This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Phenomenology / Ethics — most prominently associated with Emmanuel Levinas — to re-read the Saudi Arabia IGF 2019 Riyadh conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.
Introduction: The Problem
For Levinas, ethics emerges from the arrival of the Other's "face." Discussions at Saudi Arabia IGF carry the fundamental question of how to maintain responsibility for the Other in internet space, where faces are physically absent.
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of Saudi Arabia IGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of The face and infinite responsibility, 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 absent face and responsibility online
2019's themes — anonymity, fake news, hate speech — ask how Levinas's command "thou shalt not kill," emanating from the face, weakens or reconstitutes itself under digital mediation. Saudi Arabia's face-to-face cultural experience can resource resistance to this weakening.
Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Emmanuel Levinas-type problematic.
The national-level IGF (Saudi Arabia IGF) is an attempt to redefine the modern category of the nation-state in the digital era.
Protection of alterity
Emmanuel Levinas's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2019 conference. We examine that application below.
1. Application to "初開催"
Discussion of "初開催" can be positioned, from the perspective of Emmanuel Levinas's The face and infinite responsibility, as a central problematic. In Saudi Arabia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 初開催 are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "デジタルビジョン2030"
Discussion of "デジタルビジョン2030" can be positioned, from the perspective of Emmanuel Levinas's The face and infinite responsibility, as a derivative problematic. In Saudi Arabia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around デジタルビジョン2030 are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "AI"
Discussion of "AI" can be positioned, from the perspective of Emmanuel Levinas's The face and infinite responsibility, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Saudi Arabia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around AI 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 Emmanuel Levinas's The face and infinite responsibility, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Saudi Arabia'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 Emmanuel Levinas's The face and infinite responsibility, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Saudi Arabia'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 Emmanuel Levinas perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Saudi Arabia.
First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of The face and infinite responsibility. 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 Emmanuel Levinas's framework to other IGF conferences
- Comparative contrast between Phenomenology / Ethics and other theoretical traditions
- Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Saudi Arabia
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 Saudi Arabia IGF.
- Saudi Arabia IGF 2019 Riyadh Conference Materials.
- Japan IGF Support Organization. https://japanigf.jp/
- Nakazawa Yuki Blog. https://nkzw.jp/category/igf/
Secondary Sources (Philosophy)
- Works of Emmanuel Levinas (representative texts of Phenomenology / Ethics)
*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3日 20時34分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
