natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Af denne rsag - og af rimelighedshensyn - bżr forslag vedrżrende den fžlles landbrugspolitik angive deres fordelingsmžssige virkninger. 
Therefore, and for the sake of equity, CAP proposals should spell out their distributional effects. Assessing CAP objectives CRITERIA 2.1.
EU's ml for den fžlles landbrugspolitik er klart defineret og afspejler de identificerede behov og den langsigtede vision for den fžlles landbrugspolitik. 
EU CAP objectives are clearly defined and reflect the needs identified and the long-term vision for the CAP.
EU's ml for den fžlles landbrugspolitik er i overensstemmelse med andre generelle og sektorspecifikke EU-politikml og internationale forpligtelser28. 
EU CAP objectives are consistent with other general and sectoral EU policy objectives and international commitments28. 53.
28 F.eks. indget i forbindelse med den 21. partskonference, i henhold til mlene for bžredygtig udvikling og i Verdenshandelsorganisationen. 
The EU For example under Conference of the Parties 21, Sustainable Development Goals and the World Trade Organisation. 28
Det er en central udfordring at koble den resultatbaserede gennemfżrelsesmodel sammen med resultatbudgettering, s finansieringen afspejler de konstaterede behov og forventede resultater. 
A key challenge is to couple a performance-based delivery model with performance budgeting, with funding reflecting identified needs and expected results.
Der bżr vžre et klart krav om anvendelse af disse principper i gennemfżrelsen af de strategiske planer under den fžlles landbrugspolitik. 
There should be a clear requirement to apply these principles in delivering the CAP strategic plans.
Meddelelsen omtaler ikke medfinansiering. 
The Communication does not address co-financing.
Den nye gennemfżrelsesmodel vil samle de to sżjler i n strategisk plan. 
The new delivery model would combine the two pillars under one strategic plan.
Det har stor indflydelse p balancen af incitamenter i forbindelse med gennemfżrelsen af den fžlles landbrugspolitik, om der kan ydes medfinansiering eller ej. 
The existence or not of co-financing has a strong influence on the balance of incentives operating in the implementation of the CAP.
Den nye gennemfżrelsesmodel kan ikke vurderes, fżr der er klarhed om mekanismerne for medfinansiering. 
The new delivery model cannot be assessed without clarity on the mechanisms for co-financing.
EU's medfinansieringssatser bżr afspejle EU-mervžrdien ved de forskellige interventionstyper og -omrder. 
EU co-financing rates should reflect the EU value added of the different types and areas of intervention.
Politikken gennemfżres ved hjžlp af omkostningseffektive instrumenter og p grundlag af solid dokumentation. 
CRITERIA: 4.1. Policy is implemented by means of cost-effective instruments based on solid evidence.
Der er sammenhžng mellem den fžlles landbrugspolitik og andre EU-politikker og mellem forskellige instrumenter under den fžlles landbrugspolitik. 
There is consistency between the CAP and other EU policies and between different CAP instruments.
Gennemfżrelsesbestemmelserne er enkle og kompromitterer ikke omkostningseffektiviteten. 
Implementation rules are simple and do not compromise cost-effectiveness.
Der er foreslet hensigtsmžssige ordninger for overgangen til den nye gennemfżrelsesmodel. 
Adequate arrangements are proposed for the transition to the new delivery model.
Meddelelsen anbefaler en viderefżrelse af de direkte betalinger til landbrugerne, og mange af de ml, den nžvner, adresseres allerede af eksisterende foranstaltninger. 
The Communication advocates continuing direct payments to farmers and many of the objectives it mentions are already addressed by existing measures.
Det er derfor sandsynligt, at de foranstaltninger, medlemsstaterne vil ivžrksžtte efter 2020, vil ligne de nuvžrende foranstaltninger. 
It is therefore likely that the measures that Member States will roll out after 2020 will be similar to current measures.
Nżglen til succes for den fžlles landbrugspolitik efter 2020 vil vžre klarhed og kvalitet i de strategiske planer under denne politik. 
