The Netherlands is undergoing a major energy transition, aiming to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 55 percent by 2030 and to reach full climate neutrality by 2050. Hydrogen is expected to play a key role in this transition, particularly in industrial sectors where electrification is technically challenging or economically unviable. In support of this goal, the Dutch government is investing in large-scale hydrogen production and the phased development of a national hydrogen backbone, led by HyNetwork Services. This network will connect five major industrial clusters by 2033. However, it does not extend to the many medium-sized industrial sites dispersed across the country, collectively referred to as Cluster 6. These firms, active in energy-intensive sectors such as food processing, chemicals, glass, and metals, face significant barriers to adopting hydrogen, including high connection costs and limited infrastructure access. Additionally, many of these companies have high energy demands and rely on processes that are difficult to electrify. Combined with widespread congestion on the electricity grid, these factors severely limit their ability to transition away from fossil fuels, leaving few viable pathways for decarbonization.

This thesis explores the coordination challenge that arises from this situation. Medium-sized firms cannot commit to hydrogen without reliable infrastructure, while infrastructure providers are reluctant to invest without visible, concentrated demand. To examine how different planning strategies can address this deadlock, the thesis develops an agent-based model that simulates interactions between a central infrastructure planner and spatially distributed industrial users. The planner combines the roles of Hydrogen Distribution Network Operator and Distribution System Operator and responds to firm-level adoption decisions under real-world constraints such as investment cycles, capacity limitations, and policy changes. The model evaluates three rollout strategies: a reactive approach in which infrastructure follows demand, a proactive approach in which infrastructure anticipates demand, and a delay scenario in which no infrastructure is built. Outcomes are assessed using a Societal Net Present Value metric that captures financial costs, emissions reductions, and avoided grid reinforcements.

The simulation results show that proactive infrastructure rollout significantly improves hydrogen adoption and societal outcomes. Even modest anticipatory investments, when timed to align with firms’ decision-making cycles, help overcome coordination failures, accelerate emissions reductions, and increase infrastructure efficiency. In contrast, reactive strategies lead to fragmented, delayed development and fail to unlock widespread decarbonization. The findings also highlight the importance of policy design: hydrogen subsidies are most effective when paired with visible infrastructure, while uncoordinated electricity subsidies can fragment adoption and reduce system coherence.

The thesis concludes that enabling the hydrogen transition for medium-sized industry requires a shift from reactive to anticipatory planning. This requires urgently defining the role and responsibilities of future Hydrogen Distribution Network Operators (HDNOs), along with granting them a clear mandate to invest ahead of demand. Cost recovery mechanisms and supportive regulatory frameworks must enable timely, coordinated rollout. Only by aligning infrastructure deployment with the decarbonization timelines of medium-sized industry can regions like Cluster 6 be fully integrated into the energy transition and contribute meaningfully to national climate targets.

Urged by international accords such as the Paris Agreement and the IPCC’s global warming report, the Dutch government is in the process of developing the national industrial hydrogen market across five main industry clusters. In addition, regional hydrogen demand is being explored to complement the national hydrogen backbone by connecting decentralized industrial customers outside the five clusters through regional hydrogen distribution networks. This emerging regional industrial hydrogen market is collectively referred to as Cluster 6.

Hydrogen distribution network operators (HDNOs) are expected to play a key role in this transition as neutral market facilitators at the regional level. However, as heavily regulated entities, HDNOs are dependent on appropriate regulatory frameworks. The EU’s Hydrogen and Gas Decarbonisation Package introduces a legal framework for third-party access (TPA), allowing Member States to adopt regulated (rTPA), negotiated (nTPA), or hybrid (hnTPA) regimes. In the Dutch context, regional TPA regulation remains under development. The implications of these regimes for HDNOs and regional market development are currently unclear.

