natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Der mangler SMART-ml og resultatindikatorer, og det begržnser i hżj grad vurderingen af de specifikke instrumenters og aktiviteters bidrag til forfżlgelsen af FTU-mlene, hvad der undergraver grundlaget for en forsvarlig overvgning og evaluering (jf. punkt 19-20). 
The absence of SMART objectives and performance indicators limits significantly the assessment of the contribution of specific instruments and activities to the RTD objectives, thus undermining the basis for sound monitoring and evaluation (see paragraphs 19 and 20).
34 Jf. punkt 22-37 i sžrberetning nr. 9/2007. 
34 See paragraphs 22 to 37 of Special Report No 9/2007.
ANBEFALING NR. 1 UDVIKL EN EKSPLICIT INTERVENTIONSLOGIK Retten skal minde om sin tidligere anbefaling, at udgiftsprogrammer bżr baseres p en eksplicit interventionslogik, som knytter instrumenterne til realistiske ml. 
RECOMMENDATION NO 1 DEVELOP AN EXPLICIT INTERVENTION LOGIC The Court recalls its previous recommendation that spending programmes should be based upon an explicit intervention logic, linking the instruments to realistic objectives.
Retten konstaterede, at de undersżgte RP6-instrumenter havde fremmet effektivt forskningssamarbejde mellem projektdeltagerne. 
The Court found that the FP6 instruments audited had promoted effective research collaboration between project participants.
Men mens alle projekterne blev karakteriseret som ČudmžrketÇ, da de blev udvalgt af Kommissionen, beholdt hżjst n tredjedel af dem en vurdering mellem Čgodt til udmžrketÇ efter implementeringen (jf. punkt 22-27). 
However, while all projects were qualified as ‘excellent’ at the time of their selection by the Commission, not more than one third of them kept a rating between ‘good to excellent’ after implementation (see paragraphs 22 to 27).
Vurderingen af ekspertisenettenes og de integrerede projekters specifikke ml viser et kontrastfyldt billede. 
The assessment of NoEs’ and IPs’ specific objectives highlights a contrasting picture.
Trods deres succes med at fremme forskningssamarbejde og projekter af en rimelig kvalitet, nede ingen af de gennemgede ekspertisenet det specifikke ml om varig integration af netvžrkets partnere, hvormed det fremtidige samarbejde afhang af fortsat offentlig stżtte. 
Notwithstanding their success in promoting research collaboration and projects of reasonable quality, none of the NoEs audited achieved the specific objective of lasting integration among networked partners, thus making future collaboration subject to continued public support.
Blandt vanskelighederne var mange organisationers modvilje mod at engagere sig i en langsigtet forpligtelse, men ogs det forhold, at den maksimale lżbetid p 5 r viste sig ikke at vžre realistisk, isžr p omrder, hvor varig integration kun kan opns gradvis. 
Among the difficulties there was the reluctance of many organisations to engage in a long-term commitment, but also the fact that the maximal duration of five years proved not to be realistic, particularly in areas where lasting integration can only be achieved progressively.
Dette skaber tvivl om, under hvilke omstžndigheder det er berettiget fortsat at finansiere dem ud over den oprindelige lżbetid under det igangvžrende, syvende rammeprogram (RP7) (jf. punkt 29-35). 
This raises the question as to the conditions under which it is justified to continue their financing beyond the initial duration, under the ongoing Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) (see paragraphs 29 to 35).
De integrerede projekter har generelt net de ml, der blev efterstržbt p deres forskningsomrde. 
IPs have, in general, achieved the objectives pursued in their research field.
Fordi de lżber i lžngere tid og har flere deltagere, har de rejst betydelige ressourcer. 
Thanks to a longer duration and an increased number of participants, they have mobilised a significant volume of resources.
Men det er ikke lykkedes for de integrerede projekter at tiltržkke supplerende offentlig og privat finansiering (jf. punkt 36-38). 
However, IPs have not succeeded in attracting additional public and private funding. (see paragraphs 36 to 38).
31 ANBEFALING NR. 2 VURDR DE NYE INSTRUMENTERS RESULTATER SAMMENLIGNET MED DET TRADITIONELLE FORSKNINGSSAMARBEJDES Kommissionen bżr overveje, om ekspertisenettene og samarbejdsprojekter, der minder om integrerede projekter, som fortsat finansieres under det nuvžrende rammeprogram (RP7), har fet realistiske ml og giver vžsentlige fordele frem for traditionelle instrumenter til forskningssamarbejde. 
