Additionally, one-on-one online meetings were held with key stakeholders to better understand the context surrounding green hydrogen development and to refine and enhance the risk matrices. These discussions addressed governance, regulatory frameworks, and investment challenges specific to green hydrogen development in Jordan. 3.3.Formulating the Risk Assessment Matrices A structured process was employed to develop the risk assessment matrices: • Risk Identification: Insights from the literature review, stakeholder consultations, and international best practices were employed to identify risks for each EESG dimension. Relevant risks, including regulatory barriers, investment gaps, and water scarcity, were prioritized according to their national significance. • Risk Assessment: Probability and impact were evaluated for each identified risk: o Probability: The likelihood of the risk occurring, classified as low, medium, or high. o Impact: The severity of the risk's effects on economic, environmental, social, or governance dimensions, also classified as low, medium, or high. o Influence Period: Risks were classified as short-term(0–10 years), mid-term(11– 20 years), or long-term(21–30 years), to allow for the prioritization of mitigation efforts. • Optimization and Mitigation: Risk mitigation strategies were devised in accordance with local capacity, stakeholder feedback, and best practices. Strategies included investments in technology, policy reform, and capacity building. Additionally, opportunities were identified, including the promotion of innovation and the exploitation of Jordan's renewable energy potential. 3.4.Iterative Review Process The risk assessment was iterative, enabling continuous updates based on stakeholder contributions and new data. This dynamic approach encouraged adaptability within the methodology, allowing for future risks and opportunities to be addressed as the green hydrogen sector evolves. 15