. In mathematical analysis, dis-
cussing probability densities in isolation lacks practical significance; they are typically
interpreted as values on the vertical axis of a two-dimensional coordinate system, with
corresponding intervals on the horizontal axis. When considering a specific and finite
interval, the integral of the probability density function within that interval is exactly equal
to the probability of an event occurring within it. The probability distribution density can
be expressed as the probability value within the interval divided by the interval length.
When estimating the overall probability distribution density from observed samples,
there are two primary estimation strategies: parametric estimation and non-parametric
estimation. Parametric estimation methods are based on preconceived assumptions, as-
suming that the population follows a known probability distribution form, estimating
the parameters of the corresponding distribution through sample data. However, this
method heavily relies on the specification of the population distribution model, which has
certain limitations.
In comparison, kernel density estimation, as an important non-parametric estimation
technique, significantly reduces the need for model structure assumptions. It does not
predefine the specific shape of the population distribution but estimates the shape of the
entire distribution by constructing and weighting data points in local regions, thereby
demonstrating strong robustness and a low sensitivity to model bias. Due to its indepen-
dence from prior assumptions and its effectiveness in handling complex, unknown, or
mixed distributions, KDE is widely recognized and applied in academic research.
KDE is particularly useful for estimating the probability density function of a random
variable and analyzing the efficiency distribution of industrial chain enterprises. The model
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 12 of 28

assumes that there are n independent and identically distributed samples. ( xi ) is the
observation value of the ith sample. KDE estimates the probability density function f ( x )
as follows:
x − xi
 
1 n
nh ∑i=1
f (x) = K (7)
h
where h is the bandwidth, and K (∗) is the kernel function. The smaller the value of the
bandwidth (h), the less smooth the kernel density curve and the more details and data
noise are embodied. Conversely, the larger the value, the smoother the kernel density curve
and the fewer the details are embodied. The Gaussian kernel function is chosen for its
ability to minimize unwanted high-frequency noise while retaining essential signals. This
approach effectively highlights trends in the efficiency distribution, offering insights into
the underlying characteristics of the data.
The kernel density estimation method generates the corresponding probability dis-
tribution diagram: (1) A higher peak indicates greater data density in that region. (2) A
rightward shift of the kernel density curve signifies continuous improvement in production
efficiency. (3) The distribution pattern exhibits an elongated right tail, indicating increasing
disparities. The progressive elongation of the right tail over time and the broadening trend
of distribution ductility suggest that the spatial gap of the hydrogen energy industry chain
is gradually expanding. (4) The presence of multi-peaks indicates significant multi-polar
differentiation. The transition from a bimodal to a unimodal distribution means that the
polarization phenomenon is weakening. (5) A flatter and wider kernel density curve, char-
acterized by a decrease in peak value and an increase in width, reflects a growing degree
of variation among provinces. (6) If the kernel density curve shifts leftward, exhibiting a
right-skewed distribution i.e., as the vertical height of the wave crest increases, the horizon-
tal width decreases, and the number of the wave crest decreases, it suggests a trend toward
numerical reduction. This pattern indicates that the efficiency gap within the hydrogen
energy industry chain is narrowing, demonstrating a dynamic convergence trend.

4.3. Selection of Indicators

Input and output indicators and environmental impact factors are selected to compre-
hensively evaluate the efficiency and developmental environment of the hydrogen energy
industrial chain. The inputs are mainly labor, capital, and production facilities, while the
output indicators are measured in terms of output value and revenue. Therefore, the input
indicators selected include the number of employees, main business cost, and fixed assets,
while the output indicators are the main business revenue and net profit. The number
of employees represents the labor force dedicated to the production and operation of the
enterprise, and the main business cost, along with the enterprise management expenses,
reflects the capital investment required. On the output side, the main business income and
net profit show the enterprise’s production capacity and operation performance.
The research subject of the study is the production efficiency of China’s hydrogen
energy industry chain, with a primary focus on the impact of external environmental factors
on its input and output. When selecting these external influencing factors, it is necessary to
consider the unique characteristics of the hydrogen energy industry chain as well as the
commonalities it shares with other industrial sectors.
Compared to other industry chains, certain segments of the hydrogen energy indus-
try chain exhibit distinct regional clustering characteristics. The hydrogen production
segment is predominantly located in the northwest and northern regions of China. The
midstream hydrogen transportation pipelines and natural gas blending pipelines are mainly
distributed in the northern areas, while the downstream applications are primarily concen-
trated in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region and in the East China, South China, and Central
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 13 of 28

China regions. The commonalities shared with other industry chains include the level of
economic development and the strength of government policy support.
This study does not include hydrogen energy subsidies, primarily because the meth-
ods of subsidizing hydrogen energy vary across different provinces, making it difficult
to establish a unified quantitative metric. For instance, some provinces subsidize produc-
tion costs, while others subsidize investments in hydrogen refueling station construction.
This shortcoming will serve as a direction for future research to evaluate the effects of
various subsidies.
To comprehensively assess the external environment influencing the development of
the hydrogen energy industry, three environmental influencing factors are considered: the
level of economic development, the strength of government support, and the degree of
regional industrial agglomeration. Firstly, the level of economic development reflects the
overall economic conditions of a region or country and is measured by the gross domestic
product (GDP) indicator, which determines the investment capacity, market demand,
and technological innovation capabilities of the hydrogen energy industry chain in the
respective region. Secondly, government support characterizes the government’s policy
tendency and investment in promoting hydrogen energy development and is assessed by
the scientific and technological innovation investment index of the province where the
enterprise is located. Government policy direction and financial support directly impact
the industry’s cost structure, innovation capabilities, and market competitiveness. Thirdly,
the degree of regional industrial agglomeration reflects the concentration and collaboration
levels among relevant industries within a specific area and is measured by the output
value of the secondary industry in the enterprise’s province. A high degree of industrial
agglomeration fosters scale and synergy effects, reduces production costs, improves overall
competitiveness, and aids in talent cultivation. These advantages collectively promote the
sustainable growth of the hydrogen energy industry chain.
These influencing factors also exhibit certain interrelationships. A higher level of
economic development in a region tends to encourage greater government prioritization of
innovation activities, leading to increased investment in technological innovation for emerg-
ing industries. This, in turn, attracts more investment into the industry, gradually forming
industrial agglomeration. The high-quality development of the industry consequently
contributes to the region’s overall economic growth.

5. Empirical Analyses
5.1. Data Sources
Representative enterprises from each segment of the hydrogen energy industry chain
were selected based on the following criteria: (1) the enterprises’ main business activities
exhibit strong relevance to the upstream, midstream, and downstream sectors of the
hydrogen energy industry chain; (2) the enterprises provide continuous and complete
annual report data; (3) the enterprises were listed in 2011 or earlier.
Through big data retrieval, 68 enterprises were identified as having achieved signifi-
cant contributions to the hydrogen energy sector. These enterprises were further screened
using the aforementioned criteria, and 30 representative listed enterprises were selected,
covering the upper, middle, and lower reaches of the hydrogen energy industry chain.
Among these, 10 companies represent the upstream sector, 10 represent the midstream
sector, and 10 represent the downstream sector. These sample companies exhibit strong
sustainable development capabilities and possess a high degree of typicality and represen-
tativeness within the hydrogen energy industry.
In China, the development of hydrogen energy has been actively promoted. Since 2018,
the advancement and large-scale application of hydrogen energy and fuel cell technology
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 14 of 28

have steadily progressed. On 10 April 2020, the National Energy Administration officially
included hydrogen in the energy category, marking the arrival of the fourth wave of
development for hydrogen energy. In 2022, driven by the ongoing “Dual Carbon” strategy,
policies were introduced across multiple domains, and enterprises significantly increased
their investments. This year heralded the “breakout year” for the hydrogen energy industry.
Therefore, the sample period spans from 2018 to 2022, a timeframe during which hy-
drogen energy-related technologies experienced significant advancements and innovations.
Breakthroughs in key technologies, such as water electrolysis for hydrogen production and
fuel cells, have supported the development of the hydrogen energy industry chain during
this period.

