This essay applies the conceptual framework of the African Philosophy — most prominently associated with John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu — to re-read the LACIGF 2020 Virtual conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.
Introduction: The Problem
Ubuntu philosophy expresses the personhood view "I am because we are" widespread in sub-Saharan Africa. LACIGF also becomes a venue for this relational personhood model against Western individualism.
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of LACIGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of “I am because we are”, and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.
Ubuntu digital community
The sense of agenda brought to IGF by participants from Online (especially African nations) often carries Ubuntu personhood as background. COVID-19 can be re-evaluated from the priority of community inclusion.
Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu-type problematic.
The regional IGF (LACIGF) holds a philosophically distinct position as the intermediate category mediating global universality and national particularity.
Relational personhood
John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2020 conference. We examine that application below.
1. Application to "COVID-19"
Discussion of "COVID-19" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a central problematic. In Online's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around COVID-19 are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "格差"
Discussion of "格差" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a derivative problematic. In Online's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 格差 are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "権利"
Discussion of "権利" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Online's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 権利 are particularly at stake.
4. Application to "地域協調"
Discussion of "地域協調" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Online'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 John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Online'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 John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Online.
First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of “I am because we are”. 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 John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's framework to other IGF conferences
- Comparative contrast between African Philosophy and other theoretical traditions
- Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Online
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 LACIGF.
- LACIGF 2020 Virtual Conference Materials.
- Japan IGF Support Organization. https://japanigf.jp/
- Nakazawa Yuki Blog. https://nkzw.jp/category/igf/
Secondary Sources (Philosophy)
- Works of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu (representative texts of African Philosophy)
*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9日 18時04分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
