natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Både EU's køreplan, som blev fremlagt i 2011, samt dens nyere meddelelse med titlen "En ren planet for alle – En europæisk strategisk og langsigtet vision for en fremgangsrig, moderne, konkurrencedygtig og klimaneutral økonomi", som blev vedtaget i 2018, omfatter alle sektorer, herunder landbrug, LULUCF, energi og transport. 
Both the EU roadmap presented in 2011, as well as its more recent Communication on “A Clean Planet for all - A European strategic long-term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive and climate neutral economy”, adopted in 2018, cover all sectors including agriculture, LULUCF, energy and transport.
For så vidt angår emissionshandelssystemet, har Kommissionen ikke givet kvantificerede skøn over virkningerne af emissionerne til UNFCCC siden 2005. 
On the ETS, the Commission did not provide quantified estimates on the impacts of emissions since 2005 to the UNFCCC so far.
I betragtning af at emissionerne under EU's emissionshandelssystem konsekvent ligger under loftet, som falder år for år, opfylder systemet sit mål om at bidrage til EU's samlede emissionsmål. 
Given that the EU ETS emissions have been consistently below the cap, which decreases every year, the ETS is fulfilling its objective to contribute to the overall EU emissions targets.
Der har været en betydelig nedgang i emissionerne i fase 3 (2013-2020). 
There has been a significant decrease of emissions over the course of phase 3 (2013-2020).
Anbefaling 2 – Forbedring af rammerne for fremtidige emissionsreduktioner a) Kommissionen accepterer anbefalingen. 
Recommendation 2 – Improving the framework for future emission reductions a) The Commission accepts the recommendation.
I overensstemmelse med EU's ETS-direktiv1 bør til tag fra Den Internationale Søfartsorganisation eller Den Europæiske Union indledes, herunder det forberedende arbejde med vedtagelse og gennemførelse og med behørig hensyntagen fra alle interessenters side. b) Kommissionen accepterer anbefalingen. 
In line with the EU ETS Directive1, action from the International Maritime Organisation or the European Union should start, including preparatory work on adoption and implementation and due consideration being given by all stakeholders. b) The Commission accepts the recommendation.
Kommissionen er enig i, at udviklingen af politikker for nøglesektorer såsom landbrug og LULUCF bør være i overensstemmelse med det langsigtede perspektiv, der fremgår af Kommissionens vision om at EU bliver klimaneutral inden 2050. 
The Commission agrees that the development of policies for key sectors, such as agriculture and LULUCF, should be consistent with the long-term perspective as presented in the Commission vision for the EU to become climate neutral by 2050.
Denne langsigtede vision vil præge fremtidige EU-politikker, der er knyttet til landbrug og LULUCF. 
This long-term vision will inform future EU policies linked to agriculture and LULUCF.
Landbrug og LULUCF er en integreret del af de nationale energi-og klimaplaner, som medlemsstaterne skal udarbejde og regelmæssigt ajourføre. 
Agriculture and LULUCF are an integrated part of the national energy and climate plans (NECPs) that Member states have to prepare and regularly update.
Medlemsstaterne forelagde udkast til nationale energi-og klimaplaner i januar 2019, som blev grundigt vurderet af Kommissionen i juni 2019. 
Member States submitted draft NECPs in January 2019, which were thoroughly assessed by the Commission by June 2019.
Endvidere skal medlemsstaterne forelægge langsigtede strategier for at opfylde deres forpligtelser i henhold til UNFCCC og Parisaftalen, herunder sektorspecifikke aspekter, senest den 1. januar 2020. 
Moreover, Member States have to submit long-term strategies to meet their commitments under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement, including sectoral aspects, by 1 January 2020.
Desuden har Kommissionen i forbindelse med den fælles landbrugspolitik foreslået, at medlemsstaterne udarbejder strategiske planer i de kommende år. c) Kommissionen accepterer anbefalingen. 