5.2. Efficiency Measures

5.2.1. Phase 1: SBM-DEA Results Analysis
The results of the first stage of SBM-DEA measurement, covering comprehensive
technical efficiency (TE), pure technical efficiency (PTE), and scale efficiency (SE) for China’s
hydrogen energy industry chain (including the upstream, midstream, and downstream
segments) are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Efficiency of China’s hydrogen energy chain (phase I).

Combined Technical Efficiency Pure Technical Efficiency Scale Efficiency

The The The
Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower
Year Middle Middle Middle
Reaches Reaches Reaches Reaches Reaches Reaches
Synthesis Stretches Synthesis Stretches Synthesis Stretches
(of a (of a (of a (of a (of a (of a
(of a (of a (of a
River) River) River) River) River) River)
River) River) River)
2018 0.4916 0.5816 0.3913 0.5221 0.7118 0.7582 0.6893 0.6900 0.6907 0.7671 0.5677 0.7567
2019 0.6356 0.7593 0.4839 0.6990 0.8184 0.8950 0.7670 0.7986 0.7767 0.8483 0.6309 0.8753
2020 0.5651 0.6831 0.4052 0.6518 0.7300 0.7516 0.7184 0.7204 0.7741 0.9088 0.5640 0.9048
2021 0.4339 0.5373 0.2464 0.6171 0.7124 0.7523 0.6353 0.7564 0.6091 0.7142 0.3879 0.8158
2022 0.7079 0.7633 0.6830 0.6805 0.8345 0.9017 0.8507 0.7577 0.8483 0.8465 0.8029 0.8981

Table 2 reveals several key insights into the technical efficiency of China’s hydrogen
energy industry chain from 2018 to 2022. First, the overall technical efficiency is low, with
comprehensive technical efficiency values ranging between 0.4 and 0.75. Pure technical
efficiency values are within the range of 0.75 and 0.85, and scale efficiency values are
distributed between 0.6 and 0.85, indicating a medium efficiency level. Second, the effi-
ciency of the upstream, midstream, and downstream segments exhibits heterogeneous
characteristics. The midstream technical efficiency is lower than that of the upstream and
downstream segments.
From the calculation results, more than 50% of the 10 enterprises in the midstream
segment are in the stage of increasing returns to scale. The main reasons for this include
the lack of overall planning, the absence of an established standard system, the need for
breakthroughs in natural gas blending with hydrogen technology, and the reliance on long-
tube-trailer road transportation, which is both costly and inefficient. These factors constrain
the large-scale development of the midstream segment. Pipeline hydrogen transportation
is the optimal method for achieving large-scale, long-distance hydrogen transportation.
In the upstream segment, pure technical efficiency aligns closely with scale efficiency,
while in the midstream segment, pure technical efficiency exceeds scale efficiency. In com-
parison, in the downstream segment, pure technical efficiency is lower than scale efficiency.
Across all segments, scale efficiency and pure technical efficiency are consistently higher
than comprehensive technical efficiency. The differences in production efficiency across
the upstream, midstream, and downstream segments of the hydrogen energy industry
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 15 of 28

primarily stem from the following challenges: the upstream segment faces difficulties in
the consumption of green hydrogen produced from wind and solar power; the midstream
segment grapples with pipeline transportation technology issues; and the downstream
segment suffers from a lack of hydrogen supply for applications.
Furthermore, the trends in comprehensive technical efficiency are consistent across
the upstream, midstream, and downstream segments. The overall comprehensive technical
efficiency and pure technical efficiency follow roughly similar trends, affected by the
technological barriers in the midstream transportation segment and the limitations in
large-scale transportation capacity, showing an “N-shaped” pattern characterized by an
increase, followed by a decrease, and another increase. However, this pattern does not
indicate significant long-term improvements.
When analyzing the underlying factors, technical efficiency is jointly determined
by pure technical efficiency and scale efficiency. Pure technical efficiency represents the
maximum output achievable with the existing combination of production inputs, given the
existing technology and management practices, while scale efficiency reflects the impact
of production scale changes on efficiency. For China’s hydrogen energy industry chain,
there is considerable potential to enhance technical levels, organizational management, and
economies of scale. Breakthroughs in key technologies and innovative practices are critical
to achieving these improvements.
External environmental factors also significantly influence efficiency trends. During
2018–2019, the global shift toward renewable energy and heightened environmental con-
cerns resulted in the unprecedented rapid growth of the hydrogen energy industry. This
period saw notable achievements in hydrogen production, storage, transportation, and fuel
cell technologies. However, from 2019 to 2021, efficiency gradually declined, mainly due to
difficulties in achieving further technological breakthroughs and the disruptions caused by
the COVID-19 pandemic. The global spread of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly im-
pacted the hydrogen energy industry, subjecting it to challenges, such as a sharp decline in
market demand, funding shortages, and supply chain disruptions, which have affected the
overall production efficiency of the hydrogen energy industry. By 2021–2022, the industry
started to recover, as weaker and less risk-resistant enterprises faced bankruptcy or were
merged, while stronger firms integrated resources and optimized production capacity to
improve performance.
From 2018 to 2022, China implemented a series of policies to support the development
of the hydrogen energy industry. These policies included financial subsidies, tax incentives,
and R&D support, aiming to improve the technical efficiency and scale efficiency of the
hydrogen energy industry chain. In particular, hydrogen energy was first included in the
government report in 2019, marking a period of rapid industry growth and improved effi-
ciency within the hydrogen energy sector. However, the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020–2021,
had an impact on industry operations, although efficiency improvements continued. In
March 2022, China released the Hydrogen Energy Industry Planning (2021–2035) document,
which played a positive role in promoting technological innovation and industrial upgrad-
ing of the hydrogen energy sector. Breakthroughs in hydrogen energy technology during
this period contributed to further improvements in the efficiency of the hydrogen energy
industry chain in 2022.

5.2.2. Phase 2: Analysis of Factors Affecting SFA Efficiency

The second phase of the analysis uses the SFA model to account for environmental
influences and random error terms, refining the efficiency measurements of the industrial
chain obtained in the first stage. Specifically, the input slack variables (calculated during
the first stage) for the number of enterprise employees, business costs, and fixed assets are
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 16 of 28

used to carry out a SFA regression with three environmental factors: the economic devel-
opment level of the provinces, the extent of government support, and regional industrial
agglomeration.
From Table 3, the significance of the regression coefficients indicates that these envi-
ronmental influences have a significant effect on the input slack variables. The γ values
of the three SFA regressions are much more than 1 and are significant at the 5% level,
indicating that the three input slack variables are heavily influenced by environmental
factors, necessitating adjustments to improve the precision of the efficiency measurements
from the first stage. Additionally, the likelihood ratio (LR) test confirms the validity of the
model. Since the environmental influences on input slack variables are inversely related to
their influence on efficiency (i.e., environmental factors with positive effects on input slack
variables have a negative influence on efficiency), the sign of the regression coefficient is
used to assess these factors’ impact on efficiency.

