This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Contemporary German Philosophy — most prominently associated with Peter Sloterdijk — to re-read the Kansai IGF 2024 Kyoto conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.
Introduction: The Problem
Sloterdijk's Spheres trilogy argues that humans are always spatial beings needing some "interior." Kansai IGF can be read as an attempt to construct new "spheres" against the globalized "exterior."
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of Kansai IGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology, and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.
Construction of digital foams
Japan's national sphere, the regional sphere, and the global sphere co-exist as "foams" rather than concentric circles. Discussion of AI exemplifies governance constructed as immune system.
Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Peter Sloterdijk-type problematic.
The national-level IGF (Kansai IGF) is an attempt to redefine the modern category of the nation-state in the digital era.
Governance as immune system
Peter Sloterdijk's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2024 conference. We examine that application below.
1. Application to "AI"
Discussion of "AI" can be positioned, from the perspective of Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology, as a central problematic. In Japan's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around AI are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "地方DX"
Discussion of "地方DX" can be positioned, from the perspective of Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology, as a derivative problematic. In Japan's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 地方DX are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "大阪万博"
Discussion of "大阪万博" can be positioned, from the perspective of Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Japan's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 大阪万博 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 Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Japan'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 Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Japan'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 Peter Sloterdijk perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Japan.
First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Spheres, foams, spatial anthropology. 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 Peter Sloterdijk's framework to other IGF conferences
- Comparative contrast between Contemporary German Philosophy and other theoretical traditions
- Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Japan
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 Kansai IGF.
- Kansai IGF 2024 Kyoto Conference Materials.
- Japan IGF Support Organization. https://japanigf.jp/
- Nakazawa Yuki Blog. https://nkzw.jp/category/igf/
Secondary Sources (Philosophy)
- Works of Peter Sloterdijk (representative texts of Contemporary German 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11日 9時00分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