31 RECOMMENDATION NO 2 ASSESS THE PERFORMANCE OF NEW INSTRUMENTS COMPARED TO TRADITIONAL RESEARCH COLLABORATION The Commission should consider whether NoEs and IP-like collaborative projects, which continue to receive funding under the current Framework Programme (FP7), have been given realistic objectives and provide significant advantages as compared with traditional instruments for research collaboration.
For s vidt angr de ekspertisenet, der er finansieret under RP6, bżr Kommissionen i hvert enkelt tilfžlde vurdere, om de opnede resultater, den potentielle EU-mervžrdi og udsigterne til ikke at behżve ekstern stżtte berettiger yderligere finansiering under RP7. 
Concerning NoEs financed under FP6, the Commission should assess on a case-by-case basis whether past achievements, potential EU added value and prospects of self-sustainability justify further funding under FP7.
Samlet set er EU-midlerne under RP6 forżget i forhold til under RP5, men de opnede investeringer er relativt mindre omfattende. 
Overall, when compared to FP5, EU funds have increased in FP6 but the investment realised is proportionally less important.
Den vžsentligste rsag hertil er, at den private sektors deltagelse generelt er faldet (jf. punkt 55). 
The main reason is that the participation of the private sector in general has declined (see paragraph 55).
Revisionen afslżrede, at EU-midlerne i nogle tilfžlde langt oversteg egne midler fra de offentlige organer, der deltog i programmet, hvilket kan betyde, at EU-midler simpelthen erstatter deltagernes egne midler (jf. punkt 56). 
The Court’s audit revealed cases where EU funds were far higher than the own resources committed by public bodies participating in the programme, with the possibility that EU funds simply substitute participants’ own resources (see paragraph 56).
RP6 sżgte at tage hensyn til SMVŐs sžrlige behov og fastsatte hertil et ml om mindst 15 % af det samlede budget for de udvalgte temaer (som under det nuvžrende RP7). 
FP6 sought to take SMEs particular needs into account and set for this purpose a target of at least 15 % of the total budget of the thematic priorities (like in the current FP7).
Selv om der deltog flere SMV i FTU-projekter end under RP5, kom fžllesskabsbidraget til SMV i de udvalgte temaer kun op p 10 % (mod 12 % under RP5). 
Although, when compared to FP5, more SMEs were involved in RTD projects, the Community contribution allocated to SMEs in the thematic priorities was limited to 10 % (against 12 % in FP5).
De fżrste resultater for RP7 viser et yderligere fald (jf. punkt 39-40). 
FP7 first results show a further decline (see paragraphs 39 to 40).
Retten bemžrker, at RP6 ikke har stimuleret til en vžsentlig stigning i form af FTU-investering fra deltagernes side i en situation, hvor Det Europžiske Rd har sat som ml, at FTU-investeringer i EU skal n op p det, der svarer til 3 % af bruttonationalproduktet, og hvoraf to tredjedele skulle komme fra den private sektor. 
The Court observes that FP6 has not stimulated a significant increase in terms of participants’ RTD investment, in a context where the European Council has set the objective of reaching RTD investments in the EU equivalent to 3 % of gross domestic product, two thirds of which should come from the private sector.
32 ANBEFALING NR. 3 UNDERSŻG RSAGERNE TIL DET LAVE INVESTERINGSNIVEAU Kommissionen bżr undersżge de forskellige rsager (specifikke for rammeprogrammet eller ydre i forhold til det) til, at niveauet for deltagernes FTU-investeringer er relativt lavt sammenlignet med de ml, der efterstržbes, og foresl specifikke foranstaltninger. 
32 RECOMMENDATION NO 3 EXAMINE THE REASONS FOR A LOW INVESTMENT LEVEL The Commission should examine the various reasons (specific to the Framework Programme or external to it) underlying the relatively low level of participants’ RTD investment compared to the goals pursued and propose specific measures.
Der bżr fremlžgges oplysninger, som egner sig til overvgning af den katalysatoreffekt, EUŐs FTU-finansieringer har p de investeringer, der foretages. 
Appropriate data should be made available to monitor the catalytic effect of EU RTD funding on the investments undertaken.
Det bżr revurderes om de forventede ml, isžr for SMV og den private sektor, er realistiske. 
The realism of expected targets, in particular for SMEs and the private sector, should be reassessed.
Kommissionens forvaltning har en afgżrende rolle med at sikre et vellykket resultat og med at gżre ordningerne attraktive for potentielle deltagere. 
The Commission’s management has a decisive role in ensuring success and making schemes attractive to potential participants.
Strukturer, der er til at forvalte, klare ml, hurtige og enkle procedurer samt projektovervgning er alle afgżrende faktorer for, om instrumenterne er effektive. 