In addition, the Commission in the context of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has proposed that Member States prepare CAP strategic plans in the coming years c) The Commission accepts the recommendation.
Kommissionen er enig i, at regelmæssig og passende rapportering og vurdering af virkningerne af EU's klimapolitikker og -foranstaltninger vedrørende drivhusgasemissioner er vigtigt for at kunne vurdere deres fremskridt og effektivitet. 
The Commission agrees that regular and adequate reporting and assessment of the effects of EU climate policies and measures on greenhouse gas emissions is important to evaluate their progress and effectiveness.
Kommissionen vurderer virkningerne af EU's modvirkningspolitikker og -foranstaltninger vedrørende emissioner på forhånd. 
The Commission assesses the impacts of EU mitigation policies and measures on emissions ex ante.
Den gennemfører også regelmæssigt efterfølgende evalueringer, navnlig i 1 Betragtning 4 i direktiv (EU) 2018/410. 
It also regularly conducts ex post evaluations, in particular when preparing policy revisions.
Den arbejder løbende på at forbedre metoderne til vurdering af de individuelle politikkers afbødende virkninger. 
It is working continuously to improve methodologies for assessment of the mitigation effects of individual policies.
Kommissionen er i øjeblikket ved at færdiggøre en rapport til UNFCCC. 
The Commission is currently finalising a report to the UNFCCC.
Den forventer at fremlægge rapporten i begyndelsen af 2023. 
It expects to complete the following report by early 2023.
Revisionen blev foretaget under ledelse af Nikolaos Milionis, medlem af Revisionsretten, med støtte fra kabinetschef Kristian Sniter og attaché Matteo Tartaggia, ledende administrator Robert Markus, opgaveansvarlig Oana Dumitrescu og revisorerne Lucia Roşca, Liia Laanes, Natalia Krzempek og Bertrand Tanguy. 
The audit was led by ECA Member Nikolaos Milionis, supported by Kristian Sniter, Head of Private Office and Matteo Tartaggia, Private Office Attaché; Robert Markus, Principal Manager; Oana Dumitrescu, Head of Task; Lucia Roşca, Liia Laanes, Natalia Krzempek and Bertrand Tanguy, Auditors.
Richard Moore og Michael Pyper ydede sproglig støtte. 
Richard Moore and Michael Pyper provided linguistic support.
Fra venstre mod højre: Kristian Sniter, Oana Dumitrescu, Michael Pyper, Nikolaos Milionis, Matteo Tartaggia, Lucia Roşca, Natalia Krzempek. 
From left to right: Kristian Sniter, Oana Dumitrescu, Michael Pyper, Nikolaos Milionis, Matteo Tartaggia, Lucia Roşca, Natalia Krzempek.
Tidslinje Begivenhed Dato Revisionsplanen vedtaget/Revisionen påbegyndt 4.7.2018 Udkastet til beretning officielt sendt til Kommissionen (eller en anden revideret enhed) 28.6.2019 Den endelige beretning vedtaget efter den kontradiktoriske procedure 25.9.2019 Officielle svar fra Kommissionen (eller en anden revideret enhed) modtaget på alle sprog 24.10.2019 
Timeline Event Date Adoption of Audit Planning Memorandum (APM) / Start of audit 4.7.2018 Official sending of draft report to Commission (or other auditee) 28.6.2019 Adoption of the final report after the adversarial procedure 25.9.2019 Commission’s (or other auditee’s) official replies received in all languages 24.10.2019
PDF ISBN 978-92-847-3846-5 doi:10.2865/378177 QJ-AB-19-016-DA-N HTML ISBN 978-92-847-3706-2 doi:10.2865/906900 QJ-AB-19-016-DA-Q 
PDF ISBN 978-92-847-3826-7 doi:10.2865/747007 QJ-AB-19-016-EN-N HTML ISBN 978-92-847-3687-4 doi:10.2865/23283 QJ-AB-19-016-EN-Q
EU tager del i den globale indsats for at reducere drivhusgasemissioner og sigter mod en reduktion af emissionerne på 20 % inden 2020, på 40 % inden 2030 og på 80-95 % inden 2050. 