The clarity and wider quality of CAP strategic plans will be the key to the success of the post-2020 CAP.
Omkostningseffektiviteten af de instrumenter, medlemsstaterne vžlger og/eller udformer, skal pvises i disse planer p grundlag af solid dokumentation, herunder videnskabelige kilder og statusopgżrelser vedrżrende eksisterende foranstaltninger. 
The cost-effectiveness of instruments that Member States will select and/or design will need to be demonstrated in these plans, on the basis of solid evidence, including scientific sources and stock taking of existing measures.
De strategiske planer under den fžlles landbrugspolitik skal beskrive, hvordan politikkens forskellige instrumenter vil supplere hinanden, og hvordan de vil blive koordineret med andre politikker med betydning for landdistrikterne. 
CAP strategic plans will have to set out how different CAP instruments will complement each other and how they will be coordinated with other policies affecting rural areas.
Kommissionen og medlemsstaterne bżr sigte mod at forenkle reglerne med fokus p, hvad der er vigtigt for at sikre god performance. 
The Commission and Member States should aim to simplify rules, focussing on what is essential for performance.
Der vil fortsat vžre behov for nogle grundlžggende regler p EU-niveau. 
There will be a continued need for some basic rules at EU level.
Hvis de direkte betalinger bevares, skal der fastsžttes grundlžggende krav i EU's lovgivning. 
If direct payments are retained, basic requirements will need to be defined in EU law.
EU-reglerne bżr sikre rimelighed og lige vilkr (herunder reglerne om statsstżtte og WTO-kravene). 
EU rules should ensure fairness and a level-playing field (including rules on state aid and WTO requirements).
Det er ogs afgżrende at afsžtte tilstržkkelig tid og udarbejde hensigtsmžssige ordninger for overgangen til den nye gennemfżrelsesmodel. 
It is also crucial to allow sufficient time and to put adequate arrangements in place for the transition to the new delivery model.
Vurdering af output, udfald og eksterne faktorer i den fžlles landbrugspolitik 31 KRITERIER: 5.1. 
Assessing CAP outputs, outcomes and external factors 28 CRITERIA: 5.1.
Et effektivt performancesystem forbinder politikkens ml med dens output, resultater og effekt. 
An effective performance system links the objectives of the policy and its outputs, results and impacts.
Der er en klar sammenhžng mellem de udbetalte midler fra EU-budgettet og opnelsen af de aftalte performanceml. 
There is a clear link between money paid from the EU budget and the achievement of agreed performance targets.
Politikkens performance og de relevante eksterne faktorer overvges, og politikken justeres, nr det er nżdvendigt. 
Policy performance and relevant external factors are monitored and the policy is adjusted when necessary.
En central udfordring for den resultatbaserede gennemfżrelsesmodel i den fžlles landbrugspolitik efter 2020 er at sikre, at EU betaler for de output, der er relevante for EU's ml og er blevet leveret. 
A key challenge for the performance-based delivery mechanism for the post-2020 CAP is ensuring that the EU pays for outputs which are relevant to EU objectives and have been delivered.
Sikkerhed for den faktiske levering af output og resultater bżr opns fra to kilder: Ľ solide forvaltnings-og kontrolsystemer, som danner grundlag for ledelsens performancerapportering og gżr stżrre brug af moderne teknologier til kontroller i realtid 
Assurance about the actual achievement of outputs and results should stem from two sources: • solid management and control systems underlying management performance reporting, which makes greater use of modern technologies for real-time checks. • independent external audit.
Hvis den fžlles landbrugspolitik efter 2020 skal vžre en resultatbaseret politik, bżr der vžre en klar forbindelse mellem de opnede resultater og den finansielle bistand. 
If the post-2020 CAP is to be a performance-based policy, there should be a clear link between the results achieved and the financial support received.