Manageable structures, clarity of objectives, rapid and straightforward procedures, and project monitoring are all determinants of the Framework Programme’s effectiveness.
Rettens revision henledte opmžrksomheden p en ržkke spżrgsml, som indvirkede p effektiviteten af de aktioner, RP6 finansierede. 
The Court’s audit highlighted a number of issues which affected the effectiveness of the actions funded by FP6.
Det drejer sig isžr om usikkerheden om instrumenternes specifikke funktion, de talrige lovbestemmelser og den ikke altid tilstržkkelige vejledning, en forhandlingsproces, der tager lžngere og lžngere tid og ikke altid er klar og ben, det meget store antal deltagere i forhold til stżtten og svagheder ved projektovervgning (jf. punkt 44-53). 
These concern in particular the uncertainty about the instruments’ specific role, the multiplicity of legal provisions with guidance not always sufficient, a negotiation process that is increasingly long and often not transparent, the rather large number of participants/grant and weaknesses in project monitoring (see paragraphs 44 to 53).
Vedtaget af Revisionsretten i Luxembourg p mżdet den 4. juni 2009. 
This report was adopted by the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg at its meeting of 4 June 2009.
P Vtor Manuel da Silva Caldeira Formand R evi si on sr e t t en sv e gn e  e s o s e t t e s e g e 33 ANBEFALING NR. 
Vítor Manuel da Silva Caldeira President Special Report No 8/2009 — ‘Networks of Excellence’ and ‘Integrated Projects’ in Community research policy: did they achieve their objectives?
RESUM III. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY III.
Kommissionen glžder sig over Rettens konklusion om, at de undersżgte RP6-instrumenter har givet positive resultater. i) RPŐerne har altid vžret baseret p en sund interventionslogik (i RP7 er den gjort mere eksplicit). 
The Commission welcomes the Court’s conclusion on the success achieved by the FP6 instruments audited. (i) The FPs have always been based on a sound intervention logic (in FP7 it is made more explicit).
Det er en udfordring at sikre, at alle mlene passer pržcist til de stramt definerede SMART-kriterier, specielt i betragtning af den iboende usikkerhed, som pržger forskningsresultater. 
It is challenging, in particular given the inherent uncertainty of research results, to ensure all objectives fit precisely within the strict definitions of ‘SMART’ criteria.
Men en ržkke vžsentlige aspekter af SMART-rationalet er medtaget i den forskningsrelaterede lovgivning og i gennemfżrelsesbestemmelserne hertil, hvilket f.eks. fremgr af, at der er fastsat ČmlÇ i forbindelse med de tematiske prioriteter i RP6 p trods af, at en sdan fremgangsmde ikke var udtrykkeligt fastsat i den finansforordning, der var gžldende p det tidspunkt, hvor RP6 blev udformet og vedtaget. 
And yet, essential aspects of the ‘SMART’ rationale were accommodated in all research-related legislative and implementation acts as can be evidenced e.g. by the existence of ‘objectives’ in the FP6 thematic priorities, despite the fact that this approach was not explicit in the Financial Regulation applicable at the moment of the FP6 preparation and adoption.
Alle arbejdsprogrammerne under RP7 indeholder en analyse af de forventede konsekvenser, der svarer til de ml, det rationale og de aktiviteter, som er fastsat i sžrprogrammerne. ii) Kommissionen er klar over, at nogle ekspertisenet har vžret mindre vellykkede end andre, men en ržkke ekspertisenet nede frem til en varig integration. 
Under FP7, all work programmes contain expected impact statements, which correspond with the objectives, rationale and activities set out in the Specific Programmes. (ii) The Commission believes that some ‘Networks of Excellence’ have been less successful than others but several NoEs reached self-sustained integration.
Det er normalt med skiftende resultater i betragtning af den lange ržkke af omrder, der er džkket, de forskellige deltagere i mange forskellige projekter og betingelserne ved samarbejde i konsortier. 
This is normal given the wide range of areas covered, the various participants in dozens of different projects and the realities of collaboration in consortia.
Det er den generelle opfattelse, at de integrerede projekter har vžret ganske vellykkede, f.eks. nr det gžlder industrielt ledede demonstrationsprojekter inden for energi og transport. 
On their side, the IPs were, by common admission, quite successful, for example, in the areas of energy and transport industrially led demonstration IPs.
Mange projekter har resulteret i markedsfżring og markedstilpas-ning efter en vellykket afslutning af RP6-kontrakterne. KOMMISSIONENS S VA R 
Many projects have led to market deployment and replication after the successful end of the FP6 contracts. REPLY OF THE COMMISSION
35 iii) Kommissionen mener, at dens forvaltning af RP6-instrumenterne har spillet en vigtig rolle for den succes, der er opnet med disse instrumenter. 
