Governance and Contribution Model

Purpose

This document defines how Canonical ESG is stewarded, how the architecture evolves, and how contributions are proposed, reviewed, and incorporated.

Canonical ESG is a reference infrastructure initiative.
It is not a standards-setting body, regulator, or certification authority.

The governance model exists to preserve:

• Semantic integrity
• Structural coherence
• Version stability
• Neutral positioning
• Transparent evolution

Governance Orientation

Canonical ESG governance is infrastructural rather than normative.

It does not:

• Define compliance requirements
• Issue interpretive rulings
• Endorse reporting positions
• Confer regulatory authority

It maintains the structural architecture beneath disclosure regimes.

Core Governance Principles

Governance decisions are guided by the following principles:

1. Neutrality

No framework, jurisdiction, vendor, consulting methodology, or organisation has privileged status within the architecture.

2. Semantic Stability

Canonical Disclosure Intents (CDIs) are designed to remain durable across regulatory cycles.
Changes that alter meaning are treated with exceptional caution.

3. Explicit Interpretation Separation

Framework and jurisdictional logic must remain distinct from semantic meaning.
Regulatory interpretation must not redefine disclosure concepts.

4. Transparency

All accepted changes are versioned, documented, and publicly traceable.

5. Non-Assertion

Governance does not assert interpretive authority over external standards.

6. Institutional Viability

The model is designed to support future multi-stakeholder stewardship while preserving architectural discipline.

Stewardship and Maintainer Responsibilities

Canonical ESG is currently stewarded during its infrastructure phase.

The maintainer is responsible for:

• Curating and publishing official versions
• Managing version control and changelogs
• Preserving coherence across CDI, CMP, and jurisdiction layers
• Maintaining documentation and registries
• Evaluating contribution proposals against governance principles

The maintainer does not:

• Certify implementations
• Approve compliance claims
• Provide regulatory interpretation
• Endorse advisory methodologies

Stewardship is custodial, not proprietary.

Types of Contributions

Contributions may include:

• Clarifications to documentation
• Proposals for new Canonical Disclosure Intents (CDIs)
• Proposals for new Canonical Mapping Packs (CMPs)
• Jurisdictional mapping proposals
• Corrections of structural inconsistencies
• Schema and tooling improvements

All contributions are non-binding until formally accepted and published.

Contribution Process

Contributions follow a structured lifecycle.

1. Proposal

A contributor submits a written proposal describing:

• The proposed change or addition
• The rationale
• Affected architectural layers
• Compatibility implications
• Any impact on existing versions

2. Architectural Review

Proposals are evaluated for:

• Alignment with governance principles
• Impact on semantic stability
• Preservation of neutrality
• Version compatibility considerations
• Avoidance of regulatory overreach

3. Decision

The maintainer may:

• Accept
• Request revision
• Defer pending further analysis
• Reject with documented reasoning

Decisions are documented to preserve transparency.

4. Publication

Accepted changes are:

• Assigned a version designation
• Documented in the changelog
• Published with explicit status (e.g., draft, active, frozen)

Versioning and Stability Model

Canonical ESG uses explicit semantic versioning.

• Major versions introduce structural architectural changes.
• Minor versions introduce additive extensions or refinements.
• Patch versions correct errors without altering semantic meaning.

Frozen versions are immutable and remain referenceable.

No published version is retroactively modified.

Relationship to External Standards

Canonical ESG does not modify, reinterpret, override, or restate external standards.

Framework texts remain authoritative within their respective domains.

Contributions referencing external standards must:

• Accurately cite requirements
• Avoid normative restatement
• Explicitly distinguish interpretation from source text

Canonical ESG models structural relationships.
It does not define regulatory obligations.

Conflict of Interest

Contributors are expected to disclose material conflicts of interest when submitting proposals.

The maintainer may decline proposals that:

• Introduce vendor-specific advantage
• Privilege a single framework or jurisdiction
• Undermine neutrality
• Embed commercial positioning into the architecture

Governance decisions prioritise structural integrity over expediency.

Licensing

Canonical ESG artefacts are published under an open license.

By submitting a contribution, contributors acknowledge that:

• Accepted contributions may be redistributed
• Accepted contributions may be adapted in future versions
• No contributor retains exclusive control over accepted material

Governance Evolution

This governance model reflects the current infrastructure phase.

As participation grows, governance may evolve toward:

• Structured multi-stakeholder review
• Advisory participation mechanisms
• Formalised stewardship arrangements

Any governance changes will:

• Be versioned
• Be publicly documented
• Preserve architectural neutrality

Summary

Canonical ESG governance exists to protect semantic integrity while enabling transparent evolution.

It is designed to support an ecosystem.

It does not seek to control one.