Table 3. SFA regression results (phase II).

Number of Employees Operating Cost Input Fixed Asset Input Slack

Variant
Input Slack Variables Slack Variables Variables
0.1392 × 105 *** −16.4422 *** 96.7367 ***
Constant term (math.)
(2250.5034) (−15.8777) (53.9019)
Level of economic −0.1935 × 104 *** 2.5233 *** −7.5245 ***
development (−28.6420) (3.8880) (−2.8047)
0.1810 × 104 *** −8.1900 *** 9.3941 **
Government support
(44.5424) (−3.6784) (2.1783)
Degree of regional −0.2174 × 104 *** 13.0861 *** −20.6460 ***
industrial agglomeration (−1109.4432) (8.4986) (−5.3881)
0.1811 × 109 *** 0.6343 × 104 *** 0.1411 × 104 ***
σ2
(0.1811 × 109 ) (0.6292 × 104 ) (0.1107 × 104 )
0.8174 *** 0.2544 × 10−2 ** 0.5880 ***
γ
(34.5089) (2.0700) (10.6837)
LR 101.7466 *** 52.3148 *** 42.4716 ***
Note: Standard errors in parentheses: *** indicates significance at the 1% level, ** indicates significance at the
5% level.

(1) The regression coefficients for the economic development level are negative for the
slack variables of the number of employees and fixed assets and significant at the
1% level for business costs. A higher level of economic development enables the
introduction of more advanced technologies and automated equipment, reducing
redundancy in workforce size. At the same time, a more in-depth analysis of fixed
asset investments and the adoption of advanced process technologies correspondingly
decrease redundancy in fixed asset inputs, leading to more effective resource alloca-
tion. This indicates that higher regional economic development positively impacts
the comprehensive technical efficiency of the hydrogen energy industry. Improved
economic conditions contribute to enhanced industrial chain efficiency in various
ways. First, higher regional economic levels facilitate increased investments from the
government and enterprises in the clean energy sector, providing sufficient financial
support for the research and development, production, and application of the hydro-
gen energy industry. Second, economically advanced regions tend to attract highly
skilled and innovative talent, providing intellectual support for the efficient operation
of the hydrogen energy industry chain. Third, in more developed regions, the closer
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 17 of 28

cooperation among upstream, midstream, and downstream enterprises generates

synergistic effects, improving the overall efficiency of the industrial chain.
Specifically, for upstream companies, economically advanced regions usually have
more developed energy infrastructure and higher energy consumption, creating a broader
market for hydrogen production enterprises. In the midstream sector, economic develop-
ment influences storage and transportation enterprises primarily through market demand
and logistics costs. Greater hydrogen energy demand in developed regions helps mid-
stream companies expand their market share. For downstream enterprises, which mainly
focus on end-user applications, such as transportation, industry, and construction, econom-
ically developed regions exhibit stronger demand, providing more market opportunities
and driving growth in the hydrogen energy sector.
(2) The regression coefficients of government support are positive for the slack variables
of the number of employees and fixed assets, with significant impacts on all three
slack variables (number of employees, operating costs, and fixed assets). Direct sub-
sidies for scenarios with high application potential, such as midstream hydrogen
pipelines and downstream fuel cells in the industrial chain, can promote hydrogen
consumption and accelerate the process of green hydrogen substitution. Investing
more research funds into hydrogen energy can guide technological innovation activi-
ties towards the hydrogen energy industry, supporting its high-quality development.
However, this suggests that government policies in the hydrogen energy industry
exhibit considerable variability and frequent adjustments, introducing uncertainties
to the stable development of the industrial chain. Fluctuations in subsidy policy and
their implementation can constrain financial investments in hydrogen energy projects,
which, in turn, affects their progress and quality. Optimizing resource allocation and
providing consistent policy guidance are essential to mitigate these challenges and
enhance the efficiency of the industry chain.
Government support affects different segments of the hydrogen energy industry in
distinct ways. For upstream enterprises, the impact is mainly reflected in policy subsidies,
tax incentives, and R&D support. For midstream enterprises, policy support enhances
infrastructure construction, logistics network optimization, and the promotion of hydro-
gen energy demonstration projects, ultimately reducing storage and transportation costs
while improving accessibility and convenience. For downstream enterprises, policies, such
as subsidies for hydrogen-powered vehicle purchases and financial support for hydro-
gen refueling station construction, lower user costs, facilitating the popularization and
commercialization of hydrogen energy applications.
(3) The degree of regional industrial agglomeration has a significant positive impact on
the input slack variables for the number of employees and fixed assets but negatively
affects operating costs. A higher contribution of secondary industry to regional
GDP amplifies the positive impact on enterprise efficiency. However, the hydrogen
energy industry chain faces structural challenges. The upstream segments, such
as equipment manufacturing and raw material production, remain relatively weak,
while downstream segments focusing on applications and markets are relatively
constrained in driving overall industrial development.
For upstream enterprises, regional industrial agglomeration fosters economies of scale
and synergies, reducing production costs and improving efficiency in hydrogen production.
At the same time, industrial clustering promotes technological exchange and cooperation
among enterprises, accelerating technological innovation and industrial upgrading. For
midstream enterprises, regional industrial agglomeration optimizes logistics costs and
enhances hydrogen energy supply chain efficiency, enabling storage and transportation
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 18 of 28

enterprises to obtain hydrogen resources more conveniently and improve operational

performance. For downstream enterprises, hydrogen energy application companies benefit
from concentrated market demand and supply chain optimization, which create a favorable
market atmosphere and demonstration effect, thereby promoting the widespread adoption
and commercialization of hydrogen energy applications.
To address these issues, efforts should focus on optimizing and upgrading the in-
dustrial structure, coupled with rational planning of industrial agglomeration. A holistic
approach to fostering the overall development of the hydrogen energy industry should be
promoted, and the synergistic development of the upstream, midstream, and downstream
industry chain should be strengthened. In addition, targeted investments in upstream
equipment manufacturing and raw material production should be increased to improve
the competitiveness and efficiency of the entire industry chain.

5.2.3. Phase 3: SBM-DEA Results Analysis

Based on the adjusted input indicators in the second stage and the original indicators,
the SBM-DEA model was used to calculate the efficiency of the industrial chain and its
individual links after excluding environmental influences and random interference. The
calculation results are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Efficiency of China’s hydrogen energy chain (phase III).

Combined Technical Efficiency Pure Technical Efficiency Scale Efficiency

The The The
Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower
Year Middle Middle Middle
Reaches Reaches Reaches Reaches Reaches Reaches
Synthesis Stretches Synthesis Stretches Synthesis Stretches
(of a (of a (of a (of a (of a (of a
(of a (of a (of a
River) River) River) River) River) River)
River) River) River)
2018 0.2263 0.2622 0.0996 0.4442 0.9750 0.9966 0.9541 0.9749 0.2321 0.2631 0.1043 0.4556
2019 0.2351 0.3615 0.0786 0.4576 0.9423 0.9815 0.9321 0.9147 0.2495 0.3683 0.0843 0.5003
2020 0.1779 0.2282 0.0656 0.3761 0.9599 0.9732 0.9739 0.9333 0.1853 0.2345 0.0674 0.4030
2021 0.1828 0.3097 0.0558 0.3534 0.9690 0.9671 0.9752 0.9646 0.1886 0.3202 0.0572 0.3664
2022 0.2269 0.3512 0.0931 0.3572 0.9661 0.9778 0.9921 0.9295 0.2349 0.3592 0.0938 0.3843

From Table 4 and Figures 1–3, the following observations emerge. First, the integrated
technical efficiency and scale efficiency of the entire industry chain and its segments are
significantly low, with values ranging between [0.05, 0.4]. Both measures exhibit closely
aligned trends. However, the pure technical efficiency of the entire industry chain
Sustainability 2025, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of and
30 its
segment rises to nearly 1, indicating near-optimal technical effectiveness.

