This work develops a fiduciary–epistemic framework for governance, extending fiduciary duties to institutional and technological environments where discretion is entrusted and decisions affect others.
A board-level governance paper arguing that directors may delegate operational functions, but not fiduciary accountability for the architecture through which corporate authority is exercised. As AI-mediated systems become persistent, decision-structuring infrastructure, oversight shifts upstream to system design, authority allocation… details
Argues that fiduciary law already embeds epistemic duties governing how decision-makers form and close beliefs under entrusted discretion. Epistemic discipline is a legality condition of authority, not a virtue: failures can constitute fiduciary wrongs even without harm. For AI governance, operators of decision infrastructure bear responsibility… details
Advances a constitutional reframing of democracy under AI: legitimacy depends on fiduciary–epistemic trust rather than procedure or information abundance. Treats AI institutions as epistemic fiduciaries, introduces Fiduciary Epistemic Governance, and proposes legal and institutional forms to restore accountability, autonomy, and public trust… details