This essay applies the conceptual framework of the African Philosophy — most prominently associated with John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu — to re-read the Ukraine IGF 2021 Kyiv 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. Ukraine IGF also becomes a venue for this relational personhood model against Western individualism.
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of Ukraine IGF 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 Ukraine (especially African nations) often carries Ubuntu personhood as background. デジタル転換 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 national-level IGF (Ukraine IGF) is an attempt to redefine the modern category of the nation-state in the digital era.
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 2021 conference. We examine that application below.
1. Application to "デジタル転換"
Discussion of "デジタル転換" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a central problematic. In Ukraine's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around デジタル転換 are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "AI"
Discussion of "AI" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a derivative problematic. In Ukraine's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around AI are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "サイバーセキュリティ"
Discussion of "サイバーセキュリティ" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Ukraine's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around サイバーセキュリティ are particularly at stake.
4. Application to "国内法整備"
Discussion of "国内法整備" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Ukraine's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 国内法整備 are particularly at stake.
5. Application to "政府＋民間協働"
Discussion of "政府＋民間協働" can be positioned, from the perspective of John Mbiti / Desmond Tutu's “I am because we are”, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Ukraine's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 政府＋民間協働 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 Ukraine.
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 Ukraine
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 Ukraine IGF.
- Ukraine IGF 2021 Kyiv 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12日 21時43分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