Figure 1. Comprehensive
Figure Comprehensiveefficiency
efficiencymap.
map.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 19 of 28

Figure 1. Comprehensive efficiency map.

Figure 1. Comprehensive efficiency map.

Figure Puretechnical
Figure 2. Pure
Figure 2. Pure technicalefficiency
technical efficiencychart.
efficiency chart.
chart.

Figure 3. Scale efficiency chart.

Figure 3. Scale
Figure Scaleefficiency
efficiencychart.
chart.

Second,
Second, the
Second, thesharp
the sharpdecline
sharp declinein
decline comprehensive
inin comprehensive
comprehensive technical
technical
technical efficiency indicates
efficiency
efficiency the
the critical
indicates
indicates the critical
critical
challenges faced
challenges faced by China’s hydrogen energy industry chain. These include insufficient
challenges facedby byChina’s
China’shydrogen
hydrogen energy
energy industry
industry chain. These
chain. Theseinclude insufficient
include insufficient
R&D
R&D investment,
investment, weak weak synergy across different links in
in the chain, outdated equipment,
R&D investment, weaksynergy
synergyacrossacross different
different links
links the chain,
in the outdated
chain, equipment,
outdated equipment,
and a shortage
and aa shortage of skilled talent. Due to the long R&D cycles and high costs associated with
and shortageofof skilled talent.
skilled DueDue
talent. to thetolong
the R&D
long cycles
R&D and high
cycles andcosts associated
high with
costs associated
hydrogen
hydrogen energy
energy technologies,
technologies, many
many enterprises
enterprises reduce
reduce their
their R&D
R&D budgets
budgets under
under finan-
finan-
with hydrogen energy technologies, many enterprises reduce their R&D budgets under
cial
cial pressure,
pressure, hindering
hindering technological
technological progress
progress and
and limiting
limiting efficiency
efficiency improvements.
improvements. In
In
financial
addition,
pressure,
the lack of
hindering
strong
technological
collaboration
progress
between
and limiting
segments, such as
efficiency
production,
improvements.
storage,
addition,
In the lack
addition, the lack ofof strong collaboration
strong collaboration between segments,
between segments, such as production,
such as production, storage,
storage,
transport,
transport, refueling,
refueling, andand application,
application, reduces
reduces overall
overall chain
chain efficiency,
efficiency, whilewhile delays
delays inin
transport,
equipment refueling, and application, reduces overall chain efficiency, while delays in
equipment upgrades
upgrades further
further exacerbate
exacerbate inefficiencies.
inefficiencies.
equipment
Third, upgrades further exacerbateefficiency
inefficiencies. imbalances in the market, in-
Third, the
the decline
decline in in adjusted
adjusted scale
scale efficiency reflects
reflects imbalances in the market, in-
Third,
cluding the decline in adjusted scale efficiency reflects imbalances in the market, in-
cluding mismatches between supply and demand, uneven development
mismatches between supply and demand, uneven development acrossacross segments
segments
cluding
of mismatches between supply and demand, uneven development across segments
of the
the industry
industry chain,
chain, and
and insufficient
insufficient policy
policy support.
support. Insufficiencies
Insufficiencies in in scale
scale management
management
of
and
andthe industry
limited
limited chain,effects
clustering
clustering and insufficient
effects also
also highlight
highlight policy
the
the needsupport.
need for
for betterInsufficiencies
better spatial
spatial planning
planningin scale
and manage-
and opti-
opti-
mization
ment and of the
limitedindustry chain
clustering to improve
effects also scale efficiency.
highlight
mization of the industry chain to improve scale efficiency. the need for better spatial planning and
optimization of the industry chain to improve scale efficiency.
Fourth, the increase in pure technical efficiency after removing environmental influ-
ences demonstrates China’s strong foundation in hydrogen energy technology research
and development, equipment manufacturing, and process optimization. Over the years,
substantial progress in hydrogen energy technology innovation has enhanced production
efficiency and stability, highlighting the country’s potential for further development in
this sector.
Finally, when comparing the efficiency averages of different segments, the midstream
segment shows the lowest efficiency, followed by the downstream segment, while the
upstream segment is the most efficient. The midstream segment, which includes storage
and transportation, has become a weak link, limiting the overall efficiency of the industry
chain. Therefore, optimizing the scale of storage and transportation links and fostering
industrial economies of scale are essential for improving the overall performance of the
hydrogen energy industry chain.
 the upstream segment is the most efficient. The midstream segment, which includes stor-
age and transportation, has become a weak link, limiting the overall efficiency of the in-
dustry chain. Therefore, optimizing the scale of storage and transportation links and fos-
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 tering industrial economies of scale are essential for improving the overall performance20 of 28
of the hydrogen energy industry chain.

5.3. Trend
Trend Analysis
Analysis
Based on
Based on the
the efficiency
efficiencyofofChina’s
China’shydrogen
hydrogenenergy
energyindustry
industrychain
chainfrom
from2018–2022,
2018–2022, the
kernel density
the kernel estimation
density estimation method
methodis utilized toto
is utilized analyze
analyzethe
theefficiency
efficiencyofof30 30listed
listedcompanies
com-
panies
in in the hydrogen
the hydrogen energy energy sector
sector at at a level.
a micro microThe
level. The resulting
resulting efficiency
efficiency develop-trends
development
ment
for trends
these for these are
companies companies are illustrated
illustrated in Figures in Figures 4–6.
4–6.

Sustainability 2025, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 30

Sustainability 2025, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 30

Figure 4. Kernel density distribution of the integrated technical efficiency of industrial chain firms.
Figure 4. Kernel density distribution of the integrated technical efficiency of industrial chain firms.

Figure 4 shows the kernel density distribution of the integrated technical efficiency
of industrial chain enterprises. Overall, the distribution curve exhibits a single-peak shape
from 2011 to 2019, with the center of the curve near the 0 scale, while the right tail of the
main
Figurepeak is extended,
5. Kernel with a tendency
density distribution to form
of the pure a second
technical peakofnear
efficiency scale 1.
industrial Thisfirms.
chain suggests
that while the efficiency levels of industrial chain enterprises are relatively concentrated,
with most operating
The kernel inefficiently,
density a small
distribution curvenumber of companies
of the scale efficiencyachieve high or
of industrial even
chain rel-
enter-
ative efficiency. This reflects a bifurcation phenomenon in the efficiency
prises, as shown in Figure 6, closely resembles the curve for comprehensive technical ef- of enterprises
within
ficiencythe
in industrial
Figure 4. Forchain.
2018–2022, the kernel density distribution of scale efficiency main-
tainsThe polarization
a single-peak in production
shape, efficiency
with the main peak within China’s
positioned nearhydrogen
the 0 scaleenergy industry
line. However,
chain
the height of the main peak decreases, the center of the curve shifts leftward, andstronger
is mainly due to technological disparities, regional policy imbalances (with the trail-
policies
ing endandon thebetter infrastructure
right in thepeak
side of the main eastern region
extends versusThis
further. insufficient
indicatessupport
that theinscale
the
central
efficiencyandofwestern regions), lack
most enterprises of coordination
in the industrial chainin the industrial
remains chain low
relatively (highandstorage and
clustered
transportation costs, along with
around at a low-efficiency [Link]
At the same bottlenecks
time, a smalllimiting
number scalability), and signif-
of enterprises exhibit
icant differences in enterprise size (large firms with abundant resources versus
high-efficiency levels, demonstrating a widening gap in scale efficiency across enterprises small firms
Figure
with Kernel
[Link]
limited
within density distribution of the pure technical efficiency of industrial chain firms.
capabilities).
industry.
Figure 5. Kernel density distribution of the pure technical efficiency of industrial chain firms.