Dette kan anvendes bde i forholdet mellem Kommissionen og medlemsstaterne og, hvor det er muligt, i forholdet mellem medlemsstaterne og de enkelte bedrifter eller projekter. 
Such arrangements could be applied both to the relation between the Commission and Member States and, where feasible, to the relation between Member States and individual farms or projects.
For at sikre en forsvarlig żkonomisk forvaltning har Kommissionen og medlemsstaterne brug for rettidige oplysninger om, hvorvidt foranstaltningerne opfylder politikkens ml p en produktiv mde. 
In order to ensure sound financial management, the Commission and Member States need timely information as to whether measures achieve policy objectives in an efficient way.
Disse oplysninger bżr anvendes til at justere politikken og udgifterne, nr det er nżdvendigt. 
This information should be used to adjust policy and spending when necessary.
Sikring af ansvarlighed 64. 
Ensuring accountability 64.
Det fremgr ikke klart af meddelelsen, hvordan medlemsstaternes og Kommissionens rolle žndres, og det bżr derfor pržciseres i lovforslaget. 
The nature of the change in role of Member States and the Commission is not made clear in the Communication and will need to be clarified in the legislative proposal.
Dokumentet nžvner en stżrre rolle for medlemsstaterne og giver Kommissionen den centrale rolle at godkende medlemsstaternes strategiske planer under den fžlles landbrugspolitik "med henblik p, at den fžlles landbrugspolitik i videst mulig udstržkning bidrager til at opfylde EU's prioriteter og mlsžtninger og til at n medlemsstaternes klima-og energiml". 
While the document talks of a larger role for Member States, it gives the Commission a key role in approval of Member States’ CAP strategic plans “with a view to maximising the contribution of the CAP towards the EU priorities and objectives, and the achievement of Member States’ climate and energy targets”.
Indfżrelsen af en ny gennemfżrelsesmodel bżr bygge p de stžrkeste elementer i de nuvžrende forvaltningsstrukturer, herunder kontrolsystemer (f.eks. LPIS). 
The introduction of a new delivery model should build on the stronger elements of the current governance structures, including control systems (such as the LPIS).
Sikring af god performance i forbindelse med EU's indsats bliver centralt i den nye gennemfżrelsesmodel. 
Assurance on the performance of EU action will become central in the new delivery model.
For at sikre en forsvarlig żkonomisk forvaltning skal der ikke kun opns sikkerhed for EU-udgifternes effektivitet, men ogs for produktiviteten og sparsommeligheden. 
In order to ensure sound financial management, assurance will be needed not only on the effectiveness, but also on the efficiency and economy of EU spending.
Samtidig skal EU-udgifternes lovlighed og formelle rigtighed ogs sikres. 
At the same time, the legality and regularity of EU spending should be ensured.
32 KRITERIER: 6.1. 
29 CRITERIA: 6.1.
Der er en stžrk ansvarligheds-og revisionskžde. BILAG I - LISTE OVER PUBLIKATIONER FRA REVISIONSRETTEN, DER LIGGER TIL GRUND FOR DETTE BRIEFINGPAPIR rsberetninger Revisionsrettens rsberetning om budgetgennemfżrelsen i regnskabsret 2016 Revisionsrettens rsberetning om budgetgennemfżrelsen i regnskabsret 2015 Revisionsrettens rsberetning om budgetgennemfżrelsen i regnskabsret 2014 Sžrberetninger Nr. 10/2018: Grundbetalingsordningen for landbrugere - Ordningen er operationelt p rette spor, men dens effekt med hensyn til at forenkle, mlrette og sikre konvergens i stżtteniveauerne er begržnset Nr. 5/2018: Vedvarende energi til bžredygtig udvikling af landdistrikterne: De potentielle synergier er betydelige, men for det