Transparency and Documentation
Last updated: 21.08.2026
Governance in the Permaculture Network should be understandable and traceable without creating unnecessary documentation bureaucracy.
The core principle is:
Open by default, private when necessary.
Transparency should be the normal approach for governance, policies, network-wide decisions, and responsibilities.
Privacy, safety, legal obligations, and security may require some information to remain restricted.
Transparency means making decisions and their reasoning visible, not publishing every conversation that led to them.
The network should document outcomes and relevant reasoning rather than attempting to publish complete discussions or transcripts.
Public documentation
The following should normally be publicly accessible:
- governance principles
- current policies
- changes to governance or policies
- Network Circle decisions
- changes to Purpose, Vision, or Mission
- changes to Stewardship Areas
- major strategic decisions
- relevant network-wide financial decisions and budgets
- current Stewardship Area representatives in the Network Circle
Not every operational or routine decision needs to be made public.
Decision records
Significant decisions should have a short and understandable record.
A decision record may include:
- date
- decision
- responsible person, project, Stewardship Area, or Circle
- short reason for the decision
- relevant advice or objections where useful
- outcome
- review date where the decision is experimental or temporary
Avoid requiring long formal meeting minutes.
A short decision log is usually sufficient.
Emergency decisions should be documented and reviewed once the immediate situation has passed.
An emergency decision record should normally explain what happened, what risk existed, what action was taken, why immediate action was necessary, what consequences resulted, and whether further action is required.
Security, personal, legal, or other sensitive details should not be made public where doing so would create further risk.
Proportional documentation
Documentation should be proportional to the significance of the decision.
Documentation should be proportional to the significance of the decision.
Routine, reversible, and low-risk operational decisions do not need extensive documentation.
More documentation is appropriate where a decision:
- affects other projects or Stewardship Areas
- has long-term consequences
- commits significant resources
- creates significant risk
- is difficult to reverse
- changes policy or governance
- is likely to need explanation later
Internal documentation
Some information may need to be documented without being public.
Examples include:
- internal project planning
- drafts
- operational coordination
- confidential partner communication
- contractual details where publication is inappropriate
- personal data
- sensitive financial information
Information should be accessible to the people who need it to carry responsibility.
Access should follow responsibility rather than status.
Confidential documentation
Some information must remain confidential.
Examples include:
- Code of Conduct reports
- personal details in conflict cases
- sensitive legal matters
- security incidents
- personal data
- passwords, tokens, encryption keys, or other security credentials
Confidentiality is not a failure of transparency. Protecting people, privacy and security is part of responsible governance.
Sensitive information should be shared only on a need-to-know basis.
Meetings
Detailed traditional minutes are not required for every meeting.
Meetings should record decisions, responsibilities and important unresolved questions.
Meeting documentation should focus on:
- what was decided
- who is responsible for follow-up
- what remains unresolved
Avoid unnecessary transcripts or detailed records of every contribution.
Network Circle transparency
The Network Circle should operate with a relatively high level of transparency.
Normally make visible:
- current representatives
- important agenda topics
- decisions
- relevant reasoning
- governance and policy changes
Personal, legal, security-related, or otherwise confidential details should not be published merely for the sake of transparency.
Where part of a matter must remain confidential, a public record may still state that a confidential matter was discussed and record the non-sensitive outcome where appropriate.
Financial transparency
The Permaculture Network currently has no independent funds.
EuPN funds and external organisational funds are separate.
Where Permaculture Network funds exist, significant income and expenditure should follow the transparency principles in this document.
Sponsored contributions should be described where they materially support the network, but they do not automatically create governance authority.
Sponsorship does not need to be assigned a monetary value unless this is useful and practical.
Project-level documentation
Projects should not be required to publish every routine decision.
Projects should document decisions especially where they:
- affect other projects
- affect a Stewardship Area
- have long-term consequences
- involve significant shared resources
- are difficult to reverse
- need to remain understandable to future contributors
Projects may choose additional documentation practices that fit their own work.
Responsibility for documentation
The person or group making a significant decision is responsible for ensuring that it is documented.
Documentation may be delegated, but the decision-maker remains responsible for ensuring that an appropriate record exists.
Do not create an unnecessary permanent secretary role simply to satisfy this requirement.
Canonical record
Network-wide decisions should have one clear and reliable place of record.
Network-wide decisions should have one canonical place of record.
Discussions may happen through meetings, email, Matrix, Nextcloud, or other tools.
Final network-wide decisions should be recorded in the agreed governance documentation or Logbook.
For the current documentation structure, the Docusaurus documentation and Logbook should be treated as the likely canonical governance record where appropriate.
Do not duplicate the same authoritative decision across many locations unless necessary.
Decision history
Do not silently overwrite meaningful governance history.
Transparency includes preserving relevant decision history.
When an important policy or governance decision changes:
- preserve the historical record where practical
- clearly identify the current version
- record what replaced or superseded the previous decision
Historical records should remain understandable without implying that outdated rules are still current.
Governance Review outcomes should be recorded in the governance Logbook.
If no changes are needed, the outcome may simply be recorded as: No governance changes required.
Significant governance changes should update the relevant canonical governance documentation.
Relationship with the Code of Conduct
Code of Conduct cases require stronger confidentiality than ordinary governance decisions.
The Advisory Team should document only what is necessary for responsible handling of the case.
Personal or sensitive case details should not be placed in public governance logs.
Where a Code of Conduct outcome creates a public governance consequence, publish only the information necessary to explain that consequence.
Key principles
- Open by default, private when necessary.
- Transparency means making decisions and their reasoning visible, not publishing every conversation that led to them.
- Documentation should be proportional to the significance of the decision.
- Information should be accessible to the people who need it to carry responsibility.
- Network-wide decisions should have one canonical place of record.
- The people making a significant decision are responsible for ensuring that it is documented.
- Confidentiality is part of responsible governance where privacy, safety, legal obligations, or security require it.
- Transparency includes preserving relevant decision history.