The kernel density distribution curve of the scale efficiency of industrial chain enter-
prises, as shown in Figure 6, closely resembles the curve for comprehensive technical ef-
ficiency in Figure 4. For 2018–2022, the kernel density distribution of scale efficiency main-
tains a single-peak shape, with the main peak positioned near the 0 scale line. However,
the height of the main peak decreases, the center of the curve shifts leftward, and the trail-
ing end on the right side of the main peak extends further. This indicates that the scale
efficiency of most enterprises in the industrial chain remains relatively low and clustered
around at a low-efficiency level. At the same time, a small number of enterprises exhibit
high-efficiency levels, demonstrating a widening gap in scale efficiency across enterprises
within the industry.

Figure 6. Kernel density distribution of scale efficiency of industrial chain firms.

Figure 6. Kernel density distribution of scale efficiency of industrial chain firms.

6. Conclusions, Suggestions, and Discussion

6.1. Conclusions
To study the efficiency measurement and development trend of China’s hydrogen
energy industry chain, the three-stage DEA model was first employed to assess the com-
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 21 of 28

Figure 4 shows the kernel density distribution of the integrated technical efficiency of
industrial chain enterprises. Overall, the distribution curve exhibits a single-peak shape
from 2011 to 2019, with the center of the curve near the 0 scale, while the right tail of the
main peak is extended, with a tendency to form a second peak near scale 1. This suggests
that while the efficiency levels of industrial chain enterprises are relatively concentrated,
with most operating inefficiently, a small number of companies achieve high or even relative
efficiency. This reflects a bifurcation phenomenon in the efficiency of enterprises within the
industrial chain.
The polarization in production efficiency within China’s hydrogen energy industry
chain is mainly due to technological disparities, regional policy imbalances (with stronger
policies and better infrastructure in the eastern region versus insufficient support in the
central and western regions), lack of coordination in the industrial chain (high storage
and transportation costs, along with technological bottlenecks limiting scalability), and
significant differences in enterprise size (large firms with abundant resources versus small
firms with limited capabilities).
From 2018 to 2020, the curve shifts slightly to the left, and the peak value increases,
indicating a decline in efficiency for most enterprises and an increase in the number of
inefficient enterprises. Between 2020 and 2021, the main peak of the kernel density curve
moves to the right, and its height decreases significantly, suggesting a recovery in efficiency
levels. For 2021–2022, the main peak’s height decreases further, and the width broadens,
forming a low secondary peak to the right. This suggests a widening gap in efficiency
levels among enterprises, with some achieving significantly higher efficiency than others.
As a result, enterprises with higher efficiency will gain a more favorable market position,
while less efficient enterprises may experience greater competitive pressure or even risk
elimination. To enhance competitiveness, enterprises may increase investment in research
and development, driving technological innovation and industrial upgrading. As the
efficiency gap widens, integration across the upper, middle, and lower segments of the
industrial chain may accelerate, potentially narrowing the gap once stronger collaborative
relationships and synergies are formed.
From a macro perspective, some enterprises have entered the hydrogen energy sector
to capitalize on its development momentum. However, due to the complexity of hydro-
gen energy technology and high costs, they have not achieved significant progress. As
an emerging industry, the hydrogen energy sector is adopting a strategy of combining
point-to-point and area-driven approaches, advancing hydrogen energy demonstration
projects in an orderly fashion, and exploring effective commercialization pathways for
industry development.
Figure 5 shows the kernel density distribution of pure technical efficiency. Unlike the
integrated comprehensive technical efficiency curve, the pure technical efficiency curve
features a tall, narrow peak centered close to scale 1. The difference in peak height for
different years is pronounced, with noticeable double peaks in certain years. This indicates
that the pure technical efficiency of most enterprises is relatively high and concentrated
in the interval [0.9, 1], with more enterprises achieving near-efficiency levels. In 2018, the
number of enterprises achieving near-efficiency was close to the number of high-efficiency
enterprises, clustered near the 1 and 0.75 scales, respectively, resulting in a double-peak
distribution. For 2018–2019, the double-peak state transitions into a single-peak curve,
accompanied by a sharp decrease in peak height and a prolonged left tail. This suggests
a small decline in pure technical efficiency for a small number of enterprises. In 2019,
hydrogen energy was officially included in the Chinese government work report, marking
its official integration into China’s energy system. This signaled the beginning of significant
development for hydrogen energy, promoting the rapid growth of the hydrogen energy
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 22 of 28

industry chain. For 2019–2020, the single-peak state is maintained, with the peak height
rising and its width gradually decreasing. This suggests a narrowing gap in pure technical
efficiency among enterprises in the industrial chain, with some enterprises maintaining
high efficiency while a few others approached near-efficiency levels.
The kernel density distribution curve of the scale efficiency of industrial chain en-
terprises, as shown in Figure 6, closely resembles the curve for comprehensive technical
efficiency in Figure 4. For 2018–2022, the kernel density distribution of scale efficiency
maintains a single-peak shape, with the main peak positioned near the 0 scale line. How-
ever, the height of the main peak decreases, the center of the curve shifts leftward, and the
trailing end on the right side of the main peak extends further. This indicates that the scale
efficiency of most enterprises in the industrial chain remains relatively low and clustered
around at a low-efficiency level. At the same time, a small number of enterprises exhibit
high-efficiency levels, demonstrating a widening gap in scale efficiency across enterprises
within the industry.

6. Conclusions, Suggestions, and Discussion

6.1. Conclusions
To study the efficiency measurement and development trend of China’s hydrogen
energy industry chain, the three-stage DEA model was first employed to assess the com-
prehensive technical efficiency, pure technical efficiency, and scale efficiency of the industry
chain as a whole, as well as the upstream, midstream, and downstream segments. Addi-
tionally, this study analyzed the influence of the external environment on the efficiency of
the industry chain, identified critical shortcomings in its development [30], and assessed
efficiency trends using the kernel density estimation method.
(1) The overall comprehensive technical efficiency level of China’s hydrogen energy
industry chain was low from 2018 to 2022, primarily due to low pure technical ef-
ficiency and scale efficiency, which hindered the improvement of overall technical
efficiency. This emphasizes the need for simultaneous improvements in both pure
technical efficiency and scale efficiency. Moreover, there was an imbalance in the
efficiency development of the various segments of the industry chain, with the com-
prehensive technical efficiency of the midstream lagging behind that of the upstream
and downstream, becoming a bottleneck. An analysis of the factors influencing the
external environment reveals that the level of economic development, government
support, and regional industrial agglomeration significantly impact the efficiency
of the hydrogen energy industry chain [31]. After removing the influence of the
external environment, the comprehensive technical efficiency of the hydrogen en-
ergy industry chain further decreased, while pure technical efficiency increased [32].
As a result, China’s hydrogen energy industry chain faces deep-seated issues, such
as an irrational industrial structure, weak infrastructure, gaps in core technology,
and an uneconomical industrial scale, all of which impede the improvement of the
chain’s efficiency.
(2) The trend analysis of the 2018–2022 period reveals two levels of differentiation in the
efficiency development of 30 enterprises within China’s hydrogen energy industry
chain, spanning the upstream, middle, and downstream sectors. High-efficiency
enterprises demonstrate a more scientific and rational allocation of resources, with
little to no redundancy in input and output. In contrast, low-efficiency enterprises
exhibit significant redundancy in resource allocation, leading to unnecessary waste.
To improve production efficiency, reduce costs, and enhance competitiveness, it is
essential to further identify and utilize these resources. While some enterprises exhibit
high-efficiency levels, the majority remain at middle and low-efficiency levels. The
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 23 of 28

