This paper problematizes the obsession with “scaling up” that is visible in numerous technological domains. Using the case of hydrogen mobility projects in France, we identify a tension between a discourse of rapid scaling for nationwide deployment, and projects undertaken by local authorities and private companies who make small-scale experiments with hydrogen cars and charging stations more dense, by adding uses, actors, and technical functionalities. We use the term “deep scaling” to characterize the latter approach. By examining projects focusing on “ecosystems” of hydrogen mobility, we discuss the consequences of deep scaling for the geographic and economic extension. In this configuration, technologies are not expected to expand to vast territories by remaining the same at a bigger scale. Instead, they are attached to local sites and develop alongside them, which raises the issue of the connections between those sites. The analysis of deep scaling allows us to identify potential alternatives to ready-made discourses of scalability and contribute to the analysis of the politics and practices of scaling.
AutioErkkoThomasLlewellyn. 2014. “Innovation Ecosystems: Implications for Innovation Management?” In The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management, edited byDogsonMarkGannDavidPhillipsNelson, 204–88. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2.
BakkerSjoerdBuddeBjorn. 2012. “Technological Hype and Disappointment: Lessons from the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Case.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management24 (6): 549–63.
3.
BehlingNorikoWilliamsMarkManagiShunsuke. 2015. “Fuel Cells and the Hydrogen Revolution: Analysis of a Strategic Plan in Japan” Economic Analysis and Policy48: 204–21.
4.
Bergvall-KårebornBirgittaStåhlbro¨stAnna. 2009. “Living Lab: An Open and Citizen-centric Approach for Innovation.” International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development1 (4): 356–70.
5.
BulkeleyHarrietBrotoVanesa Castán. 2013. “Government by Experiment? Global Cities and the Governing of Climate Change.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers38 (3): 361–75.
6.
CallonMichel. 1980a. “Struggles and Negotiations to Decide What Is Problematic and What Is Not: the Socio-logics of Translation.” In The Social Process of Scientific Investigation, edited byKnorrKarinKrohnRogerWhitleyRichard P., 197–20. Dordrecht, Netherlands: D Reidel.
7.
CallonMichel. 1980b. “The State and Technical Innovation: A Case Study of the Electrical Vehicle in France.” Research Policy9 (4): 358–76.
8.
CallonMichel. 1999. “Ni Intellectuel Engagé, ni Intellectuel Dégagé: la Double Stratégie de l’attachement et du Détachement.” Sociologie du Travail41 (1): 65–78.
CugurulloFederico. 2018. “Exposing Smart Cities and Eco-cities: Frankenstein Urbanism and the Sustainability Challenges of the Experimental City.” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space50 (1): 73–92.
11.
EhrensteinVéraDaniel NeylandD.. 2018. “On Scale Work: Evidential Practices and Global Health Interventions.” Economy and society47 (1): 59–82.
12.
EngelsFranziskaWentlandAlexanderPfotenhauerSebastian. 2019. “Testing Future Societies? Developing a Framework for Test Beds and Living Labs as Instruments of Innovation Governance.” Research Policy48 (9): 103826.
13.
EspagneEtienneMagachoGuilherme. 2022. “Planification Écologique et Changement Structurel: Perspectives Pour la France.” Revue de l’OFCE1: 175–201.
14.
EvansJamesKarvonenAndrew. 2014. “‘Give Me a Laboratory and I Will Lower Your Carbon Footprint!’ – Urban Laboratories and the Governance of Low-carbon Futures: Governance of Low Carbon Futures in Manchester.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research38 (2): 413–30.
15.
GeelsFrankSchotJohan. 2007. “Typology of Sociotechnical Transition Pathways.” Research policy36 (3): 399–17.
16.
GoldmanMichael. 2011. “Speculative Urbanism and the Making of the Next World City.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research35 (3): 555–81.
17.
GranstrandOveHolgerssonMarcus. 2020. “Innovation Ecosystems: A Conceptual Review and a New Definition.” Technovation90: 102098.
18.
GrossMatthias. 2016. “Give Me an Experiment and I Will Raise a Laboratory.” Science, Technology, & Human Values41 (4): 613–34.
19.
HalpernOritJesseLecavalierNereaCalvillo, et al.2013. Test-bed urbanism. Public Culture25 (2): 272–306.
20.
HauglandBardSkjølsvoldThomas. 2020. “Promise of the Obsolete: Expectations for and Experiments with Self-driving Vehicles in Norway.” Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy16 (1): 37–47.
21.
HayatSamuel. 2022. “Unrepresentative Claims: Speaking for Oneself in a Social Movement.” American Political Science Review11 (3): 1038–50.
22.
HechtGabriel. 1998. The Radiance of France: Nuclear Power and National Identity after World War II. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
HultmanMartinNordlundCrister. 2013. “Energizing Technology: Expectations of Fuel Cells and the Hydrogen Economy, 1990–2005.” History and Technology29 (1): 33–53.
