meaning of "implicated"

I want to know what "implicated" means in the following contexts. All the contexts belong to the same book. I think it means "participative" here. Am I right?

Contexts:

There is an argument – a flippant one perhaps, in the first instance – to say the city has effectively become the ‘new body’. In other words, as an object of study – to say nothing of in practice – it promises to supersede in significance a previous preoccupation within critical discourse with the signifying human body as both implicated and expressive locus. Instead cities, with their rising populations – the global balance of urban to rural populations having tipped in 2007 irrevocably towards the former – and complex, transitory configurations, have become the prime embodiments, and therefore indices, of a fast-changing modernity.

The role of the writer (about art) – that is: me, here, now – represents an analogous extension of this form of situational encounter. In other words, and at the risk of sounding a little simplistic, it takes into account both a subjective and a cultural position inasmuch as the artwork – which ‘filters’ or incorporates the abstract or specific city – presents itself as the object or site of my experiencing as well as the means by which I may navigate around or embark upon a process of ‘implicated reflection’ or ‘tactical response’. In turn, such an encounter is contingent upon how I have come – consciously or unconsciously – to be constituted: in other words, what I may ‘bring’ and the degree to which I may be inclined to allow myself to be affected, questioned and perhaps transformed.

Moreover, in his afterword to But Beautiful, Dyer provides further gloss on this role (referencing George Steiner’s Real Presences), couching his definition in terms reminiscent of ‘implicated witness to events’: ‘the performer “inserts his own being in the process of interpretation”. Such interpretation is automatically responsible because the performer is answerable to the work in a way that even the most scrupulous reviewer is not [. . .] all art is also criticism’

Here, alone the promise of the artwork provokes the activation of remembrance in the present of an unresolved past. What is particularly relevant for my position is the way this case demonstrates how both the making of an artwork – that is, from the artist’s point of view, including what Christo calls the ‘software stage’ of agreeing terms with various implicated parties – and the eventual experiencing of it (from the spectator’s standpoint) can function as a means to discover and produce place, or to negotiate the terms by which it operates, precisely as an outsider from ‘elsewhere’ (as opposed to the conventional assumption of knowing intervention).

What is important about both of the memorials is, first, the way in which their configurations facilitate for the visitor a performance of cultural memory in the present. In other words: as a historical moment that continues to play in the present and that is subject to constant public reappraisal and, therefore, a form of ‘re-writing’. Second, both sites are located centrally in their respective European cities: literally and in terms of the implicit way they carry their urban pasts. As such, they are deeply implicated specifically in those cities, being produced by that which has gone on in them but also contributing to their reconstituted definition in the present day.