This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Systems Theory / Biological Epistemology — most prominently associated with Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann — to re-read the Nepal IGF 2021 Virtual conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.
Introduction: The Problem
The autopoiesis concept formulated by Maturana and applied to social systems theory by Luhmann captures the operating mode of self-referential systems. Nepal IGF is a self-referential system that produces its discussion through its discussion.
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of Nepal IGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Self-creating systems, and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.
IGF as self-referential system
Discussions at Virtual in 2021 themselves reference the accumulated IGF heritage and produce new accumulation. The national system of Nepal and IGF as a global subsystem mutually observe through structural coupling.
Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann-type problematic.
The national-level IGF (Nepal IGF) is an attempt to redefine the modern category of the nation-state in the digital era.
Structural coupling of system and environment
Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann'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 "Youth IGF発足"
Discussion of "Youth IGF発足" can be positioned, from the perspective of Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann's Self-creating systems, as a central problematic. In Nepal's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around Youth IGF発足 are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "COVID対応"
Discussion of "COVID対応" can be positioned, from the perspective of Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann's Self-creating systems, as a derivative problematic. In Nepal's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around COVID対応 are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "国内法整備"
Discussion of "国内法整備" can be positioned, from the perspective of Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann's Self-creating systems, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Nepal's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 国内法整備 are particularly at stake.
4. Application to "政府＋民間協働"
Discussion of "政府＋民間協働" can be positioned, from the perspective of Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann's Self-creating systems, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Nepal's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 政府＋民間協働 are particularly at stake.
5. Application to "生成AI"
Discussion of "生成AI" can be positioned, from the perspective of Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann's Self-creating systems, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Nepal's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 生成AI are particularly at stake.
Implications for Executives and Practitioners
The philosophical reflection of this essay is not merely academic. The Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Nepal.
First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Self-creating systems. 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 Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann's framework to other IGF conferences
- Comparative contrast between Systems Theory / Biological Epistemology and other theoretical traditions
- Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Nepal
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 Nepal IGF.
- Nepal IGF 2021 Virtual Conference Materials.
- Japan IGF Support Organization. https://japanigf.jp/
- Nakazawa Yuki Blog. https://nkzw.jp/category/igf/
Secondary Sources (Philosophy)
- Works of Humberto Maturana / Niklas Luhmann (representative texts of Systems Theory / Biological Epistemology)
*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 17時17分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