24.
JasanoffSheila. 2004. States of Knowledge: The Coproduction of Science and Social Order. London, UK: Routledge.
25.
KarvonenAndrew. 2018. “The City of Permanent Experiments?” In Innovating Climate Governance: Moving Beyond Experiments, edited byTurnheimBrunoBerkhoutFranzKivimaaPaula, 201–15. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
KarvonenAndrewBartVan Heur. 2014. “Urban Laboratories: Experiments in Reworking Cities: Introduction.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research38 (2): 379–92.
27.
KitchinRob. 2018. “Reframing, reimagining and remaking smart cities” InCreating smart cities edited by ColettaClaudioEvansLeightonHeaphyLiamKitchinRob, 219–230. Routledge.
28.
LatourBruno. 1983. “Give Me a Laboratory and I Will Raise the World.” In Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, edited byKnorrKarinMulkayMichael, 141–70. London, UK: Sage.
29.
LaurentBrice. 2017. Democratic Experiments. Problematizing Nanotechnology and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30.
LaurentBrice. 2019. “Innovation for Whom? City Experiments and the Redefinition of Urban Democracy.” In Innovation beyond Technology: Science for Society and Interdisciplinary Approaches, edited byLechevalierSébastien, 265–83. Singapore: Springer.
31.
LaurentBrice. Forthcoming. “Territorial Frictions of Digital Innovation.” In Project: Europe. Remaking European Futures through the Politics of Digital Innovation, edited byDratwaJimMarelliLucaHoywehenIne vanVerschraegenGert. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
32.
LaurentBriceDoganovaLilianaGasullClémentMuniesaFabian. 2021. “The Test Bed Island: Tech Business Experimentalism and Exception in Singapore.” Science as Culture30(3): 367–90.
33.
LaurentBriceTironiMartin. 2015. “A Field Test and Its Displacements. Accounting for an Experimental Mode of Industrial Innovation.” CoDesign11 (3-4): 208–21.
34.
MarchalDavidBodineauLuc. 2022. “Accompagner le Déploiement de la Filière Hydrogène Française Opéré à l’initiative des Écosystèmes Territoriaux.” Annales des Mines—Réalités industrielles4 (4): 41–46.
35.
MarresNoortje. 2020. “What If Nothing Happens? Street Trials of Driverless Cars as Experiments in Participation.” In TechnoScience in Society, Sociology of Knowledge Yearbook, edited byMaassenSabineDickelSaschaSchneiderChristoph. Nijmegen, Netherlands: Springer/Kluwer. 111–130.
36.
MarresNoortje. 2022. “AI as a Trial of Implicitness: The Creation of Real-world Test Environments in Society.” Paper presented at the EHESS, June 3, 2022.
37.
MitchellTimothy. 2009. “Carbon Democracy.” Economy and Society38 (3): 399–32.
38.
MuniesaFabian. 2011. “A Flank Movement in the Understanding of Valuation.” The Sociological Review59(2_suppl): 24–38.
39.
MuniesaFabianLilianaDoganova. 2011. “The time that money requires: Use of the future and critique of the present in financial valuation.” Finance and society6(2): 95–113.
40.
MustarPhilippeLarédoPhilippe. 2002 “Innovation and Research Policy in France (1980–2000) or the Disappearance of the Colbertist State.” Research Policy31 (1): 55–72.
41.
NaberRolfRavenRobKouwMatthjisDassenTon. 2017. “Scaling Up Sustainable Energy Innovations.” Energy Policy110: 342–54.
42.
NortonPeter. 2011. Fighting Traffic. The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43.
PfotenhauerSebastianLaurentBricePapageorgiuKyriakiStilgoeJack. 2022. “The Politics of Scaling.” Social Studies of Science52 (1): 3–34.
RyghaugMarianneOrnetzederMichaelSkjølsvoldTomasThrondsenWilliam. 2019. “The Role of Experiments and Demonstration Projects in Efforts of Upscaling: An Analysis of Two Projects Attempting to Reconfigure Production and Consumption in Energy and Mobility.” Sustainability11 (20): 5771.
50.
SigfussonThorsteinn. 2007. “Hydrogen Island: The Story and Motivations behind the Icelandic Hydrogen Society Experiment.” Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change12 (3): 407–18.
TsingAnna. 2012. “On Nonscalability The Living World Is Not Amenable to Precision-Nested Scales.” Common Knowledge18 (3): 505–24.
54.
Van DijkMeine Peter. 2018. “Smart Eco-cities Are Managing Information Flows in an Integrated Way: The Example of Water, Electricity and Solid Waste.” In Smart Futures, Challenges of Urbanisation, and Social Sustainability, edited byDastbazMohammadNaudéWimManoochehriJamileh, 149–68. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