meste ikke opnet Nr. 21/2017: Forgrżnnelse: en mere kompleks indkomststżtteordning, som endnu ikke er miljżmžssigt effektiv Nr. 16/2017: Udvikling af landdistrikterne: behov for mindre kompleksitet og stżrre fokus p resultater Nr. 15/2017: Forhndsbetingelser og resultatreserve p samhżrighedsomrdet: Instrumenterne er innovative, men endnu ikke effektive Nr. 10/2017: EU's stżtte til unge landbrugere bżr mlrettes bedre med henblik p at fremme et effektivt generationsskifte Nr. 2/2017: Kommissionens forhandling af partnerskabsaftaler og programmer p samhżrighedsomrdet for perioden 2014-2020: Udgifterne er i hżjere grad rettet mod Europa 2020-prioriteterne, men ordningerne for resultatmling bliver stadig mere komplekse 1 
ANNEX I – LIST OF ECA PUBLICATIONS SUPPORTING THIS BRIEFING PAPER Annual Reports Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2016 Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2015 Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2014 Special Reports No 10/2018: Basic Payment Scheme for farmers – operationally on track, but limited impact on simplification, targeting and the convergence of aid levels No 05/2018: Renewable energy for sustainable rural development: significant potential synergies, but mostly unrealised No 21/2017: Greening: a more complex income support scheme, not yet environmentally effective No 16/2017: Rural Development Programming: less complexity and more focus on results needed No 15/2017: Ex ante conditionalities and performance reserve in Cohesion: innovative but not yet effective instruments No 10/2017: EU support to young farmers should be better targeted to foster effective generational renewal No 2/2017: The Commission’s negotiation of 2014-2020 Partnership Agreements and programmes in Cohesion: spending more targeted on Europe 2020 priorities, but increasingly complex arrangements to measure performance 1
Nr. 36/2016: En vurdering af ordningen for afslutning af samhżrighedsprogrammerne og programmerne for udvikling af landdistrikter 2007-2013 Nr. 34/2016: Bekžmpelse af madspild: en mulighed for EU for at forbedre fżdevareforsyningskždens ressourceeffektivitet Nr. 31/2016: Mindst n ud af fem euro fra EU-budgettet skal bruges p klimaindsatsen: Der er sat ambitiżse tiltag i vžrk, men der er en alvorlig risiko for, at mlet ikke kan ns Nr. 26/2016: Det er stadig en udfordring at gżre krydsoverensstemmelsesordningen mere effektiv og sikre stżrre forenkling Nr. 19/2016: Gennemfżrelse af EU's budget gennem finansielle instrumenter - hvad man kan lžre af programperioden 2007-2013 Nr. 3/2016: Bekžmpelse af eutrofiering i Żstersżen: Der er behov for yderligere og mere effektive foranstaltninger Nr. 1/2016: Er Kommissionens system til resultatmling i relation til landbrugeres indkomst hensigtsmžssigt udformet og baseret p solide data? 
No 36/2016: An assessment of the arrangements for closure of the 2007-2013 cohesion and rural development programmes No 34/2016: Combating Food Waste: an opportunity for the EU to improve the resource-efficiency of the food supply chain No 31/2016: Spending at least one euro in every five from the EU budget on climate action: ambitious work underway, but at serious risk of falling short No 26/2016: Making cross‐compliance more effective and achieving simplification remains challenging No 19/2016: Implementing the EU budget through financial instruments – lessons to be learnt from the 2007-2013 programme period No 03/2016: Combating eutrophication in the Baltic Sea: further and more effective action needed No 1/2016: Is the Commission’s system for performance measurement in relation to farmers’ incomes well designed and based on sound data?
