Over the past years, I’ve been deeply involved in shaping permaculture education in Finland and beyond. I’ve served as chair of the Finnish Permaculture Association, acquired a Diploma in Permaculture Design 2021 and then taught PDCs.
In that time, I encountered a difficult and unresolved situation around governance, power, and process — one that led to my resignation and lasting harm.
I’m publishing the full set of Slack and email conversations here not to escalate, but to make visible a dynamic that often plays out quietly in volunteer organizations. Where soft language is used to cover hard power moves. Where people with no formal standing try to redefine roles and responsibilities. And where tone is policed more than content.
These messages speak for themselves. I have redacted any sensitive personal data and publish this with the intention of contributing to a culture of accountability, clarity, and integrity in permaculture.
The mail conversation
My mail from 24.03.2022 to Andreas Jonsson and Erkki Pöytäniemi:
Hi both,
I'm getting tired of this "Holma said" and "Andreas said" discussion. Takes up too much of my time already. Let's clear this out.
In my opinion non diploma-holders, no matter if they are part of an education circle or not, should not be allowed to set rules for the diploma or the PDC.
This is the standard procedure in all the association's I checked with. I haven't seen it done differently so far.
There are no shortcuts to the diploma.
Cheers,
Dominik
Erkki's mail from 24.03.2022 to me and Andreas
Hi Andreas,
Sorry about this. I don’t know why Dominik wanted to pull you into this and it’s up to you if you want to answer. There has been no discussion about rules from my side anyway. For your reference the presiding discussion below.
Best Regards,
Erkki
My mail from 24.03.2022 to Erkki and Andreas
Hi both,
Ok Erkki. I told you what I noticed, how I feel and what I need. I noticed that you didn't take my concern into a account. I'm now feeling even more undervalued as I already do. I need a solution for this. I'm going to elaborate on my point of view and if this doesn't help I ask Andreas to mediate.
I have a guess where the problem is coming from. I asked the association to be the certification body for my PDC. This kind of happened at the same time the education circle formed. My best guess is that we have a mixture of responsibilities here and using the same word for different points of view. Erkki probably wants to talk within the education circle what is needed that the association can certify PDCs. There is no requirement other than the diploma. The diploma holder could actually certify PDCs themselves. The only international requirement to my knowledge is the diploma. There are different minimum requirements around Europe / the world. Some association's require a second tutor, others require a TPT or other education certificates / background from the lead tutor. The association should make sure that I possess the diploma and start handling the PDC register containing my students in July. I think requirements should only be discussed with the people who can run PDCs. It would be unfair for people running PDCs if the requirements and rules are set by people who can't run a PDC.
It is probably the same when it comes to the diploma. When I talk about the diploma I talk from the point of the association being a diploma issuing body. While I guess Erkki is talking form the point of having a diploma guild.
Erkki, I apologise for putting you in an awkward position. Wasn't really my intention. When I was referring to the PDC and the Diploma I was referring from a protecting position, while you where talking about what the association needs to do in order to certify my PDC and run a Diploma guild.
I hope you accept my apology.
About your concern regarding "dictating from outside" - you might want to see me as a freed radical, which according to the association's policies is possible. I'm currently the only in the association active diploma holder - which is also an awkward position. I voiced my concern loud and clearly for multiple times and I even offered solutions. No one is dictating anything. You are free in the domain of education. I just voiced concern that the education circle should not be responsible for the PDC (herein as the set of requirements other than the diploma) and the Diploma until diploma holder is present. I voided my interest in the circle but I'm stretched thin due to the Nordic Permaculture Festival and the PDC. If the circle wants to discuss the PDC (requirements / rules) or Diploma (issuing diplomas) I'm happy to be there.
In any case: Andreas can you mediate if it further escalates?