The EU takes part in the global efforts to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions, aiming for a 20 % reduction of its emissions by 2020, a 40 % reduction by 2030 and an 80-95 % reduction by 2050.
Kommissionen er ansvarlig for at revidere de data, som medlemsstaterne rapporterer om de aktuelle og forventede emissioner, og for at foreslå EU-politikker og -foranstaltninger, som skal bidrage til at nå reduktionsmålene. 
The Commission is responsible for reviewing the data reported by Member States on the current and projected emissions and for proposing EU policies and measures to reach the reduction targets.
Vi konstaterede, at EU's emissionsdata rapporteres behørigt, men at EU har behov for mere viden om fremtidige reduktioner af drivhusgasemissioner. 
We found that the EU emission data is appropriately reported, but that the EU needs better insight into future greenhouse gas emission reductions.
Vi fremsætter anbefalinger, som har til formål at forbedre Kommissionens revisionsproces vedrørende data om drivhusgasemissioner for sektoren for arealanvendelse, ændret arealanvendelse og skovbrug (LULUCF) og rammerne for fremtidige emissionsreduktioner. 
We make recommendations aimed at improving the Commission review process of greenhouse gas emission data for the land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector and the framework for future emission reductions.
INEA har leveret fordele, men manglerne vedrżrende CEF bżr adresseres 19 Indhold Resum Indledning Revisionens omfang og revisionsmetoden Bemžrkninger Punkt I-V 01-11 12-18 19-80 19-40 21-22 23-24 25-30 31-40 41-80 42-56 57-73 74-80 81-89 INEA leverede de forventede fordele med visse begržnsninger, som skyldtes rammeforhold INEA udviklede standardiserede procedurer, der har forenklet gennemfżrelsen INEA's administrative omkostninger ligger under de oprindelige skżn, selv om personaleomkostningerne er en smule hżjere Der var kun synergier i et begržnset antal foranstaltninger INEA begržnses af rammeforhold Der er mangler i de ellers veltilrettelagte CEF-udvžlgelsesprocedurer, risici i gennemfżrelsen af programmet og svagheder i performancerapporteringen Udvžlgelsesprocedurerne er veltilrettelagte, men der kunne med fordel sikres stżrre sammenhžng og gennemsigtighed Der er risiko for, at CEF ikke bliver gennemfżrt fuldt ud Den eksisterende performanceramme er ikke velegnet til at vise, hvordan projekterne bidrager til at opfylde programmlene Konklusioner og anbefalinger Bilag Bilag I - Kommissionens og INEA's ansvar vedrżrende CEF-forvaltning 2 
Contents Executive summary Introduction Audit scope and approach Observations INEA delivered expected benefits with some limitations related to framework constraints INEA developed standardised procedures that have simplified implementation INEA’s administrative costs are below initial estimates, though staff costs are slightly higher Synergies materialised only in a limited number of actions INEA faces framework constraints There are shortcomings in the otherwise well organised CEF selection procedures, risks in the implementation of the programme and weaknesses in performance reporting Selection procedures are well-organised, but would benefit from increased coherence and transparency There is a risk that the CEF will not be fully implemented The existing performance framework is not well-suited to demonstrate how projects contribute to programme objectives Conclusions and recommendations Annexes Annex I — Commission and INEA responsibilities in the area of CEF management Paragraph I-V 01-11 12-18 19-80 19-40 21-22 23-24 25-30 31-40 41-80 42-56 57-73 74-80 81-89 2
Glossar og forkortelser Kommissionens svar Revisionsholdet Tidslinje 3 
Glossary and abbreviations Replies of the Commission Audit team Timeline 3
Resum I Forvaltningsorganet for Innovation og Netvžrk (INEA) blev oprettet for programmeringsperioden 2014-2020 med det forml at gennemfżre dele af Connecting Europe-faciliteten (CEF) og Horisont 2020-programmet. 