Nr. 25/2015: EU's stżtte til infrastruktur i landdistrikterne har potentiale til at give vžsentlig mere valuta for pengene Nr. 23/2015: Vandkvaliteten i Donaus opland: Det gr fremad med at gennemfżre vandrammedirektivet, men der er stadig et stykke vej Nr. 20/2015: Omkostningseffektiviteten af EU's landdistriktsstżtte til ikke-produktive investeringer i landbruget Nr. 12/2015: EU's prioritet om at fremme en videnbaseret żkonomi i landdistrikterne er blevet pvirket af drlig forvaltning af videnoverfżrsels-og rdgivningsforanstaltninger Nr. 5/2015: Er finansielle instrumenter et velfungerende og lovende vžrktżj i forbindelse med udvikling af landdistrikterne? 2 
No 25/2015: EU support for rural infrastructure: potential to achieve significantly greater value for money No 23/2015: Water quality in the Danube river basin: progress in implementing the water framework directive but still some way to go No 20/2015: The cost-effectiveness of EU Rural Development support for non-productive investments in agriculture No 12/2015: The EU priority of promoting a knowledge-based rural economy has been affected by poor management of knowledge-transfer and advisory measures No 5/2015: Are financial instruments a successful and promising tool in the rural development area? 2
Nr. 23/2014: Fejl i udgifterne til udvikling af landdistrikterne: Hvad er rsagerne, og hvordan hndteres disse fejl? 
No 23/2014: Errors in rural development spending: what are the causes, and how are they being addressed?
Nr. 4/2014: Integration af EU's vandpolitiske ml i den fžlles landbrugspolitik: en delvis succes Nr. 12/2013: Kan Kommissionen og medlemsstaterne pvise, at EU's budget til udvikling af landdistrikter anvendes fornuftigt? 
No 4/2014: Integration of EU water policy objectives with the CAP: a partial success No 12/2013: Can the Commission and Member States show that the EU budget allocated to the rural development policy is well spent?
Nr. 10/2013: Den fžlles landbrugspolitik: Er den sžrlige stżtte, der ydes i henhold til artikel 68 i Rdets forordning (EF) nr. 
No 10/2013: Common Agricultural Policy: Is the specific support provided under Article 68 of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 well designed and implemented?
Nr. 8/2013: Stżtte fra Den Europžiske Landbrugsfond for Udvikling af Landdistrikterne til forbedring af skovenes żkonomiske vžrdi Nr. 6/2013: Har foranstaltningerne til diversificering af żkonomien i landdistrikterne givet medlemsstaterne og Kommissionen valuta for pengene? 
No 8/2013: Support for the Improvement of the economic value of forests from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development No 6/2013: Have the Member States and the Commission achieved value for money with the measures for diversifying the rural economy?
Nr. 1/2013: Har EU's stżtte til fżdevareindustrien effektivt og produktivt bidraget til at forżge vžrdien af landbrugsprodukter? 
No 1/2013: Has the EU support to the food-processing industry been effective and efficient in adding value to agricultural products?
Nr. 8/2012: Mlretning af stżtten til modernisering af landbrugsbedrifter Nr. 7/2011: Er stżtten til miljżvenligt landbrug udformet og forvaltet godt? 
No 8/2012: Targeting of aid for the modernisation of agricultural holdings No 7/2011: Is agri-environment support well designed and managed?
Andre dokumenter Briefingpapir: Future of EU finances: Reforming how the EU Budget operates (2018) Horisontal analyse: EU's energi-og klimaindsats (2017) Baggrundsnotat: EU-budgettet: Er tiden inde til reformer? 
Other documents Briefing Paper: Future of EU finances: reforming how the EU budget operates (2018) Landscape Review: EU action on energy and climate action (2017) Briefing Paper: EU Budget: time to reform?
