natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kommissionen vil se nžrmere p Revisionsrettens forslag vedrżrende tilpasning af modkżbsordningen uden dog at afskaffe muligheden for at anvende interventionslagrene, da denne praksis er det centrale i ordningen. 
The Commission will examine the proposition of the Court as regards the adaptation of the bartering arrangements without nevertheless preventing the possibility to mobilise intervention stocks as this practice is at the core of the scheme.
Sžrberetning nr. 6/2009 Ń Den Europžiske Unions fżdevarehjžlp til socialt drligt stillede personer: en vurdering af mlene og de anvendte midler og metoder KOMMISSIONENS SVAR 
Special Report No 6/2009 — European Union food aid for deprived persons: an assessment of the objectives, the means and the methods employed REPLY OF THE COMMISSION
Hvordan fr man fat i publikationer fra EU? Publikationer til salg: Ľ Via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu) Ľ Hos boghandleren; oplys titel, forlag og/eller ISBN-nummer Ľ Ved at kontakte et af vores salgssteder direkte. 
How to obtain EU publications Publications for sale: • via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu); • from your bookseller by quoting the title, publisher and/or ISBN number; • by contacting one of our sales agents directly.
Adresser, telefonnumre osv. findes p fżlgende webadresse: http://bookshop.europa.eu, eller send en fax til +352 2929-42758 med anmodning om kontaktoplysninger. 
You can obtain their contact details on the Internet (http://bookshop.europa.eu) or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.
Gratis publikationer: Ľ Via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu) Ľ Hos Europa-Kommissionens repržsentationer eller delegationer. 
Free publications: • via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu); • at the European Commission’s representations or delegations.
Adresser, telefonnumre osv. findes p fżlgende webadresse: http://ec.europa.eu, eller send en fax til +352 2929-42758 med anmodning om kontaktoplysninger. 
You can obtain their contact details on the Internet (http://ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.
I DENNE BERETNING VURDERER RETTEN FORVALTNINGEN OG EFFEKTEN AF SAMT MIDLERNE TIL EUŐS FŻDEVAREPROGRAM FOR DE SOCIALT DRLIGST STILLEDE. 
IN THIS REPORT THE COURT MAKES AN ASSESSMENT OF THE MANAGEMENT, THE RESOURCES AND THE IMPACT OF THE EU FOOD PROGRAMME FOR THE MOST DEPRIVED CITIZENS.
FORANSTALTNINGEN BLEV INTRODUCERET I 1987, HVOR DER BLEV ANVENDT LANDBRUGSPRODUKTER FRA OFFENTLIGE INTERVENTIONSLAGRE, OG DEN ANVENDES STADIG I NOGLE MEDLEMSSTATER. 
THE MEASURE WAS FIRST INTRODUCED IN 1987, BY USING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS IN PUBLIC INTERVENTION STOCKS, AND IS STILL APPLIED IN CERTAIN MEMBER STATES.
BERETNINGEN VISER, AT PROGRAMMETS ML, NAVNLIG MLET OM AT HJŽLPE DE MEST TRŽNGENDE, STADIG ER GYLDIGT, OG RETTEN FREMSŽTTER EN RŽKKE ANBEFALINGER, SOM HAR TIL FORML AT ŻGE FORANSTALTNINGENS EFFEKT. 
THE REPORT DEMONSTRATES THAT THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAMME, ESPECIALLY THAT FOR THE ‘CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS THE WELL-BEING’ OF THE MOST NEEDY REMAIN VALID, AND MAKES A SERIES OF RECOMMENDATIONS AIMED AT INCREASING THE IMPACT OF THE MEASURE.
DEN EUROPŽISKE REVISIONSRET ISBN 978-92-9207-336-7 QJ-AB-09-007-DA-C 
EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS QJ-AB-09-007-EN-C
DEN EUROPŽISKE REVISIONSRET DA ČEKSPERTISENETTENEÇ OG ČDE INTEGREREDE PROJEKTERÇ I FŽLLESSKABETS FORSKNINGSPOLITIK Ń NEDE DE DERES ML? Sžrberetning nr. 
EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS EN ‘NETWORKS OF EXCELLENCE’ AND ‘INTEGRATED PROJECTS’ IN COMMUNITY RESEARCH POLICY: DID THEY ACHIEVE THEIR OBJECTIVES?
8 2009 ISSN 1831-0796 Sžrberetning nr. 
Special Report No 8 2009 ISSN 1831-0834
8 2009 ČEKSPERTISENETTENEÇ OG ČDE INTEGREREDE PROJEKTERÇ I FŽLLESSKABETS FORSKNINGSPOLITIK Ń NEDE DE DERES ML? (artikel 248, stk. 4, andet afsnit, EF) DEN EUROPŽISKE REVISIONSRET 
Special Report No 8 2009 ‘NETWORKS OF EXCELLENCE’ AND ‘INTEGRATED PROJECTS’ IN COMMUNITY RESEARCH POLICY: DID THEY ACHIEVE THEIR OBJECTIVES? (pursuant to Article 248(4), second subparagraph, EC) EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS
2 DEN EUROPŽISKE REVISIONSRET 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi 1615 Luxembourg LUXEMBOURG Tlf. +352 4398-45410 Fax +352 4398-46410 E-post: euraud@eca.europa.eu Internet: http://www.eca.europa.eu Sžrberetning nr. 