Executive summary I The Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (INEA) was set up for the 2014-2020 programming period to implement parts of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and Horizon 2020 programmes.
Det har et samlet budget p 33,6 milliarder euro til medfinansiering af projekter inden for transport, energi og telekommunikation. 
It has a total budget of €33.6 billion for co-financing projects in the fields of transport, energy and telecommunications.
Vi udvalgte INEA til revision, bde fordi det har det stżrste budget, der forvaltes af noget EU-forvaltningsorgan, og fordi dets retsgrundlag i żjeblikket er ved at blive žndret med henblik p perioden 2021-2027. 
We selected INEA for audit both because this is the largest budget managed by any EU executive agency, and because the legal framework is currently being revised for the 2021-2027 period.
II Vi vurderede INEA's forvaltning af de delegerede EU-udgiftsprogrammer. 
II We assessed INEA’s management of the delegated EU spending programmes.
Til det forml undersżgte vi, om INEA sammen med Kommissionen i) har udfżrt sine delegerede opgaver og opnet de forventede fordele ved uddelegering af ansvar og ii) fżlger solide procedurer i forvaltningen af CEF. 
To do this, we examined whether INEA, together with the Commission, (i) has fulfilled the tasks delegated to it and achieved the expected benefits of externalising responsibilities, and (ii) follows robust procedures for managing the CEF.
INEA var den primžre reviderede enhed. 
INEA was our principal auditee.
Vi fokuserede p INEA's aktiviteter i perioden 2014-2020 og brugte interview og skrivebordsgennemgange som vores vigtigste dataindsamlingsprocedurer. 
We focused on its activities in the 2014-2020 period, using interviews and desk reviews as our main data collection procedures.
III INEA har leveret de forventede fordele med visse begržnsninger, som skyldtes rammeforhold. o INEA anvender standardiserede procedurer, der har forenklet gennemfżrelsen af de delegerede udgiftsprogrammer. 
III INEA has delivered the expected benefits with some limitations related to framework constraints. o INEA uses standardised procedures that have simplified the implementation of the delegated spending programmes.
INEA's samlede administrative omkostninger ligger i żjeblikket under de oprindelige skżn, selv om personaleomkostningerne er en smule hżjere. 
Its overall administrative costs are currently below initial estimates, though staff costs are slightly higher.
Der er kun i et begržnset antal foranstaltninger opnet synergier mellem CEF og Horisont 2020, mellem de forskellige CEF-sektorer og mellem INEA og andre agenturer. o Mlt ud fra sine fem nżgleresultatindikatorer har INEA udfżrt sine opgaver, men disse indikatorer er ikke specifikt resultatorienterede, dvs. rettet mod at mle gennemfżrelsen af programmerne eller absorptionen af midlerne. o Personaleforvaltningen har nogle begržnsninger, navnlig p grund af rammeforhold. 
Synergies between CEF and Horizon 2020, between CEF sectors, and with other agencies, have only materialised in a limited number of actions. o INEA has fulfilled its tasks as measured by five key performance indicators, but these are not specifically results-oriented, i.e. not targeted to measuring programme implementation or the absorption of funds. o Particularly due to framework constraints, staff management has some limitations.
Eftersom personaleantallet er knyttet til de delegerede programmer, kan INEA ikke p en fleksibel mde omplacere sit personale til de mest presserende opgaver. o Vi konstaterede mangler i koordineringen af Kommissionens indkaldelser, som ikke planlžgges p flerrig basis for at żge forudsigeligheden for projektivžrksžttere. 4 
Since staff numbers are linked to the delegated programmes, INEA cannot flexibly reassign its staff to the most pressing tasks. o We found shortcomings in the coordination of Commission ́s calls, which are not planned on a multiannual basis to increase the predictability for project promoters. 4
IV Vi konstaterede mangler i de ellers veltilrettelagte CEF-udvžlgelsesprocedurer, risici i programgennemfżrelsen og svagheder i performancerapporteringen. o Procedurerne for projektudvžlgelse er veltilrettelagte, men bżr harmoniseres yderligere p tvžrs af de tre CEF-sektorer. 