Et baggrundsnotat om midtvejsgennemgangen af den flerrige finansielle ramme for 2014-2020 (2016) Horisontal analyse: Optimal anvendelse af EU's midler: en horisontal analyse af risiciene i relation til den żkonomiske forvaltning af EU-budgettet (2014) 3 
A briefing paper on the mid-term review of the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 (2016) Landscape review: Making the best use of EU money: a landscape review of the risks to the financial management of the EU budget (2014) Landscape review: Gaps, overlaps and challenges: a landscape review of EU accountability and public audit arrangements (2014) 3
Horisontal analyse: Mangler, overlapninger og udfordringer: en horisontal analyse af EU's ordninger for ansvarlighed og offentlig revision" (2014) 4 BILAG II - TRAKTATENS ML FOR DEN FŽLLES LANDBRUGSPOLITIK 5 Traktatens ml for den fžlles landbrugspolitik (artikel 39 i TEUF): Ľ at forżge landbrugets produktivitet ved fremme af den tekniske udvikling, ved rationalisering af landbrugsproduktionen og ved den bedst mulige anvendelse af produktionsfaktorerne, isžr arbejdskraften Ľ herigennem at sikre landbrugsbefolkningen en rimelig levestandard, isžr ved en forhżjelse af de individuelle indkomster for de i landbruget beskžftigede personer Ľ at stabilisere markederne Ľ at sikre forsyningerne Ľ at sikre forbrugerne rimelige priser p landbrugsvarer. 
ANNEX II – TREATY CAP OBJECTIVES 4 CAP Treaty objectives (Art. 39 TFEU): • to increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress and by ensuring the rational development of agricultural production and the optimum utilisation of the factors of production, in particular labour; • thus to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture; • to stabilise markets; • to assure the availability of supplies; • to ensure that supplies reach consumers at reasonable prices Relevant horizontal objectives of the Treaty: • promoting a high level of employment (Article 9), • environmental protection to promote sustainable development (Article 11), • consumer protection (Article 12) and animal welfare requirements (Article 13), • public health (Article 168(1)), and • economic, social and territorial cohesion (Articles 174 to 178).
1) Ľ żkonomisk, social og territorial samhżrighed (artikel 174-178). Mlene for den fžlles landbrugspolitik for 2014-2020 (artikel 110, stk. 2, i forordning 1306/2013): Ľ bžredygtig fżdevareproduktion med fokus p landbrugsindkomster, produktivitet i landbruget og prisstabilitet Ľ bžredygtig forvaltning af naturressourcerne og klimapolitik med fokus p udledning af drivhusgasser, biodiversitet, jord og vand Ľ ligevžgtig rumlig udvikling med fokus p beskžftigelse, vžkst og fattigdom i landdistrikterne. 
CAP objectives for 2014-2020 (Art. 110 (2) of R1306/2013): • viable food production, with a focus on agricultural income, agricultural productivity and price stability; • sustainable management of natural resources and climate action, with a focus on greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity, soil and water; and • balanced territorial development, with a focus on rural employment, growth and poverty in rural areas CAP objectives for the post-2020 reform (from the Commission’s communication on the future of food and farming): • to foster a smart and resilient agricultural sector; • to bolster environmental care and climate action and to contribute to the environmental and climate objectives of the EU; • to strengthening the socio-economic fabric of rural areas.
DEN EUROPŽISKE REVISIONSRET 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi 1615 Luxembourg LUXEMBOURG Tlf. +352 4398-1 Kontakt: eca.europa.eu/da/Pages/ContactForm.aspx Websted: eca.europa.eu Twitter: @EUAuditors ŠDen Europžiske Union, 2018. 
EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi 1615 Luxembourg LUXEMBOURG Tel. +352 4398-1 Enquiries: eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/ContactForm.aspx Website: eca.europa.eu Twitter: @EUAuditors
DA 2019 Udfordringer for en effektiv cybersikkerhedspolitik i EU Briefingpapir Marts 2019 
EN 2019 Challenges to effective EU cybersecurity policy Briefing Paper March 2019
Om briefingpapiret: Formålet med dette briefingpapir, som ikke er en revisionsberetning, er at give et overblik over EU's komplekse politiske landskab for cybersikkerhed og identificere de vigtigste udfordringer for en effektiv politikgennemførelse. 
About the paper: The objective of this briefing paper, which is not an audit report, is to provide an overview of the EU’s complex cybersecurity policy landscape and identify the main challenges to effective policy delivery.
Briefingpapiret omhandler net-og informationssikkerhed, cyberkriminalitet, cyberforsvar og desinformation. 
It covers network and information security, cybercrime, cyber defence and disinformation.