Skip to main content

Resources_Funding_and_Financial_Responsibility

# Resources, Funding and Financial Responsibility

Last updated: 21.08.2026

The Permaculture Network currently needs only a lightweight financial governance model.

The important starting point is:

The Permaculture Network currently has no independent funds.

Do not create a complex financial governance structure for money that does not yet exist.

Current situation​

The current situation is:

  • Vihreä Pourusmäki ry legally owns and operates the Permaculture Network.
  • Vihreä Pourusmäki may hold or manage funding for other projects, including external grant-funded activities.
  • Funding belonging to unrelated Vihreä Pourusmäki projects does not automatically become a resource of the Permaculture Network.
  • Chase & Snow currently provides the hosting infrastructure and sponsors the software development of the Permaculture Network.
  • These sponsored services are contributions to the network, not EuPN income.

Separation of funds​

EuPN funds and external organisational funds are separate.

EuPN funds and external organisational funds are separate.

Money held by VVihreä Pourusmäki ry for unrelated projects, grants, or activities should not be treated as Permaculture Network funds.

The legal relationship between Vihreä Pourusmäki and the Permaculture Network does not mean that all resources held by the association belong to EuPN.

Hosting, software development, professional services, or other resources may be contributed or sponsored by individuals or organisations.

Such contributions should be transparent where relevant, but they do not automatically create additional governance power.

Sponsored contributions do not create governance authority.

Chase & Snow's sponsorship of hosting and software development should be documented transparently.

Authority over technical work comes from active responsibility for that work, not simply from funding or sponsorship.

When EuPN funds begin to exist​

Financial governance becomes relevant when the Permaculture Network itself begins to generate or receive funds.

Financial governance becomes relevant when the network begins to generate or receive funds of its own.

Examples may include:

  • ticket income from a Permaculture Network event
  • income from an online convergence
  • donations specifically made to the Permaculture Network
  • sponsorship specifically intended for EuPN
  • grants explicitly awarded for Permaculture Network activities
  • other income generated directly through an EuPN project

Project and event income​

Income generated through an EuPN project or event becomes an EuPN-controlled resource, while it may remain allocated to the originating project until its costs and obligations have been completed.

Income generated through an EuPN project or event becomes an EuPN-controlled resource, while it may remain allocated to the originating project until its costs and obligations have been completed.

For example, if an online convergence generates ticket income:

  1. event-related costs and obligations are accounted for
  2. project-specific allocation may continue while the project is active and obligations remain
  3. those funds should then be governed according to the network's financial rules

After associated costs and obligations are completed, any remaining surplus may become shared Permaculture Network resources.

Detailed accounting or allocation rules should be defined only when they are needed.

Where EuPN generates funds and no separate legal arrangement exists, those funds will normally need to be legally held and administered by Vihreä Pourusmäki.

There is an important distinction between community governance and legal financial execution.

Community governance operates within the legal responsibilities of Vihreä Pourusmäki.

Legal responsibility does not create general authority over community governance.

Community governance​

The Permaculture Network may decide, through its governance processes, how shared EuPN resources should be used.

  • Vihreä Pourusmäki remains responsible for:

  • holding funds

  • making payments

  • entering contracts

  • accounting

  • taxation

  • statutory reporting

  • other legal financial obligations

Community governance determines how shared network resources should be used. Legal and financial commitments remain the responsibility of the legal entity holding the funds.

Legal responsibility does not imply control over community decisions.

At the same time, no governance decision can require the legal operator to act unlawfully or accept an unreasonable legal or financial risk.

The legal operator should not become a general management body for EuPN governance simply because it holds the funds.

However, it cannot be required to implement an unlawful or legally unreasonable decision.

Where a community decision cannot legally or reasonably be implemented by Vihreä Pourusmäki ry, the legal constraint should be explained and the responsible governance body should work with the legal operator to find an alternative that preserves the intention of the decision as far as possible.

A legal objection should identify the actual legal, contractual, financial, or statutory constraint.

Future Finance Policy​

Do not introduce detailed financial procedures, spending thresholds, or approval limits before they are needed.

If the Permaculture Network begins to hold significant funds or enter ongoing financial commitments, a dedicated Finance Policy should be established or expanded before substantial commitments are made.

A future Finance Policy may define:

  • budgeting
  • project budgets
  • spending authority
  • approval thresholds
  • reserves
  • financial reporting
  • conflicts of interest
  • recurring commitments
  • handling of project surpluses
  • transparency requirements

Transparency​

Where Permaculture Network funds exist, significant income and expenditure should follow the existing transparency principles.

Sponsored contributions should also be described where they materially support the network.

This does not mean that sponsorship must always be assigned a monetary value unless this is useful and practical.