Directors’ Epistemic Duties and Fiduciary Openness: A Cross-Cultural and Interdisciplinary Framework for Corporate Governance

In this thesis, I develop a normative and operational framework for embedding epistemic openness within fiduciary corporate governance, arguing that directors have distinct epistemic duties requiring systematic integration of diverse stakeholder knowledge. Drawing on fiduciary ethics, epistemic justice theory, stakeholder theory, and Sen’s capability approach, I demonstrate that meaningful stakeholder participation is central to organisational legitimacy, innovation, and sustainability. I explicitly counter Abraham Singer’s claim that Rawlsian principles of justice cannot be applied to corporate governance, arguing instead that governance is inherently political and therefore requires contextually adapted Rawlsian fairness. Building on Anderson’s systemic account of epistemic justice, I propose institutional reforms to foster epistemic fairness. Complementing this, I synthesise global philosophical traditions—including Confucian relational ethics, Daoist non-coercive governance, Buddhist mindfulness, Islamic shura (consultation), Hebrew stewardship, Hindu dharma and jnana, Christian servant leadership, Māori relational accountability and stewardship, and Ubuntu’s collective epistemic responsibility—offering culturally nuanced, ethically robust guidance for practice. A comparative analysis of fiduciary regimes in the UK, US (Delaware), EU/OECD, and Australia reveals systemic epistemic deficiencies. I propose targeted reforms, including structured stakeholder consultations, transparent documentation standards, clear accountability mechanisms, and director training. The thesis thus expands traditional fiduciary conceptions, offering clear pathways toward ethically accountable, inclusive, and epistemically robust corporate governance. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28155.17449