From Conflict to Coexistence

India’s ambitious Green Hydrogen Mission is being heralded as the nation’s next clean energy breakthrough. With a target of producing 5 million metric tons of green hydrogen annually by 2030, the mission promises industrial rejuvenation, reduced fossil fuel dependency and export competitiveness along with job creation. However, if not executed with care, this transition could deepen inequalities, spark local resistance, and strain natural ecosystems.

As history has shown with coal mining, hydroelectric dams, and even solar parks, clean energy transitions are not automatically feasible. They can often lead to displacement without consent, ecological imbalance, and social unrest, especially when driven top down without local voices. Green hydrogen, despite its promise, is no exception. To navigate these challenges, India needs a strong Corporate Social Responsibility framework embedded within green hydrogen projects. More than just a checkbox or compliance burden, CSR must be reimagined as a tool for social license to operate, enabling inclusive development, community empowerment and long-term co-existence.

Hydrogen is crucial for decarbonising sectors where direct electrification is difficult- like steel, cement, and fertiliser production. With over USD 34 billion in expected investments and 600,000 jobs projected, green hydrogen is expected to reshape India’s energy and industrial landscape. But with opportunity comes complexity. The deployment of hydrogen infrastructure such as electrolysers and production plants often overlaps with agriculture or forest lands, raising the risks of land acquisition disputes if local consultation is neglected. Electrolysis, the core process in green hydrogen production, requires significant water input, which could worsen existing vulnerabilities in water scarce regions like Rajasthan, Karnataka, and Tamil Nadu. Moreover, when communities are excluded from decision making, they may be perceived as obstacles rather than partners, breeding distrust, resistance, and potential unrest. A critical query in this context is: If these communities are not meaningfully involved from the outset, can we truly call this a “just” energy transition, or merely a low carbon replication of old extractive models?

Safety concerns also loom large, as hydrogen’s highly flammable nature necessitates clear risk communication and emergency preparedness, both of which are often inadequate. A technology-first rollout that ignores these socio-environmental safeguards could not only stall implementation but also erode public trust and undermine India’s broader climate leadership goals. Corporate social responsibility in energy transitions must go beyond token gesture. It must address common concerns, generate shared values, and create resilience. For hydrogen, Corporate Social Responsibility can play a transformative role by resolving conflicts through dialogue and consent-based land use, empowering communities without job, training, and infrastructure, and protecting local resources through investment in water-efficient and ecologically sensitive technologies. It also fosters long term partnership between developers, civil society, and local institutions, ensuring that projects are inclusive and grounded in trust. Far from being an act of charity, CSR in this context is a strategic investment in social stability, reputational strength, and long-term sustainability of India’s green hydrogen transition.

To operationalise a responsible hydrogen transition, India’s CSR framework must rest on five key pillars. First, participatory planning requiring Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) for land and water use, the formation of grassroots stakeholder forums, and accessible grievance redressal systems. Second, resource stewardship involving the adoption of water-efficient electrolysers, conducting ecological impact assessments, and promoting integrated land-use models like agrivoltaics. Third, inclusive growth must be achieved through local skill development, investment in essential social infrastructure, and support for hydrogen-linked green entrepreneurship. Fourth, a strong health and safety culture demands regular safety drills, first-responder training, and clear risk communication using local languages. Finally, monitoring and accountability should include community-led tracking through digital dashboards, adaptive governance frameworks that respond to new risks, and transparent public disclosure of CSR outcomes.

Together, these pillars can ensure India’s hydrogen future is not only green but also just and inclusive. The government’s National Green Hydrogen Mission provides a durable foundation for R&D and investment, but without robust social safeguards, it risks evolving into an elite techno-economic project disconnected from ground realities. To institutionalise responsible and inclusive growth, policy must go further by mandating CSR budgets that explicitly support displaced or impacted communities through clear Just Transition Guidelines. A system of Responsible Hydrogen Certification – akin to “green hydrogen” tagging for carbon intensity – should be introduced to recognise companies with exemplary CSR practices. Additionally, governments should incentivise participation by offering subsidies or fast-track approvals to firms that exceed CSR benchmarks and actively co-create benefits with local communities. Importantly, due process must be protected so that streamlined project approvals do not override critical safeguards like environmental clearances, Gram Sabha consent, or comprehensive water-use assessments.

India’s clean energy players have already pioneered inclusive models worth replicating. Companies like Tata Power, Renew Power, and Adani Green have used CSR to provide solar irrigation, women’s entrepreneurship, school electrification, and climate resilience programs across rural India. Such models demonstrate that community engagement pays dividends – reducing opposition, accelerating land acquisition, and building public trust. These learnings must now be adapted to hydrogen. For instance, “Hydrogen Valleys” planned across Indian states must be designed not only as hubs of innovation but also as engines of inclusive growth. Local procurement, district-level innovation clusters, and strong civil society partnerships can anchor hydrogen in regional development.

Even the best frameworks must confront real-world complexities. Without genuine community participation, hydrogen projects risk facing social resistance, where protests grow and CSR becomes reactive rather than proactive. In water-stressed regions, hydrogen production may become untenable unless alternative sources or seawater-based technologies are adopted. Moreover, India lacks a hydrogen-ready workforce, making it imperative for CSR to support polytechnic upskilling and the vocational inclusion of youth and women. High capital costs add further pressure, but well-designed CSR can de-risk investments by building trust, reducing delays, and preventing litigation. India cannot treat hydrogen as just another industrial venture. To lead globally, it must prioritise ethical, inclusive, and community-driven models that respect local aspirations. True success will be measured not in megatons of hydrogen, but in the quality of jobs created, the resilience of the ecosystem, and the strength of grassroots partnerships. The transition must move from extractive to inclusive – and CSR, when done right, is the bridge to a future rooted in green justice.

Anusreeta Dutta is a columnist, political ecology researcher with prior experience as an ESG analyst. Hrishikesh Vedantam is a Co-Founder of Meridian Data Labs. Views expressed are personal