current state of these enterprises presents significant challenges in making quick

changes, and it is unlikely that they can independently improve their efficiency with-
out external support or intervention. Within each segment of the industrial chain,
high-efficiency enterprises can serve as industry leaders, guiding other firms toward
technological innovation and reform. By sharing experiences and technologies with
low-efficiency enterprises or forming industry alliances, they can enhance communica-
tion and collaboration, thereby helping lower-performing enterprises to improve their
efficiency. A key area for future research is determining how to effectively integrate
point-to-point and area-driven approaches, using key points to drive broader indus-
try development. The overall efficiency level of China’s hydrogen energy industry
chain remains relatively low, mainly due to an unbalanced industrial structure, weak
infrastructure, limited breakthroughs in core technologies, and diseconomies of scale.
To address these challenges, prioritizing the development of leading enterprises is
recommended. By allowing these firms to serve as anchors for industry-wide progress,
they can drive advancements in other enterprises, ultimately facilitating an overall
improvement in the efficiency of the hydrogen energy industrial chain.

6.2. Recommendations
Against the strategic backdrop of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality, the hydrogen
energy industry has encountered unprecedented development opportunities. However,
influenced by various factors, such as technological complexity, high investment costs, and
multiple production stages, China’s hydrogen energy industry chain still faces issues,
like low production efficiency and insufficient coordination. To achieve high-quality
development across the entire industry chain, this study recommends adopting a policy-
driven approach, combining point-to-point and area-driven strategies. The immediate goal
should be to enable leading enterprises in each segment to achieve breakthroughs in key
core technologies. In addition, it is also suggested that domestic and international hydrogen
energy technological innovation cooperation be actively promoted, alongside strengthening
standardization, industry regulation, and the efficient, coordinated development of the
industry chain. The following steps will contribute to achieving this goal:
(1) Continuously improve the level of key core technologies. Relying on national science
and technology programs, it is essential to vigorously support the development of
foundational materials, core components, critical equipment, and disruptive tech-
nologies within the hydrogen energy sector. Projects, such as hydrogen-powered
aircraft, liquid hydrogen transport ships, offshore wind-to-hydrogen equipment, and
integrated wind-solar-hydrogen storage and refueling systems, should be progres-
sively advanced. A comprehensive hydrogen energy equipment system should be
developed, covering the entire industrial chain of production, storage, transportation,
and application. It is necessary to accelerate innovation in proton exchange membrane
fuel cells, focusing on the development of critical materials, improving performance
indicators, and expanding batch production capabilities. Efforts should be made to
continuously enhance the reliability, stability, and durability of fuel cells [33]. Support
should also be provided for the development of new fuel cells and other related
innovations. It is necessary to promote the R&D and manufacturing of core com-
ponents and essential equipment, as well as the improvement of renewable energy
hydrogen conversion efficiency and the scaling of hydrogen production per unit. It
is also necessary to overcome the technical challenges related to hydrogen energy
infrastructure and push forward the development of key core technologies across
the production, storage, transport, and application of green, low-carbon hydrogen
energy [34].
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 24 of 28

(2) Emphasize the development of industrial innovation support platforms. By focusing

on critical areas and key segments of the hydrogen energy sector, efforts should be
made to establish multi-level and diversified innovation platforms that accelerate the
convergence of talent, technology, funding, and other essential innovation factors.
Universities, research institutes, and enterprises should collaborate to establish key
laboratories and cutting-edge interdisciplinary research platforms to carry out ap-
plied basic research and explore advanced hydrogen energy technologies. Relying on
leading enterprises to integrate high-quality innovation resources in the industry, the
establishment of industrial innovation centers, engineering research centers, technol-
ogy innovation centers, and manufacturing innovation centers should be prioritized,
fostering efficient collaborative innovation.
Incorporating digital technology into the hydrogen energy industry is crucial for
optimizing efficiency and resource utilization. Data integration across the upper, middle,
and lower reaches of the hydrogen energy industry chain, including production, storage,
transportation, and application, can provide a comprehensive understanding of industry
dynamics. Utilizing big data analytics can enable accurate prediction of hydrogen energy
demand and optimize resource allocation. In addition, a hydrogen energy industry chain
cooperation mechanism should be established to promote information sharing and collabo-
ration at the different stages of the value chain. Strengthening industrial chain integration
can foster a cluster effect, improving the overall competitiveness of the hydrogen energy
sector. Digital collaboration is a key driver of industry development, and the establish-
ment of a centralized data platform, intelligent production and management systems, and
optimized energy management frameworks can further enhance operational efficiency.
Strengthening collaboration among government entities, industries, academic institutions,
research organizations, and application sectors, along with fostering international coopera-
tion and exchanges, will be instrumental in advancing the competitiveness and capabilities
of the hydrogen energy industry.
(3) Promote the development of a specialized talent pool for hydrogen energy. Driven by
the need for technological innovation in the hydrogen energy sector, efforts should
be made to attract and cultivate high-end talent to strengthen the R&D capabilities
in basic frontier technologies related to hydrogen energy. The focus should be on
accelerating the cultivation of professional talents in hydrogen energy technology and
equipment, thereby reinforcing the innovation foundation necessary for the industry’s
growth. A sound mechanism for talent cultivation and training systems should be
established. The development of local hydrogen energy talent has become a key
consideration for enterprises when selecting project locations. Driven by favorable
policies and industrial demand, the challenge of hydrogen energy talent shortages has
seen breakthroughs in Chinese universities. Since 2019, programs, such as “Hydrogen
Energy Technology Application” and “Hydrogen Energy Science and Engineering”,
have been included in the undergraduate curriculum of Chinese universities. Beyond
undergraduate programs, the development of hydrogen energy disciplines has ex-
panded to include master’s and doctoral levels. Establishing a comprehensive training
model encompassing undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral programs will provide
strong support for cultivating talent within the hydrogen energy industry. This will
accelerate the development of hydrogen energy-related disciplines and specialties
and expanding the pool of hydrogen energy innovation and R&D professionals [35].
(4) Actively pursue international collaboration in hydrogen energy technology innova-
tion. It is necessary to encourage joint research and development of hydrogen energy
science and technology, promote cooperation in the innovation of key core technolo-
gies, materials, and equipment across the entire industry chain, and actively build
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 25 of 28

