From Readiness to Responsibility: Board-Level Accountability for AI-Driven Regenerative Governance in ASEAN

Authors

Maizatul Akmal Musa

Faculty of Administrative Science & Policy Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Seremban 3 (Malaysia)

Shahril Eashak Ismail

Faculty of Administrative Science & Policy Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Seremban 3 (Malaysia)

Article Information

DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100800916

Subject Category: Social science

Volume/Issue: 10/8 | Page No: 13350-13358

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-08-25

Accepted: 2026-08-30

Published: 2026-09-21

Abstract

However, corporate governance continues to disclose, rather than address, socio-ecological crises: GRI, SASB, TCFD, and ISSB frameworks measure harm avoided but not good restored, whereas Malaysian and ASEAN policy increasingly demands the design of industries to be "restorative or regenerative". The thesis of this paper is that the gap resulting from such a mismatch should be viewed not as one of data but of accountability, and that its closure should rely on the shift of corporate boards from preparedness to deploying AI-powered RegTech platforms to accountability for the fiduciary duty to account for what the platforms promise to deliver. By integrating theories of corporate governance, regenerative development, and circular economy with RegTech-readiness literature, the paper reinterprets four key board-level dimensions (data governance, algorithmic explainability, control ownership, and regulatory mapping) in terms of a regenerative accountability threshold and identifies two failure modes that are regenerative washing (unvalidated net-positive impact claims) and the regenerative fiduciary duty (the extended director liability beyond the company's boundaries). Grounding itself in Malaysia's regenerative economy framework and non-delegable directorial liability system (Companies Act 2016), the paper concludes with five propositions for ASEAN and emerging markets' experimentation. The core of the paper's argumentation is that preparedness is a prerequisite of accountability but not an alternative to it.

Keywords

Regenerative Economy, Board Accountability, Artificial Intelligence, Circular Economy, ASEAN

Downloads

References

1. ASEAN Taxonomy Board. (2025). ASEAN Taxonomy for Sustainable Finance, Version 4. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Arner, D. W., Barberis, J., & Buckley, R. P. (2016). The emergence of RegTech 2.0: From know your customer to know your data. Journal of Financial Transformation, 44, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Arnold & Porter. (2024). SEC targets "AI washing" in first of its kind enforcement matters. Advisories, March 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Berle, A. A., & Means, G. C. (1932). The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York: Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Ministry of National Development Planning [Bappenas]. (2024). Circular Economy Roadmap and National Action Plan Indonesia 2025–2045. Jakarta: Bappenas. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. DLA Piper. (2025). SEC settlement highlights continued enforcement focus on AI washing. AI Outlook, January 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49–64. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Du Plessis, C. (2012). Towards a regenerative paradigm for the built environment. Building Research & Information, 40(1), 7–22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2013). Towards the Circular Economy Vol. 1: An Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition. Cowes, UK: Ellen MacArthur Foundation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. The Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Fullerton, J. (2015). Regenerative Capitalism: How Universal Principles and Patterns Will Shape the New Economy. Greenwich, CT: Capital Institute. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. P., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The circular economy – A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757–768. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Gillan, S. L., Koch, A. G., & Starks, L. T. (2021). Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66, 101889. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Government of Singapore. (2021). Singapore Green Plan 2030. Singapore: Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Grassi, L., & Lanfranchi, D. (2022). RegTech in public and private sectors: The nexus between data, technology and regulation. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 49(3), 441–479. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hahn, T., & Tampe, M. (2021). Strategies for regenerative business. Strategic Organization, 19(3), 456–477. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Ibiyeye, A., Ibiyeye, T. O., & Oke, F. (2025). RegTech readiness for financial institutions in the AI governance era: Emerging technology risk, internal control, and inclusive compliance modernization. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 27(2), 2249–2264. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Konietzko, J., Das, A., & Bocken, N. (2023). Towards regenerative business models: A necessary shift? Sustainable Production and Consumption, 38, 372–388. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ministry of Local Government Development [KPKT]. (2024). Circular Economy Blueprint for Solid Waste in Malaysia (2025–2035). Putrajaya: KPKT. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry [MITI]. (n.d.). Circular Economy Policy Framework. Putrajaya: MITI. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Mang, P., & Reed, B. (2012). Regenerative development and design. In R. A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology. New York: Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Munonye, W. C., Ajonye, G. O., Ahonsi, S. O., Munonye, D. I., Akinloye, O. A., & Chigozie, I. O. (2025). Governing circular intelligence: How AI-driven policy tools can accelerate the circular economy transition. Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 19, 100324. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Muñoz, P., & Branzei, O. (2021). Regenerative organizations: Introduction to the special issue. Organization & Environment, 34(4), 507–516. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Reed, B. (2007). Shifting from 'sustainability' to regeneration. Building Research & Information, 35(6), 674–680. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Republic of the Philippines. (2022). Republic Act No. 11898: Extended Producer Responsibility Act of 2022. Manila: Congress of the Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Royal Thai Government. (2021). Bio-Circular-Green (BCG) Economy Action Plan 2021–2027. Bangkok: Office of the National Higher Education Science Research and Innovation Policy Council. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Rudin, C. (2019). Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high-stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(5), 206–215. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Saberi, S., Kouhizadeh, M., Sarkis, J., & Shen, L. (2019). Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management. International Journal of Production Research, 57(7), 2117–2135. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Yermack, D. (2017). Corporate governance and blockchains. Review of Finance, 21(1), 7–31. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles