natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
There are at least four reasons why strategy and priorities do not flow solely from the SWOT analyses: 1. the territories concerned do not come under a single public authority; 2. the statistics do not relate to all the territories concerned; 3. as the major problem is the weakness of cooperation links as explained in paragraph 17, the best way of identifying what steps needs to be taken is by a bottom-up approach; 4. the programmes are the outcome of a negotiation process between partners in different Member States trying to find a consensus. 
There are at least four reasons why strategy and priorities do not flow solely from the SWOT analyses: 1. the territories concerned do not come under a single public authority; 2. the statistics do not relate to all the territories concerned; 3. as the major problem is the weakness of cooperation links as explained in paragraph 17, the best way of identifying what steps needs to be taken is by a bottom-up approach; 4. the programmes are the outcome of a negotiation process between partners in different Member States trying to find a consensus.
The Commission considers that, for the four reasons given above, for cross-border CIPs a bottom-up approach gives better results. 
The Commission considers that, for the four reasons given above, for cross-border CIPs a bottom-up approach gives better results.
This inevitably means less targeting than with a top-down approach, but it must still take into account programme strategy and priorities. 
This inevitably means less targeting than with a top-down approach, but it must still take into account programme strategy and priorities.
It is also closer to the concerns of authorities which are responsible for development matters and of local actors. 
It is also closer to the concerns of authorities which are responsible for development matters and of local actors.
The steps referred to at 3 and 4 should be explained in the CIPs and integrated in the SWOT analysis. 
The steps referred to at 3 and 4 should be explained in the CIPs and integrated in the SWOT analysis.
Finally, in the field of cross-border cooperation, even with more targeting the problems connected with borders would not all be resolved, some of them (e.g. differences between taxation and social security systems) are outside the scope of the ERDF or can only be addressed in part (e.g. judicial and administrative cooperation — See Annex II, point 7). 
Finally, in the field of cross-border cooperation, even with more targeting the problems connected with borders would not all be resolved, some of them (e.g. differences between taxation and social security systems) are outside the scope of the ERDF or can only be addressed in part (e.g. judicial and administrative cooperation Ń See Annex II, point 7).
Applying solutions in these areas is the sole responsibility of the Member States. 
Applying solutions in these areas is the sole responsibility of the Member States.
As regards transnational CIPs, the Commission can go along with the Court’s analysis and its criticism of inadequate targeting. 
As regards transnational CIPs, the Commission can go along with the CourtŐs analysis and its criticism of inadequate targeting.
The Member States concerned were, in some areas, not sufficiently involved in identifying projects which genuinely created structures for the territories concerned. 
The Member States concerned were, in some areas, not sufficiently involved in identifying projects which genuinely created structures for the territories concerned.
In future consideration should be gi-ven, for this strand, to developing more top-down working methods involving national administrations. 
In future consideration should be given, for this strand, to developing more top-down working methods involving national administrations.
Complementarity lies principally in the cross-border cooperation aspect which comes on top of the traditional and economic and social development. 
Complementarity lies principally in the cross-border cooperation aspect which comes on top of the traditional and economic and social development.
For instance, two border regions will include the financing of business support in their regional programmes and, by way of complement, the exchange of experience in financing such services in Interreg. 
For instance, two border regions will include the financing of business support in their regional programmes and, by way of complement, the exchange of experience in financing such services in Interreg.
For strand B, complementarity is achieved in that the CIPs finance transnational projects which are too complex for mainstream financing. 
For strand B, complementarity is achieved in that the CIPs finance transnational projects which are too complex for mainstream financing.
For strand C complementarity derives from the objective of improving regional policies and instruments, some of which are used for implementing mainstream actions. 
For strand C complementarity derives from the objective of improving regional policies and instruments, some of which are used for implementing mainstream actions.
The selection committee must be in a position to base its decisions on its appraisal of the quality of the projects, as it is possible, with the quantified criteria, to quickly identify the strengths and weaknesses of each project and to discuss them in the steering committee. 
The selection committee must be in a position to base its decisions on its appraisal of the quality of the projects, as it is possible, with the quantified criteria, to quickly identify the strengths and weaknesses of each project and to discuss them in the steering committee.
The Commission agrees with the Court that defining minimum quality would improve the selection system for certain programmes. 
The Commission agrees with the Court that defining minimum quality would improve the selection system for certain programmes.
The trans-European nature of projects is one of the principal requirements of the guidelines. 
The trans-European nature of projects is one of the principal requirements of the guidelines.
The Court is quite right in underlining that some strand A projects financed by Interreg are not carried out jointly by partners on both sides of a border. 
The Court is quite right in underlining that some strand A projects financed by Interreg are not carried out jointly by partners on both sides of a border.
This is authorised by the guidelines where significant impact can be demonstrated on the other side of the border. 
This is authorised by the guidelines where significant impact can be demonstrated on the other side of the border.
The Commission considers that exchange of experience is a way for the bodies involved in these exchanges to improve their know-how. 
The Commission considers that exchange of experience is a way for the bodies involved in these exchanges to improve their know-how.
In some cases they may then be in a position to carry out more effectively local development actions financed, for instance, under mainstream or Interreg financed cross-border programmes. 
In some cases they may then be in a position to carry out more effectively local development actions financed, for instance, under mainstream or Interreg financed cross-border programmes.
This applies to improvement in business support and the prevention of coastal erosion. 
This applies to improvement in business support and the prevention of coastal erosion.
The Commission believes that projects for the exchange of experience are often a prerequisite for the development of innovative action and better use of public funds. 
The Commission believes that projects for the exchange of experience are often a prerequisite for the development of innovative action and better use of public funds.
As regards the observation on the lack of targeting, the Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 63. 
As regards the observation on the lack of targeting, the Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 63.
THE FEASIBILITY OF MEASURING PROGRESS EX POST 71. 
THE FEASIBILITY OF MEASURING PROGRESS EX POST 71.
As explained in the reply to paragraph 63, the bottom-up approach means taking into account the opinions of partners in determining objectives and not only the SWOT analysis. 
As explained in the reply to paragraph 63, the bottom-up approach means taking into account the opinions of partners in determining objectives and not only the SWOT analysis.
In addition, the general objective of cross-border CIPs of developing cooperation between administrations and organisations of all kinds on both sides of the border (see paragraph 63) and the intangible nature of a good many of the activities chosen make it difficult to quantify exactly the impact of the operation (see paragraphs 21 and 22). 
In addition, the general objective of cross-border CIPs of developing cooperation between administrations and organisations of all kinds on both sides of the border (see paragraph 63) and the intangible nature of a good many of the activities chosen make it difficult to quantify exactly the impact of the operation (see paragraphs 21 and 22).
C 303/34 CS Úřední věstník Evropské unie 7.12.2004 73. 
C 303/34 EN Official Journal of the European Union 7.12.2004 73.
Commission staff are in the process of analysing in detail the mid-term evaluation reports; this exercise will help to remedy the problems and shortcomings detected by the Court concerning the relevance of the indicators. 
Commission staff are in the process of analysing in detail the mid-term evaluation reports; this exercise will help to remedy the problems and shortcomings detected by the Court concerning the relevance of the indicators.
What the Commission has seen so far is that one point criticised in a good many reports is that project partners can each determine their own indicators; in its official reaction to the reports the Commission will recommend that project partners be required to use the indicators stipulated in the programming documents (programme and com-plement). 
What the Commission has seen so far is that one point criticised in a good many reports is that project partners can each determine their own indicators; in its official reaction to the reports the Commission will recommend that project partners be required to use the indicators stipulated in the programming documents (programme and complement).
The lack of accuracy of the measurement of impact is mainly due to the intangible nature of the large number of activities financed. 
The lack of accuracy of the measurement of impact is mainly due to the intangible nature of the large number of activities financed.
The context indicators proper serve to define the starting situation, giving a snapshot of the region to which reference can be made to see whether the programme has had any impact on this situation. 
The context indicators proper serve to define the starting situation, giving a snapshot of the region to which reference can be made to see whether the programme has had any impact on this situation.
It is true that these indicators are not necessarily influenced by the operation, and that their value as far as the programme is concerned can be limited. 
It is true that these indicators are not necessarily influenced by the operation, and that their value as far as the programme is concerned can be limited.
Many earlier Interreg evaluations found that impact objectives cannot be quantified if this starting situation is not known. 
Many earlier Interreg evaluations found that impact objectives cannot be quantified if this starting situation is not known.
The Commission notes that a first step has been taken, but that harmonious application to all the CIPs would have been of more use. 
The Commission notes that a first step has been taken, but that harmonious application to all the CIPs would have been of more use.
As regards quantifiable indicators, i.e. of outputs and out-comes, as a rule it is the beneficiaries who state in their reports what has been achieved or, for some indicators, it is the joint secretariat. 
As regards quantifiable indicators, i.e. of outputs and outcomes, as a rule it is the beneficiaries who state in their reports what has been achieved or, for some indicators, it is the joint secretariat.
It is only to be expected that contributions to overall objectives made by specific projects should be difficult to determine. 
It is only to be expected that contributions to overall objectives made by specific projects should be difficult to determine.
The Commission urged Member States to select only a limited number of relevant indicators. 
The Commission urged Member States to select only a limited number of relevant indicators.
It reminded Member States of this recommendation in the simplification exercise (Commu-nication of 25 April 2003 (C(2003) 1255)). 
It reminded Member States of this recommendation in the simplification exercise (Communication of 25 April 2003 (C(2003) 1255)).
The Commission urged Member Stats to put in place computerised project management systems and databases to compile information for use as indicators. 
The Commission urged Member Stats to put in place computerised project management systems and databases to compile information for use as indicators.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 79. 
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 79.
The delays in the publication of guidelines and in the approval of programmes did not have any decisive effect on the quality of programmes (see replies to paragraphs 28, 29 and 36 to 39). 
The delays in the publication of guidelines and in the approval of programmes did not have any decisive effect on the quality of programmes (see replies to paragraphs 28, 29 and 36 to 39).
As regards evaluation, some progress was made through the increased quantification of objectives, even though this progress was limited because of the intangible nature of many of them (see the reply to paragraph 21). 
As regards evaluation, some progress was made through the increased quantification of objectives, even though this progress was limited because of the intangible nature of many of them (see the reply to paragraph 21).
The Commission guidelines have produced significant advances in the CIP management system compared with the previous period. 
The Commission guidelines have produced significant advances in the CIP management system compared with the previous period.
Further progress is expected on the basis of current experience and exchanges between management bodies under the Interact programme. 
Further progress is expected on the basis of current experience and exchanges between management bodies under the Interact programme.
The Commission is also planning to propose that the Council should introduce for the next programming period a new legal instrument to facilitate the creation of joint structures. 
The Commission is also planning to propose that the Council should introduce for the next programming period a new legal instrument to facilitate the creation of joint structures.
On the matter of the analyses available, the Commission would refer to its replies to the observations in paragraph 18. 
On the matter of the analyses available, the Commission would refer to its replies to the observations in paragraph 18.
As stated in paragraphs 17 and 58, the general objective of cross-border cooperation is the development of a cross-border economy by developing cross-border socio-economic centres out of the two economies separated by the border. 
As stated in paragraphs 17 and 58, the general objective of cross-border cooperation is the development of a cross-border economy by developing cross-border socio-economic centres out of the two economies separated by the border.
This means that any opportunity for developing cooperation between administrations and socio-economic actors located on either side of the border should be promoted. 
This means that any opportunity for developing cooperation between administrations and socio-economic actors located on either side of the border should be promoted.
Hence the guidelines deliberately provide a relatively wide field of action. 
Hence the guidelines deliberately provide a relatively wide field of action.
In some CIPs, however, specific cross-border problems were identified, by reference to which targeted and measurable objectives were defined and resources were concentrated on these objectives. 
In some CIPs, however, specific cross-border problems were identified, by reference to which targeted and measurable objectives were defined and resources were concentrated on these objectives.
These two approaches are not therefore mutually exclusive, as is shown by the examples of targeting on specific problems that the Court quotes in paragraph 58. 
These two approaches are not therefore mutually exclusive, as is shown by the examples of targeting on specific problems that the Court quotes in paragraph 58.
The Commission would refer to its replies to paragraphs 26 and 55. 
The Commission would refer to its replies to paragraphs 26 and 55.
As the Member States were aware of the essential aspects of the guidelines before they were published and as the Commission was in regular contact with the regions while the proposals were being prepared, the Commission does not think that programmes suffered in quality because of the delay in publishing the guidelines. 
As the Member States were aware of the essential aspects of the guidelines before they were published and as the Commission was in regular contact with the regions while the proposals were being prepared, the Commission does not think that programmes suffered in quality because of the delay in publishing the guidelines.
It would refer to its reply to paragraph 28. 
It would refer to its reply to paragraph 28.
The Commission organised systematic assessment of the quality of the proposals and monitored the action taken on its observations. 
The Commission organised systematic assessment of the quality of the proposals and monitored the action taken on its observations.
Where, on occasion, it was unable to impose its de-mands, this was because it was involved in complex negotiations with a set of partners who also had to negotiate the adjustments requested between themselves. 
Where, on occasion, it was unable to impose its demands, this was because it was involved in complex negotiations with a set of partners who also had to negotiate the adjustments requested between themselves.
The delays that occurred were not only when the Commission was examining the proposals. 
The delays that occurred were not only when the Commission was examining the proposals.
They were also the result of the time taken by Member States, who had to talk to each other and reach agreement on the improvements requested by the Commission. 
They were also the result of the time taken by Member States, who had to talk to each other and reach agreement on the improvements requested by the Commission.
As explained in paragraphs 37 and 38, as a rule they took longer in doing this than the Commission did in examining the proposals. 
As explained in paragraphs 37 and 38, as a rule they took longer in doing this than the Commission did in examining the proposals.
As regards the low take-up of payment appropriations, the Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 39. 
As regards the low take-up of payment appropriations, the Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 39.
Because of the search for the essential consensus in programmes involving a number of Member States and the very purpose of the programmes, CIPs are targeted at enhanced cooperation and not at predetermined sectors of activity. 
Because of the search for the essential consensus in programmes involving a number of Member States and the very purpose of the programmes, CIPs are targeted at enhanced cooperation and not at predetermined sectors of activity.
The Commission would also refer to its replies to paragraphs 58 and 59. 
The Commission would also refer to its replies to paragraphs 58 and 59.
The Commission believes that improvements are still necessary in terms of shared structures, and it is reassuring to note that in most cases there is a single financial plan, despite the fact that the resources allocated to the structural funds are distributed by Member States. 
The Commission believes that improvements are still necessary in terms of shared structures, and it is reassuring to note that in most cases there is a single financial plan, despite the fact that the resources allocated to the structural funds are distributed by Member States.
7.12.2004 CS Úřední věstník Evropské unie C 303/35 88. 
7.12.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 303/35 88.
The Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 52. 
The Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 52.
As the Commission explained in paragraph 63, the bottom-up approach brings out concerns not identified by expert analysis. 
As the Commission explained in paragraph 63, the bottom-up approach brings out concerns not identified by expert analysis.
These concerns of regional and local authorities are used in cross-border areas in addition to expert studies to determine strategy and priorities. 
These concerns of regional and local authorities are used in cross-border areas in addition to expert studies to determine strategy and priorities.
It is difficult to measure the impact of CIPs because of the intangible nature of cooperation objectives (see the reply to paragraph 73). 
It is difficult to measure the impact of CIPs because of the intangible nature of cooperation objectives (see the reply to paragraph 73).
The Commission pays attention to the analysis of the starting situation. 
The Commission pays attention to the analysis of the starting situation.
It is for this reason that it proposed context indicators. 
It is for this reason that it proposed context indicators.
The principal objective of cross-border CIPs is to develop cross-border economic and social centres through joint strategies for sustainable territorial development and not only to resolve problems directly linked to borders. 
The principal objective of cross-border CIPs is to develop cross-border economic and social centres through joint strategies for sustainable territorial development and not only to resolve problems directly linked to borders.
The main concern is to overcome the major handicap of these areas which lies in the weak links between actors who are located close to each other but in different Member States. 
The main concern is to overcome the major handicap of these areas which lies in the weak links between actors who are located close to each other but in different Member States.
Programmes do, none the less, seek to resolve certain specific problems linked to the existence of borders. 
Programmes do, none the less, seek to resolve certain specific problems linked to the existence of borders.
The priorities and measures are directed at resolving the major problem of limited links between actors, and not only to seek out specific problems which would justify sectoral targeting of actions. 
The priorities and measures are directed at resolving the major problem of limited links between actors, and not only to seek out specific problems which would justify sectoral targeting of actions.
Targeting does exist, but it concerns the processes which generate cooperation and not sectors of activity, given that the key objective is to generate cross-border economic centres. 
Targeting does exist, but it concerns the processes which generate cooperation and not sectors of activity, given that the key objective is to generate cross-border economic centres.
The objective set by the Commission in its guidelines for strand C, namely ‘improving regional development policies and instruments’, responds to a need which can be identified only by the public authorities concerned by comparing their own policies with those of their counterparts in other Member States. 
The objective set by the Commission in its guidelines for strand C, namely Ôimproving regional development policies and instrumentsŐ, responds to a need which can be identified only by the public authorities concerned by comparing their own policies with those of their counterparts in other Member States.