IV We found shortcomings in the otherwise well-organised CEF selection procedures, risks in programme implementation and weaknesses in performance reporting. o The procedures for selecting projects are well-organised, but have to be further harmonised across the three CEF sectors.
Sammenhžngen mellem de eksterne eksperters vurdering og Kommissionens endelige tildelingsbeslutning er forskellig fra sektor til sektor. 
The degree of correlation between the assessment made by external experts and the Commission’s final award decision differs between the sectors.
I CEF Transport er sandsynligheden for udvžlgelse uafhžngig af de scorer, som de eksterne eksperter giver anbefalede projekter. rsagerne til afvigelser fra vurderingerne bżr dokumenteres bedre. 
In CEF Transport, the probability of being selected is independent of the scores given by the external experts for recommended projects.
Dette gžlder isžr 14 CEF-T-projekter (med ca. 711 millioner euro i tilskud), som Kommissionen udvalgte, men som de eksterne eksperter ikke havde anbefalet til finansiering p grund af forhold vedrżrende modenhed, kvalitet eller effekt. o Desuden bżr de tildelingskriterier, der bruges til at udvžlge projekter, pržciseres yderligere. 
This is a particular issue for 14 CEF-T projects (worth about €711 million in grants) which the Commission selected but the external experts had not recommended for funding for reasons of maturity, quality or impact. o Moreover, the award criteria used to select projects need further clarification.
Navnlig er en grundig vurdering af modenhed og kvalitet vigtig med henblik p at foregribe forhold, der kan true projekternes rettidige gennemfżrelse. o Der er risiko for, at programmet ikke bliver gennemfżrt fuldt ud. 
The thorough assessment of maturity and quality in particular is key for anticipating issues that may affect the timely implementation of projects. o There is a risk that the programme will not be fully implemented.
I januar 2019 - i periodens femte r - var under en fjerdedel af de midler, der var tildelt projekter, blevet omsat i betalinger. 
By January 2019, in the fifth year of the period, less than one quarter of the funds awarded to projects had resulted in payments.
Den langsomme udbetaling af midlerne skyldes forsinket og ufuldstžndig projektgennemfżrelse. o Hertil kommer, at det nuvžrende system for indkaldelser ikke afholdt ansżgere fra at indsende umodne projektforslag. 
This slow disbursement of funding is attributable to the delayed implementation and under-execution of projects. o In addition, the current system of calls did not discourage immature project proposals.
INEA fulgte Kommissionens plan for indkaldelser af forslag og bevilgede en betydelig del af CEF-budgettet tidligt i programmeringsperioden. 
Following the Commission ́s schedule for calls for proposals, INEA granted a significant share of the CEF budget early in the programming period.
85 % af CEF-T-budgettet blev bevilget i forbindelse med 2014-og 2015-indkaldelserne, og CEF-T-budgettet for 2014 alene var p 12 milliarder euro - 52 % af det samlede delegerede budget for perioden. 
85 % of the CEF-T budget was granted under the 2014 and 2015 calls, and the CEF-T budget for 2014 alone was €12 billion - or 52 % of the total delegated budget for the period.
Ulempen ved at bevilge s meget s tidligt var, at nogle af de udvalgte projekter ikke var modne nok. o Eftersom perioden 2014-2020 slutter nžste r, er der risiko for, at der vil komme en betydelig ophobning af betalinger, frigjorte midler og tilbagefżrsler i de kommende mneder. 
The downside of allocating so much so early was that some projects selected were not mature enough. o With the 2014-2020 period due to end next year, there is a risk that payments, decommitments and reflows will build up significantly in the coming months.
Dermed vil programmets potentielle effekt blive forsinket yderligere. 