This research addresses the knowledge gap surrounding the influence of TPA regimes on stakeholder behaviour and hydrogen deployment in Cluster 6. Using a case study approach, the study combines literature review, expert interviews, and agent-based modelling (ABM) to analyse how TPA regimes affect stakeholder decision-making and infrastructure rollout. Interviews were held with system operators, a Cluster 6 representative, local industries, and the municipality. Interviewees highlighted challenges due to unclear stakeholder roles and financial responsibilities. While some industries expressed interest in hydrogen, driven by visionary entrepreneurs, most remained hesitant and dependent on broader commitment. High costs and uncertainty around hydrogen pricing were key concerns. Network operators indicated that key negotiation terms under nTPA could include prioritization based on project characteristics and investment cost division.

These insights informed the agent-based model. Industrial agents in the model decide to transition to hydrogen based on a motivation score derived from peer pressure, cost-benefit analysis (CBA), and waiting list incentives. Scenarios reflect different TPA regimes and associated rules: rTPA with first-come-first-served prioritization, and nTPA and hnTPA with negotiable prioritization and cost division.

The results show that TPA regimes significantly affect the pace and scale of hydrogen deployment. nTPA yields the most favourable outcomes for hydrogen off-take and CO₂ reduction, due to prioritization mechanisms that reward large, efficient projects. However, prioritization alone does not accelerate the timing of transition unless economic conditions are also supportive.

The investment cost division plays a stronger role in influencing the pace of transition. When industries are partially relieved of investment costs (under nTPA and hnTPA), the model shows shorter average waiting times and an earlier final transition year. Even when hnTPA switches to rTPA, results remain favourable due to early negotiation-phase decisions. Together, the negotiation terms support more ambitious transitions and earlier uptake.

Based on these findings, the study recommends clarifying stakeholder roles and financial responsibilities, assigning an HDNO, and considering scenario-based price guarantees. HDNOs could use negotiation terms to incentivize cost-efficient projects and introduce cost-sharing mechanisms to reduce risk. Both actors should promote visibility and flexibility in early-phase TPA design to increase motivation for hydrogen adoption.

In conclusion, third-party access regimes play a crucial role in shaping the regional hydrogen transition. While regulated TPA delays progress, negotiated TPA supports more ambitious and timely outcomes. Hybrid regimes offer a partial solution but depend on economic conditions and timing.

Green hydrogen is emerging as a critical component in the global fight against climate change, offering a viable pathway to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and facilitate the transition to a low carbon economy. As renewable energy sources (RES) like wind and solar become more prevalent, the challenge of their variable supply and the resulting green hydrogen production, demands robust energy storage solutions to ensure stability and flexibility in the energy supply. Underground hydrogen storage (UHS) in salt caverns has been technically proven as an efficient and effective method to address these challenges. However, despite the growing need for UHS, the development of such projects is lagging behind.
The study applied and extended the Institutional Network Analysis (INA) method to the case study of UHS in salt caverns in the Netherlands. The INA method is designed to identify institutional relations and analyse how formal and informal institutions interact within an institutional environment. In this research, the method was modified to focus exclusively on formal institutions, excluding informal institutions. Two extensions were made to deepen the analysis. First, a rule typology analysis was added to analyse the key characteristics of the formal rules within the institutional environment. Second, the approach was further refined by categorizing drivers behind institutional connections.
The application of the extended INA methodology uncovered several critical insights into the institutional environment governing UHS in salt caverns. First, the study identified a misalignment between the Dutch government’s policy intentions, as outlined in the Subsurface Spatial Planning Vision, and the actual practices dictated by the Environment and Planning Act. While the Act emphasizes participation and the opportunity for third parties to propose solutions, the Vision often rules out these possibilities by pre-determining the most fitting solution for a specific problem. Second, the analysis revealed an institutional void, particularly in the area of participatory governance. Although many formal institutions advocate for a participatory approach, the policy documents lack clear guidelines on how third parties should be included in decision-making processes and how the effectiveness of participation strategies should be assessed. Next, the study highlighted the central role of specific actors, such as the competent authority and project developers, who hold significant influence within the institutional network. Additionally, several objects related to permit applications and operational procedures were identified as potential bottlenecks due to their high embeddedness scores. Lastly, the analysis of the rule typology revealed that boundary, information, and position rules are the most prevalent within the institutional context. This suggests that the institutional environment is heavily focused on regulating access and exit within the context and ensuring the dissemination of information to relevant stakeholders.