an international hydrogen energy innovation chain and industry chain. It is also

necessary to take an active role in the development of international hydrogen energy
industry standards and to adhere to the principle of joint construction and shared ben-
efits, exploring partnerships in hydrogen energy trade, infrastructure development,
and product innovation with countries involved in the “Belt and Road” initiative. Fi-
nally, it is necessary to strengthen project cooperation with countries and regions with
leading hydrogen energy technologies, and to jointly explore international markets.
(5) The establishment of a standardization and regulatory framework for the hydro-
gen energy industry is crucial for ensuring safety within the sector. Formulating
national and industry-specific standards for hydrogen energy production, storage,
transmission, and utilization, and clarifying industrial norms will help prevent safety
incidents caused by improper operations or equipment failures [36]. At the same
time, strengthening industrial supervision is necessary to ensure that enterprises and
individuals adhere to relevant regulations, thereby enhancing the safety standards of
the hydrogen energy industry. Achieving high-quality and sustainable development
in the hydrogen energy sector requires coordination across the entire industry chain.
This includes securing top-tier equipment from upstream manufacturers, ensuring
the safe transport and storage of hydrogen by midstream companies, and facilitating
its correct use by downstream consumers. Industry-wide synergy and cooperation
bolster the risk resistance of the entire hydrogen energy chain. A flexible regulatory
framework should be established to avoid a “one-size-fits-all” approach.
Efforts should focus on strengthening safety technology R&D, promoting pilot projects,
improving industry standards and certification systems, and fostering industry–academia–
research collaboration to tackle technical challenges. Policy support and incentives should
be provided, and public education and industry training should be enhanced, along with
leveraging international experience to promote global collaborative development. Estab-
lishing a dedicated hydrogen energy fund can provide financial support and risk protection
for hydrogen-related projects. Legal frameworks should also be strengthened, incorporat-
ing hydrogen energy safety regulations and environmental protection policies. Further-
more, participation in international hydrogen energy organizations should be encouraged,
strengthening exchanges and cooperation with countries that have advanced hydrogen
technologies. By integrating foreign innovations, strengthening interactions with interna-
tional markets, and promoting globalization efforts, the technological level and market
competitiveness of China’s hydrogen energy industry can be significantly enhanced.
(6) To optimize resource utilization and innovation, a hydrogen energy industry alliance
should be established. This alliance would connect upstream and downstream enter-
prises, research institutions, and related stakeholders, promoting technical exchange,
cooperation, and resource sharing. Collaborative innovation across the industry chain
can drive efficiency and technological advancements. Building a comprehensive
hydrogen storage and transportation network is another crucial step. Inspired by
power grid dispatching and intelligent energy management in buildings, a unified
hydrogen dispatching and management system should be implemented. Hydrogen
can be transported from production sites to consumption areas through pipelines
and high-pressure gas cylinders, reducing storage and transportation costs, while
improving safety [37].
Expanding hydrogen application scenarios is also vital. Encouraging R&D and demon-
stration projects in various application fields, including hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (trans-
portation), hydrogen-based steelmaking (industrial), and hydrogen heating (construction)
can increase demand and promote industry growth. Additionally, establishing a hydrogen
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 26 of 28

energy trading platform can facilitate market-oriented allocation and resource sharing.
This platform would allow enterprises and individuals across the hydrogen energy value
chain to buy and sell hydrogen efficiently. Drawing inspiration from intelligent build-
ing energy storage-sharing services, a resource-sharing mechanism between different
segments of the hydrogen industry should be explored. These efforts, supported by pol-
icy initiatives, technological advancements, talent development, and market promotion,
can ensure the coordinated growth of the hydrogen energy industry and accelerate its
long-term development.
(7) A structured industry improvement action plan should be formulated with the pri-
mary objective of enhancing efficiency, increasing technology research and devel-
opment, and driving key technology innovations in the hydrogen energy sector.
Introducing and assimilating international advanced technologies and equipment
will accelerate the industry’s ability to innovate and adapt. Efforts should be made
to expand infrastructure for hydrogen storage, production, transportation, and uti-
lization. Optimizing hydrogen production structures is also critical, which includes
increasing the proportion of hydrogen production by water electrolysis and improv-
ing the efficiency of hydrogen production from coal. To achieve sustainable and
competitive industry growth, a unified energy system should be developed, ensuring
seamless integration with global markets. Strengthened supervision will be necessary
to maintain safety and environmental protection. Promoting international cooperation
and exchanges will further advance the sector. Collaboration with internationally
renowned enterprises and research institutions can drive joint research and devel-
opment, accelerating the adoption and commercialization of cutting-edge hydrogen
energy technologies.

6.3. Discussion
This paper introduces innovations for measuring the efficiency trends of the hydrogen
energy industry chain. However, the industry faces numerous uncertainties, particularly in
key and complex areas, such as hydrogen production, storage, and transportation. Factors,
such as technological breakthroughs, policy changes, and market demand fluctuations, may
affect investment decisions, technology research and development, and market expansion.
These uncertainties may also trigger chain reactions that could lead to efficiency declines
across the entire industrial chain.
Due to the current limitations in data availability, this study does not incorporate
uncertainty analysis. Future research will address this gap by introducing a risk aversion
strategy based on the conditional value at risk (CVaR). This approach will enable a more
accurate evaluation of the risks facing the hydrogen energy industry chain under uncer-
tainty and their potential impact on overall efficiency, mitigating these uncertainties and
enhancing the resilience of the hydrogen energy industry.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, B.L. and P.Z.; data curation, B.L.; formal analysis, P.Z. and
B.L.; funding acquisition, P.Z.; investigation, B.L.; project administration, H.I. and H.D.; supervision,
H.I. and H.D.; writing—original draft, B.L. and Y.Q.; writing—review and editing, P.Z., H.I. and H.D.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: Shandong Provincial Social Science Planning Research Project: 23CSDJ57.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement: The data supporting the plots within this paper and other study
findings are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 27 of 28