35 (iii) The Commission considers that its management of the FP6 instruments has played an important role in ensuring the success achieved by these instruments.
Kommissionen har aktivt forsżgt at lżse de opstede problemer inden for de begržnsninger, som de lovgivningsmžssige rammer medfżrer. 
The Commission has actively sought to address any problems encountered, within the constraints imposed by the existing legislative framework.
Der forel faktisk udkast til vejledningsdokumenter selv inden lanceringen af RP6. iv) RP6 alene (med de to nye instrumenter, ekspertisenettene og de integrerede projekter) er ikke nogen patentlżsning p de udfordringer, som europžisk forskning er oppe imod, specielt fordi det kun omfatter 5 % af de samlede europžiske forskningsmid-ler. 
Draft guidance documents were actually available even before the launch of FP6. (iv) FP6 alone (with its two new instruments, the IPs and NoEs) is not the panacea for the challenges facing the European research landscape, especially since it made up only 5 % of the overall European funding for research.
Desuden er det p et tidspunkt, hvor tusindvis af projekter finansieret af RP6 er i gang, for tidligt at foretage konklude-rende sammenligninger med RP5. 
Moreover, at a moment when thousands of projects financed by it continue their course, it is too early to make conclusive comparisons with FP5.
Endvidere mener Kommissionen, at RP6 har styrket forskningsindsatsen vžsentligt, og at RP6 har givet betydelige resultater. 
Further, the Commission believes that FP6 has provided a significant boost to research efforts and that the achievements of FP6 have been substantial.
Kommissionen kan bekržfte Rettens konstateringer vedrżrende den private sektors deltagelse, men den vil gerne tilfżje, at nr der henses til de offentlige og private organisationer, der er involveret i kommercielle aktiviteter (erhvervssektoren), svarer deltagelsesra-terne til dem, der var gžldende for RP5. 
The Commission acknowledges the Court’s findings as regards the participation of the private sector and would like to add that when taking into account public and private organisations engaged in commercial activities (the business enterprise sector) participation rates are similar to those of FP5.
Kommissionen er klar over vanskelighederne i forbindelse med SMVŐernes deltagelse i RP6. 
The Commission agrees about the difficulties related to the SME participation under FP6.
Disse problemer er der taget hensyn til i RP7. 
These issues have been addressed in FP7.
KOMMISSIONENS SVAR IV. 
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION IV.
RPŐerne har altid vžret baseret p en sund interventionslogik, hvilket har muliggjort en effektiv evaluering og overvgning. 
The FPs have always been based on a sound intervention logic which has allowed effective evaluation and monitoring.
I RP7 er interventionslogikken gjort mere eksplicit, og der anvendes ml og resultat-mlinger, som vil bidrage til at styrke evaluerings- og overvgningssystemet yderligere. 
In FP7, the intervention logic is made more explicit, together with the objectives and performance measures that will help further strengthen the evaluation and monitoring system.
I RP7 er forskningsml og mlsžtninger for forskningspolitik klart og eksplicit fastsat i arbejdsprogrammerne. 
In FP7, research goals and research policy objectives are clearly and explicitly set in the work programmes.
For hvert emne er de videnskabelige ml, aktiviteternes omfang og de forventede resultater defineret. 
For each topic, the scientific goals, the scope of activities and indications on the results expected are defined.
V. i) Kommissionen har evalueret de integrerede projekter og ekspertisenettene gennem en ržkke undersżgelser og rapporter. 
V. (i) The Commission has evaluated IPs and NoEs through various studies and reports.
Hvad angr en fortsat finansiering af RP6-ekspertisenet under RP7, er Kommissionen net frem til samme konklusion som Retten. ii) Kommissionen undersżger lżbende forsk-ningslandskabet, overvger de nationale FTU-politikker og deltager aktivt i bestržbelserne p at fremme forskningsinveste-ringerne, ikke mindst gennem den bne koordinationsmetode. iii) Kommissionen er enig i, at en klar og rettidig vejledning, en hurtigere kontrakttil-deling og en bedre projektovervgning er meget vigtige faktorer. 
With regard to a continued funding of FP6 NoEs under FP7, the Commission reached a similar conclusion to the Court. (ii) The Commission is constantly examining the research landscape, monitors the national R & D policies and is actively engaged in endeavours to further research investments through, not least, the open method of coordination. (iii) The Commission agrees that clear and timely guidance, a speedier contracting process and better project monitoring are very important.
