This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Post-structuralism / Philosophy of Difference — most prominently associated with Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari — to re-read the AprIGF 2013 Seoul conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.
Introduction: The Problem
Deleuze & Guattari's rhizome concept in A Thousand Plateaus rethinks organization as multi-directional connections without center or hierarchy. AprIGF's multistakeholder structure experiments with the transition from arborescent to rhizomatic order.
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of AprIGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Rhizome vs. arborescent hierarchy, and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.
The possibility of rhizomatic governance
Governments, civil society, technical community, and the private sector intersect at Seoul arborescently within themselves but rhizomatically in IGF's space. South Korea's very participation temporarily deterritorializes the arborescent territory of the nation-state.
Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari-type problematic.
The regional IGF (AprIGF) holds a philosophically distinct position as the intermediate category mediating global universality and national particularity.
Deterritorialization and reterritorialization
Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2013 conference. We examine that application below.
1. Application to "プライバシー"
Discussion of "プライバシー" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari's Rhizome vs. arborescent hierarchy, as a central problematic. In South Korea's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around プライバシー are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "モバイル"
Discussion of "モバイル" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari's Rhizome vs. arborescent hierarchy, as a derivative problematic. In South Korea's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around モバイル are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "オンライン自由"
Discussion of "オンライン自由" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari's Rhizome vs. arborescent hierarchy, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In South Korea's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around オンライン自由 are particularly at stake.
4. Application to "地域協調"
Discussion of "地域協調" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari's Rhizome vs. arborescent hierarchy, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In South Korea's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 地域協調 are particularly at stake.
5. Application to "越境データ"
Discussion of "越境データ" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari's Rhizome vs. arborescent hierarchy, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In South Korea's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 越境データ are particularly at stake.
Implications for Executives and Practitioners
The philosophical reflection of this essay is not merely academic. The Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in South Korea.
First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Rhizome vs. arborescent hierarchy. Second, in dialogue with regulators and civil society, it suggests dimensions of consensus formation that purely technical arguments cannot reach. Third, it indicates that the long-term ground of business legitimacy lies not so much in technical advantage or market share as in participation in such philosophical-normative debates.
Academic Positioning and Future Research
The argument of this essay attempts to graft a philosophical perspective onto the mainstream political-science and legal approaches to internet governance research. Three future research questions follow.
- Verification of the applicability of Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari's framework to other IGF conferences
- Comparative contrast between Post-structuralism / Philosophy of Difference and other theoretical traditions
- Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of South Korea
In particular, the third point has the potential to liberate IGF research from West-centric debate and open a more multi-layered discursive space.
Primary Sources
- IGF Secretariat. Annual Reports of AprIGF.
- AprIGF 2013 Seoul Conference Materials.
- Japan IGF Support Organization. https://japanigf.jp/
- Nakazawa Yuki Blog. https://nkzw.jp/category/igf/
Secondary Sources (Philosophy)
- Works of Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari (representative texts of Post-structuralism / Philosophy of Difference)
*This piece belongs to the academic essays (philosophy series). The author's views do not necessarily represent those of any institutional affiliation. Feedback and critique are welcome.*
更新履歴
第1稿投稿 2026年6月21日 17時46分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