Acknowledgments: We would like to express our gratitude to the Dongying Regional High-Quality
Economic Development Research Base at Shandong Institute of Petroleum and Chemical Technology
for their financial support.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Zhao, H.; Zhu, B.; Jiang, B. Comprehensive assessment and analysis of cavitation scale effects on energy conversion and stability
in pumped hydro energy storage units. Energy Convers. Manag. 2025, 325, 119370. [CrossRef]
2. Cheng, Q. Research on the Connotation, Mechanism and Measurement of Industrial and Supply Chains–Based the Toughness of
Regional Industrial and Supply Chains and Its Enlightenment to Nantong. Shanghai Econ. 2022, 6, 25–40. [CrossRef]
3. Shi, J.; Lu, D.; Xu, L. On the Fourth Global Industrial Chain Reconstruction with China’s Industrial Chain Upgrading. Res. Financ.
Econ. Issues 2022, 4, 8–117. [CrossRef]
4. Duan, W.; Wang, B. Theories and paths to enhance the resilience of industrial chain supply chain. Chin. Soc. Sci. Today 2023, 3.
5. Song, M. Study on the Path to Enhancing China’s Industrial Chain Resilience. Ind. Eng. Innov. Manag. 2024, 7, 148–153. [CrossRef]
6. Wen, H.; Liang, W.; Lee, C.C. Input–output Efficiency of China’s Digital Economy: Statistical Measures, Regional Differences, and
Dynamic Evolution. J. Knowl. Econ. 2023, 15, 10898–10923. [CrossRef]
7. Cheng, L.T.W.; Lee, S.K.; Li, S.K.; Tsang, C.K. Understanding resource deployment efficiency for ESG and financial performance:
A DEA approach. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 2023, 65, 101941. [CrossRef]
8. Wang, Q.; Wu, S.; Huang, P.; Hueng, C.J. The influence of market liquidity on the efficiency of China’s pilot carbon markets.
Financ. Res. Lett. 2025, 72, 106560. [CrossRef]
9. Oldenhof, L.; Kersing, M.; Zoonen, V.L. Sphere transgressions in the Dutch digital welfare state: Causing harm to citizens when
legal rules, ethical norms and quality procedures are lacking. Inf. Commun. Soc. 2024, 27, 2704–2720. [CrossRef]
10. Tan, J. Research on the mechanism of digital economy to enhance the innovation efficiency of high-tech industry in the context of
big data. Appl. Math. Nonlinear Sci. 2024, 9, 1–14. [CrossRef]
11. Zoitovich, K.K.; Uralovich, A.N.; Jonuzokovich, A.A. Factor analysis of industrial efficiency indicators. J. Crit. Rev. 2020, 7,
515–517.
12. Ang, F.; Ramsden, J.S. Analysing determinate components of an approximated Luenberger–Hicks–Moorsteen productivity
indicator: An application to German dairy-processing firms. Agribusiness 2024, 40, 349–370. [CrossRef]
13. Hu, L.; Chen, F.; Zhao, R. Does Digital Inclusive Finance Increase Industry Chain Resilience in China? Sustainability 2024, 16, 6028.
[CrossRef]
14. Amiri, S.; Alinaghian, M.; Khosroshahi, H. Optimizing greenness and pricing in green product development: Addressing
cannibalization and enhancing market share in a duopoly markets. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2024, 26, 1–46. [CrossRef]
15. Feng, H.; Guanchun, L.; Jing, H. CSR performance and firm idiosyncratic risk in a data-rich environment: The role of retail
investor attention. J. Int. Financ. Mark. Inst. Money 2023, 89, 101877. [CrossRef]
16. Fiona, S.; Jennifer, P. Measuring the academic library:Translating today’s inputs and outputs into future impact and value. Inf.
Learn. Sci. 2018, 119, 109–120. [CrossRef]
17. Alireza, A.; Tofigh, A.; Maryam, N. A firm-specific Malmquist productivity index model for stochastic data envelopment analysis:
An application to commercial banks. Financ. Innov. 2024, 10, 3705–3715. [CrossRef]
18. Mansaray, S.S.; Hongyi, X.; Sawaneh, A.I. Assessing and enhancing operational efficiency in Sierra Leone’s retail banking sector:
A comparative analysis using CCR and BCC DEA models. Manag. Decis. Econ. 2024, 45, 3705–3715. [CrossRef]
19. Zhang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Wang, J.; Zhao, L.; Chen, M. Evaluation of Carbon Emission Efficiency in the Construction Industry
Based on the Super-Efficient Slacks-Based Measure Model: A Case Study at the Provincial Level in China. Buildings 2023, 13, 2207.
[CrossRef]
20. Forghani, D.; Ibrahim, M.D.; Daneshvar, S. Improving weak efficiency frontier in a variable returns to scale stochastic data
envelopment analysis model. RAIRO-Oper. Res. 2022, 56, 2159–2179. [CrossRef]
21. Lou, Y.Y.; Yang, G.L.; Guan, Z.C.; Chen, X.L.; Pan, H.; Wang, T.; Zheng, H.J. A parallel data envelopment analysis and Malmquist
productivity index model of virtual frontier for evaluating scientific and technological innovation efficiency at universities. Decis.
Anal. J. 2024, 10, 100384. [CrossRef]
22. Mohanty, A.; Mohapatra, G.A.; Tripathy, K.P. Smart hospitality using IoT enabled integrated face recognition, machine learning,
and fuzzy AHP for analyzing customer satisfaction measurements. Int. J. Inf. Technol. 2024, 17, 1597–1605. [CrossRef]
23. Peter, S.C.; Whelan, J.P.; Pfund, R.A. Text Comprehension Analyses to Improve Assessment Accuracy: Demonstration Using
Gambling Disorder Screening. J. Gambl. Stud. 2022, 38, 1269–1287. [CrossRef]
24. Zulqarnain, M.; Wei, W.; Ihsan, J. Evaluating the factors of coal consumption inefficiency in energy intensive industries of China:
An epsilon-based measure model. Resour. Policy 2022, 78, 102800. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2025, 17, 3140 28 of 28

25. Ling, W. Hydrogen Energy in Shandong: Building on the Momentum and Joining the Trend of Our Times. Engineering 2021, 7,
726–727. [CrossRef]
26. Zhang, X. The Development Trend of and Suggestions for China’s Hydrogen Energy Industry. Engineering 2021, 7, 719–721.
[CrossRef]
27. Xu, S.; Yu, B. The Current Development Status and Future Prospects of Hydrogen Energy Technology in China. J. Beijing Inst.
Technol. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2021, 23, 1–12. [CrossRef]
28. Gao, W. The concept of hydrogen energy continues to attract attention, with listed companies positioning themselves in a
trillion-level market. Econ. Inf. Dly. 2022, 3. [CrossRef]
29. Fried, H.O.; Lovell, C.A.K.; Schmidt, S.S.; Yaisawarng, S. Accounting for Environmental Effects and Statistical Noise in Data
Envelopment Analysis. J. Product. Anal. 2002, 17, 157–174. [CrossRef]
30. Kijima, Y.; Schoemaker, R.; Tipka, A. Investigation of Radioxenon Probability Density Functions at IMS Radionuclide Stations
Using a Monte Carlo Method for Background Estimation. Pure Appl. Geophys. 2024, 181, 1–11. [CrossRef]
31. Nourelhouda, A.E. Green Entrepreneurship: External Environment Analysis on the Renewable Energy Industry in Jordan. J.
Humanit. Arts Soc. Sci. 2022, 6, 275–302. [CrossRef]
32. Ziobrowski, Z.; Rotkegel, A. Assessment of Hydrogen Energy Industry Chain Based on Hydrogen Production Methods, Storage,
and Utilization. Energies 2024, 17, 1808. [CrossRef]
33. Huo, H.; Wang, K.; Li, B. Model-based humidity observer for vehicle proton exchange membrane fuel cell based on a new sliding
mode observer estimation technique. Int. J. Green Energy 2024, 21, 3601–3612. [CrossRef]
34. Wei, L.; Yanming, W.; Yalin, X. Green hydrogen standard in China: Standard and evaluation of low-carbon hydrogen, clean
hydrogen, and renewable hydrogen. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2022, 47, 24584–24591. [CrossRef]
35. Ran, M.; Li, Y. Value Logic of Talent Cultivation Quality in Evaluation Model for Vocational Colleges in New Era. Educ. Reform
Dev. 2024, 6, 51–56. [CrossRef]
36. Sokhna, G.S.; Emmanuel, H.; Vincent, D. Hydrogen development in Europe: Estimating material consumption in net zero
emissions scenarios. Int. Econ. 2023, 176, 100457. [CrossRef]
37. Zhang, H.; Li, Z.; Xue, Y.; Chang, X.; Su, J.; Wang, P.; Guo, Q.; Sun, H. A Stochastic Bi-Level Optimal Allocation Approach of
Intelligent Buildings Considering Energy Storage Sharing Services. IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron. 2024, 70, 5142–5153. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.