Cheers,
Dominik
Erkki's mail from 25.03.2022 to me and Andreas
Hi Dominik, I can’t really relate to your first sentence about me not taking your concerns into account. I initiated the Education circle because I think it is a key area of Permaculture. I thought that an Education circle within the Permaculture Association should exist and offered to start it. Lotta, Suvi and Marja were eager to participate. You were also welcome as a key actor in the field. Naturally the circle is open. Our first need and task was to understand and survey where we were; the framework and domain. Your input at this early stage was to tell us what we are not allowed to touch. That seemed very strange so I asked you to refer to where those views come from. Now in your email you are elaborating on the subject which is very welcome. This is what we should have been talking about with you in the circle. Your comments show that there is a lot to discuss and the situation is not clear-cut at all. I suppose the situations in the other Nordic countries show that as well. In my view the Education circle’s task is to discuss how the Permaculture Association wants to promote the development and how to steer it in a cooperative way. Of course the diploma holders are each free to decide for themselves. We don’t need a diploma in order to have a discussion about what we want in the Association regarding education. On the other hand if we come up with something that diploma holders don’t agree with it will evidently fail. So there can be no purpose to go against diploma holders. As you recognise yourself, in your case you are wearing 2 hats as the chair of the association and as a diploma holder. In that context I am not sure what you mean with being a "free radical”? Do you mean that you do not want the Association to interfere ? I’m not able to react to everything you write here. I propose that we have a honest discussion about this in the circle meeting. I can assure you that we will listen closely to what you say and how you see the development forward. We are not in the business of setting rules, we are just trying to find out what the rules are and why and how they can be clarified in a constructive way. I hope you don’t feel that I am escalating - it certainly was not my purpose at any point - and that we can continue the discussion in the normal framework of circles. I accept your apology and hope there are no hard feelings! And sorry for insisting that this is discussed thoroughly. I will copy this into Slack for the others to be aware of the discussion. Maybe you can do the same with your email below? Thanks Andreas, if you have followed this far! All the best, Erkki
Andreas Email from 31.03.2022 to me and Andreas
Hey guys
I just have to say that I have a family health issue and I'm also in the middle of a PDC at the moment. And it is also exploding spring here, so I'm sorry to say that I don't have the capacity to follow this situation.
I have seen this pattern of dialogue earlier though, and one thing I can say from my own experience is this - try not to follow the same pattern as other associations in the Nordic countries, trying to settle things by consensus (preference) in rare large meetings, without setting clear goals. Rather, try to find time for regular meetings in person to set the patterns (Vision Mission Aims). Timeframe every decision to see when to evaluate.
Solving collaborative issues of this dimension asynchronouslý and digitally, is REALLY super hard before you set your clear domains and aims.
After setting the Vision Mission and Aims of different domains, it becomes so much easier. But it SHOULD take time. From pattern to detail :)
And when we perceive chaos, we are often in Observation mode.
I sincerely hope you can work it out.
All humble hugs
Andreas
Let's analyse it - What's really happening?
Erkki tries to appear reasonable, but his writing shows multiple red flags:
- Gaslighting-lite: “I can’t really relate to your first sentence…” → denies my emotional reality.
- Defensive reframing: presents himself as a facilitator, not a decision-maker — despite clearly steering the circle and inviting specific participants.
- Subtle control: phrases like “we are just trying to find out what the rules are and how they can be clarified” sounds open, but in reality, Erkki is redefining authority, trying to insert non-diploma holders into processes they have no mandate over.
Erkki positions himself as the rational moderator, but his early comment — “I don’t know why Dominik wanted to pull you into this” — is classic undermining, painting my concern as dramatic or inappropriate.
Power is being redefined through soft processes
Erkki is trying to shift control over key decisions (PDC certification, diploma processes) into the education circle — which is composed mostly of people without a diploma. That’s a quiet power grab, disguised as open discussion.
He’s using process language to mask a lack of qualification: “we are just trying to clarify,” “no one is dictating,” “we’re just facilitating…”
Calling out structural overreach — and paying for it
I'm saying:
Only people who have done the work should set the rules for it.
Which is completely logical — and in line with most systems of professional accountability.
But because I'm saying this while holding power (as chair), and saying it directly, others interpret it as domineering, when in reality I'm drawing a line to protect standards.
No one is actually mediating
Andreas was invited in as a neutral party. But he declined to mediate and instead issued abstract advice. (editor's note: Andreas was Erkki's mentor in the Diploma of Applied Permaculture Design during that time - one could speculate how much money Erkki payed during his diploma journey)
This leaves me with no real ally in the conversation — just one subtly undermining actor (Erkki) and one passive observer (Andreas).
What’s the psychological dynamic?
- I'm the ethical guardian in this situation — holding structure, roles, and accountability.
- Erkki is the power shifter — claiming collaborative space while redrawing lines quietly.
- Andreas is the comfort-seeker — unwilling to intervene, retreating into abstract pattern language.
This is a classic “triangulation” pattern: One person in conflict, one challenger, and one appeaser who avoids conflict by spiritualizing or intellectualizing it.
Conclusion
I’m not looking to reopen the situation. I publish this and other documents and move forward. Next is a very disturbing conversation in the Suomen Permakulttuuri Yhdistys Slack channel involving multiple members of the board from 2022.
- Log in to post comments