This would mean further delaying the programme’s potential impact.
Det er vigtigt at overvge projektfremskridtene for at identificere forsinkelser og tržffe korrigerende foranstaltninger. 
Monitoring of project progress is important so that delays can be identified and corrective actions can be taken.
Overvgningsvžrktżjerne - f.eks. bestemmelser i tilskudsaftalerne og aktionsstatusrapporterne - kunne dog med fordel forbedres med henblik p at sikre en effektiv anvendelse af EU-midlerne. 5 
However, monitoring tools – such as provisions in grant agreements and action status reports, would benefit from improvement to ensure the effective use of EU funds. o The existing performance framework is not well suited to demonstrate how projects contribute to the overall CEF objectives.
INEA overvger hovedsagelig projekternes output, men denne tilgang er utilstržkkelig til at vurdere resultaterne. 
INEA mainly monitors project outputs, but this approach is insufficient to assess results.
Der er sledes ingen klare oplysninger om, hvorvidt eller hvordan de EU-medfinansierede projekter har net de żnskede resultater. 
Thus there is no clear 5 information as to whether or how EU co-funded projects have achieved the targeted results.
V P grundlag af vores revisionsresultater anbefaler vi tiltag, der kan hjžlpe Kommissionen og INEA til: 1) at forbedre potentialet for synergier mellem CEF og Horisont 2020-programmet og mellem CEF-sektorerne 2) at styrke rammen for INEA's forvaltning af de delegerede programmer 3) at sikre stżrre harmonisering og gennemsigtighed i projektudvžlgelsesprocedurerne 4) at skabe bedre betingelser for rettidig gennemfżrelse af CEF 5) at žndre performancerammen med henblik p bedre overvgning af projektresultater. 6 
V Based on our findings, we recommend action which would help the Commission and INEA to: (1) improve the potential for synergies between the CEF and H2020 programmes, and between CEF sectors; (2) strengthen the framework for INEA’s management of the delegated programmes; (3) ensure greater harmonisation and transparency of project selection procedures; (4) set better conditions for timely implementation of the CEF; (5) redesign the performance framework to better monitor project results. 6
Indledning Den Europžiske Unions forvaltningsorganer 01 Kommissionen har siden 2003 haft befżjelse til at oprette forvaltningsorganer for en begržnset periode til at forvalte specifikke opgaver i forbindelse med EU-programmer1. 
Introduction Executive agencies of the European Union 01 Since 2003, the Commission has the right to set up executive agencies for a limited period of time to manage specific tasks related to EU programmes1.
Det fżrste af disse organer blev oprettet i starten af 2004. 
The first such agency was established in early 2004.
Siden da har Kommissionen gradvist żget finansieringen og antallet af outsourcede programmer til sine nu seks forvaltningsorganer2. 
Since then, the Commission has gradually increased the volume of funds and number of programmes outsourced to what are now six executive agencies2.
02 I modsžtning til decentrale agenturer og andre organer kan forvaltningsorganer ikke af Kommissionen plžgges opgaver, der indebžrer, at der skal udżves et skżn, nr politiske beslutninger skal fżres ud i livet. 
02 Unlike with decentralised agencies and other bodies, the Commission may not entrust an executive agency with tasks requiring discretionary powers in translating political choices into action.
03 I sit forslag til den flerrige finansielle ramme for 2021-2027 (FFR) understregede Kommissionen, at forvaltningsorganerne har stor betydning for programgennemfżrelsen, da de giver omkostningsbesparelser og stordriftsfordele og sikrer den operationelle nžrhed til stżttemodtagerne. 
03 In its proposal for the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework (MFF), the Commission emphasised the importance of executive agencies in programme implementation, as this generates cost savings and economies of scale and ensures operational proximity to beneficiaries.
Ifżlge Kommissionen bżr det sledes overvejes at gżre brug af yderligere outsourcing. 
According to the Commission, consideration should therefore be given to further outsourcing.