{"id":21357,"date":"2019-06-11T18:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-06-11T18:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2019\/06\/11\/en-philo-youth-apr-igf-2019-latour-actor-network\/"},"modified":"2019-06-11T18:00:00","modified_gmt":"2019-06-11T18:00:00","slug":"en-philo-youth-apr-igf-2019-latour-actor-network","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2019\/06\/11\/en-philo-youth-apr-igf-2019-latour-actor-network\/","title":{"rendered":"Latourian Actor-Network Theory on Youth AprIGF 2019 Vladivostok \u2014 Human and non-human actors"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Thumbnail\"<\/p>\n

\n

This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Science and Technology Studies<\/strong> \u2014 most prominently associated with Bruno Latour<\/strong> \u2014 to re-read the Youth AprIGF 2019 Vladivostok conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Introduction: The Problem<\/h2>\n

Latour's actor-network theory in Reassembling the Social treats humans and non-humans symmetrically. Youth AprIGF can be read as an assembly of protocols, cables, regulations, and humans.<\/p>\n

This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of Youth AprIGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Human and non-human actors<\/strong>, and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.<\/p>\n

\"Analytical<\/p>\n

Assemblies of protocols, cables, humans<\/h2>\n

\u30a2\u30b8\u30a2\u592a\u5e73\u6d0b\u82e5\u8005 debated at Vladivostok typifies treating technical artifacts as political actors. Latour's "parliament of things" is a theoretical extension of IGF.<\/p>\n

Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Bruno Latour-type problematic.<\/p>\n

The Youth IGF practically raises the philosophical problematic of intergenerational justice.<\/p>\n

Parliament of things<\/h2>\n

Bruno Latour'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.<\/p>\n

1. Application to "\u30a2\u30b8\u30a2\u592a\u5e73\u6d0b\u82e5\u8005"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30a2\u30b8\u30a2\u592a\u5e73\u6d0b\u82e5\u8005" can be positioned, from the perspective of Bruno Latour's Human and non-human actors<\/strong>, as a central problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30a2\u30b8\u30a2\u592a\u5e73\u6d0b\u82e5\u8005 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

2. Application to "\u30d5\u30a7\u30ed\u30fc\u30b7\u30c3\u30d7"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30d5\u30a7\u30ed\u30fc\u30b7\u30c3\u30d7" can be positioned, from the perspective of Bruno Latour's Human and non-human actors<\/strong>, as a derivative problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30d5\u30a7\u30ed\u30fc\u30b7\u30c3\u30d7 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

3. Application to "\u30e1\u30f3\u30bf\u30eb\u30d8\u30eb\u30b9"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30e1\u30f3\u30bf\u30eb\u30d8\u30eb\u30b9" can be positioned, from the perspective of Bruno Latour's Human and non-human actors<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30e1\u30f3\u30bf\u30eb\u30d8\u30eb\u30b9 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

4. Application to "\u82e5\u8005\u80b2\u6210"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u82e5\u8005\u80b2\u6210" can be positioned, from the perspective of Bruno Latour's Human and non-human actors<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u82e5\u8005\u80b2\u6210 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

5. Application to "\u82e5\u8005\u306eSNS\u5229\u7528"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u82e5\u8005\u306eSNS\u5229\u7528" can be positioned, from the perspective of Bruno Latour's Human and non-human actors<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u82e5\u8005\u306eSNS\u5229\u7528 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

\"Philosophical<\/p>\n

Implications for Executives and Practitioners<\/h2>\n

The philosophical reflection of this essay is not merely academic. The Bruno Latour perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Russia.<\/p>\n

First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Human and non-human actors<\/strong>. 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.<\/p>\n

Academic Positioning and Future Research<\/h2>\n

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.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Verification of the applicability of Bruno Latour's framework to other IGF conferences<\/li>\n
  2. Comparative contrast between Science and Technology Studies<\/strong> and other theoretical traditions<\/li>\n
  3. Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Russia<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    In particular, the third point has the potential to liberate IGF research from West-centric debate and open a more multi-layered discursive space.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Primary Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n