This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Ontology / Phenomenology — most prominently associated with Martin Heidegger — to re-read the Global IGF 2021 Katowice conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.
Introduction: The Problem
Heidegger's concept of Ge-stell (enframing) in "The Question Concerning Technology" captures how modern technology reveals the world as "standing-reserve." The themes of Global IGF 2021 directly engage the question of controlling this enframing.
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of Global IGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve, 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 internet as enframing
Topics like インターネット分断 risk treating both humans and nature as data standing-reserve. Read Heideggerianly, whether the traditional modes of world-disclosure in Poland contain a "saving power" that can counter this enframing becomes the central question.
The conference theme "Internet United" carries implications beyond a mere policy slogan. It can be positioned as a contemporary reformulation, in digital-era vocabulary, of the kinds of questions Martin Heidegger problematized.
The form of the Global IGF stands between the principle of national sovereignty and the logic of a global public realm that transcends it.
The saving power
Martin Heidegger'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 "インターネット分断"
Discussion of "インターネット分断" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve, as a central problematic. In Poland's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around インターネット分断 are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "包摂"
Discussion of "包摂" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve, as a derivative problematic. In Poland's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 包摂 are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "データガバナンス"
Discussion of "データガバナンス" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Poland's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around データガバナンス are particularly at stake.
4. Application to "信頼"
Discussion of "信頼" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Poland's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 信頼 are particularly at stake.
5. Application to "国連連携"
Discussion of "国連連携" can be positioned, from the perspective of Martin Heidegger's Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Poland's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 国連連携 are particularly at stake.
Implications for Executives and Practitioners
The philosophical reflection of this essay is not merely academic. The Martin Heidegger perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Poland.
First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Ge-stell (enframing) and standing-reserve. 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 Martin Heidegger's framework to other IGF conferences
- Comparative contrast between Ontology / Phenomenology and other theoretical traditions
- Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Poland
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 Global IGF.
- Global IGF 2021 Katowice Conference Materials.
- Japan IGF Support Organization. https://japanigf.jp/
- Nakazawa Yuki Blog. https://nkzw.jp/category/igf/
Secondary Sources (Philosophy)
- Works of Martin Heidegger (representative texts of Ontology / Phenomenology)
*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4日 10時48分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