Kommissionen skal opfylde sine ml, samtidig med at den konstant skal sikre en balance mellem to ml, som er vanskelige at forene, nemlig en hurtig udbetaling af midler og nżdvendigheden af at sikre en korrekt fordeling p af midler p kontrahenter, alt sammen inden for de lovgivningsmžssige rammer. 
The Commission carries out its obligations while it constantly has to balance between two goals that are difficult to reconcile, namely the speediness of disbursement of funds and the need to ensure their accountable distribution to contractors, all in the context of the given legislative environment.
36 INDLEDNING 10. 
36 INTRODUCTION 10.
Det var hensigten, at RP6 skulle tilskynde til deltagelse af SMVŐer inden for alle omrder og alle instrumenter, isžr nr det gžlder de aktiviteter, der gennemfżres inden for de prioriterede tematiske omrder. 
FP6 was meant to encourage the participation of SMEs in all areas and all instruments, in particular in the context of the activities carried out in the priority thematic areas.
Den lavere succesrate for forslag under RP6 end under RP5 skyldes det stżrre antal deltagere under RP6. 
A lower success rate for proposals under FP6 than under FP5 is attributed to the higher subscription rates under FP6.
Deltagelsesrater afhžnger af en ržkke komplekse faktorer, bl.a. forslagenes detaljeringsgrad, de til rdighed stende midler og evalueringsstrategien. 
Subscription rates depend on a number of complex factors, among others the degree of detail of the calls for proposals, the funds available and the evaluation approach.
REVISIONSBEMŽRKNINGER 20.-21. 
AUDIT OBSERVATIONS 20.–21.
I sit svar p en af Rettens tidligere revisio-ner1 fastholdt Kommissionen, at RPŐerne altid har vžret baseret p en sund interventionslogik, som under overholdelse af traktatens bestemmelser er kommet til udtryk i de forskellige lovbestemmelser og gennemfżrelsesbestemmelser. 
In its response to a previous audit of the Court1, the Commission maintained that the FPs have always been based on a sound intervention logic, which has been articulated as per the Treaty’s provisions in the various legislative and implementation acts.
I RP7 gżres dette mere eksplicit, hvilket yderligere vil styrke Kommissionens evaluerings-og overvgningssystem. 
In FP7 this is made more explicit, which will further strengthen the Commission’s monitoring and evaluation.
P trods af at denne fremgangsmde ikke var fastslet i den finansforordning, der var gžldende p det tidspunkt, hvor RP6 blev udformet og vedtaget, blev en ržkke vžsentlige elementer i SMART-strategien alligevel medtaget i Kommissionens arbejdsprogrammer under RP6. 
Despite the fact that this approach was not explicit in the Financial Regulation applicable at the moment of the FP6 preparation and adoption, essential elements of the ‘SMART’ approach were nevertheless taken up in the Commission’s work programmes under FP6.
Alle arbejdsprogrammerne under RP7, som blev udformet p grundlag af en detaljeret forudgende konsekvensanalyse, indeholder en analyse af de forventede konsekvenser, der svarer til de ml, det rationale og de aktiviteter, som er fastsat i sžrprogrammerne. 
Under FP7, which was developed on the basis of a detailed ex ante impact assessment, all work programmes contain expected impact statements, which correspond with the objectives, rationale and activities set out in the Specific Programmes.
1 Se Kommissionens svar p sžrberetning nr. 9/2007. 
1 See the Commission’s replies to Special Report No 9/2007.
KOMMISSIONENS SVAR 24. 
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION 24.
Kommissionen mener, at det er meget positivt, at deltagerne i Rettens undersżgelse generelt har givet udtryk for stor tilfredshed med de to instrumenter (ekspertisenet og integrerede projekter). 
The Commission considers that the high overall satisfaction with the two instruments (NoEs and IPs) expressed by the participants in the Court’s survey is very positive.
P grund af de to instrumenters forskellige anvendelsesomrde og profil er det normalt, at private partnere isžr har fundet, at integrerede projekter bedst passede til deres behov. 
Given the different scope and profile of the two instruments, it is normal that private partners found in particular IPs more suitable to fit their needs.
Da forslag svarer til ČforventningerÇ og projekter til ČrealiteterÇ, og da gennemfżrelsen af projekter kan medfżre uventede vanskeligheder, er det ikke overraskende, at evalueringen af nogle projekter vil vžre mindre positiv end evalueringen af de forslag, de hidrżrte fra. 
As proposals correspond to ‘expectations’ and projects to reality, and as the implementation of projects can result in unexpected difficulties, it is not surprising that the evaluation of some projects could be less positive than the evaluation of the proposals they stemmed from.