2 EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi 1615 Luxembourg LUXEMBOURG Tel. +352 4398-45410 Fax +352 4398-46410 E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu Internet: http://www.eca.europa.eu Special Report No 8 2009 More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).
8 2009 Yderligere oplysninger om EU fs p internet via Europaserveren (http://europa.eu) Bibliografiske data findes bagest i denne publikation Luxembourg: Den Europžiske Unions Publikationskontor, 2009 ISBN 978-92-9207-404-3 doi:10.2865/62996 Š De Europžiske Fžllesskaber, 2009 Eftertryk tilladt med kildeangivelse Printed in Belgium Sžrberetning nr. 
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2009 ISBN 978-92-9207-408-1 doi:10.2865/63596 © European Communities, 2009 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Det europžiske forskningsrum (EFR): En forskningszone uden gržnser, hvor de videnskabelige ressourcer vil blive anvendt bedre til at skabe flere job og forbedre Europas konkurrenceevne. 
5 GLOSSARY European Research Area (ERA): A border-free zone for research, in which scientific resources will be better deployed to create more jobs and to improve Europe’s competitiveness.
FTU-rammeprogrammer (RPŐer): Flerrige programmer, som for en given periode fastlžgger, hvilke videnskabelige og teknologiske aktiviteter Fžllesskabet skal finansiere, deres budget og de detaljerede regler for den tekniske og finansielle implementering af dem. 
RTD Framework Programmes (FPs): Multiannual programmes establishing, for a given period, the scientific and technological activities to be funded by the Community, their budget and the detailed rules for their technical and financial implementation.
Integrerede projekter: Instrument, der er udformet til at n ambitiżse, klart definerede videnskabelige og teknologiske ml med en europžisk dimension. 
Integrated Projects (IPs): Instrument designed to achieve ambitious, clearly defined scientific and technological objectives of a European dimension.
Sm og mellemstore virksomheder (SMV): Virksomheder, som beskžftiger under 250 personer, og som har en rlig omsžtning p ikke over 50 millioner euro eller en rlig samlet balance p ikke over 43 millioner euro. Sžrberetning nr. 
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): Enterprises which employ fewer than 250 persons and which have an annual turnover not exceeding 50 million euro, and/or an annual balance sheet total not exceeding 43 million euro.
I. Europžisk forskning menes at lide under, at investeringerne er utilstržkkelige og spredte. 
I. European research is held to suffer from insufficient and dispersed investment.
Som led i EUŐs aktioner for at rette op p det indfżrte sjette rammeprogram (RP6) to nye instrumenter, ČekspertisenetÇ og Čintegrerede projekterÇ. 
As part of the EU actions to remedy this, the Sixth Framework Programme (FP6) introduced two new instruments, ‘Networks of Excellence’ and ‘Integrated Projects’.
Mlet var p den ene side at skabe en vžsentlig og varig integration af forskningsaktiviteterne og p den anden side at n ambitiżse, klart definerede videnskabelige og teknologiske ml med en europžisk dimension. 
The aim was, on one side, to create a substantial and lasting integration of the research activities and, on the other side, to achieve ambitious, clearly defined scientific and technological objectives of a European dimension.
Revisionen omfattede en undersżgelse af, hvor meget ČekspertisenetÇ og Čintegrerede projekterÇ havde bidraget til opfyldelsen af de mlsžtninger for forskningspolitikken, der er fastsat i traktaten, og af deres egne specifikke mlsžtninger, hvor effektivt Kommissionen havde forvaltet de nye instrumenter, og i hvor hżj grad RP6 havde fremmet FTU-investeringer. 
The audit examined to what extent ‘Networks of Excellence’ and ‘Integrated Projects’ had contributed to achieve the research policy objectives set by the Treaty as well as their own specific objectives, the Commission had effectively managed the new instruments and FP6 had stimulated RTD investment.
Rettens konklusion var, at: i) de RP6-instrumenter, der blev gennemget, med et positivt resultat havde fremmet forskningssamarbejde og projekter af en rimelig kvalitet. 
The Court concluded that: (i) The FP6 instruments audited were successful in promoting research collaboration and projects of reasonable quality.
Men instrumenterne har fungeret uden en eksplicit interventionslogik, SMART-ml og resultatindikatorer ii) de specifikke ml for de nye instrumenter kun til dels blev net. 
However these instruments have operated in the absence of an explicit intervention logic, as well as of SMART objectives and performance indicators. (ii) The specific objectives of the new instruments were only partially achieved.
ČEkspertisenetÇ fremmede en god grad af forskningssam-arbejde, men skabte i mange tilfžlde ikke en gradvis tiltagende og bžredygtig integration af forskningsaktiviteterne mellem netvžrkspartnerne. 
‘Networks of Excellence’ promoted a good level of research collaboration, but often did not achieve a progressive and self-sustainable integration of the research activities between the network partners.
ČIntegrerede projekterÇ fremmede hżjkvalitetsforsk-ningssamarbejde, men tiltrak hverken flere ressourcer fra individuelle deltagere eller supplerende kilder til offentlig og privat finansiering. 
‘Integrated Projects’ promoted high-quality research collaboration, but did not attract more resources from individual participants nor additional sources of public and private financing.
RK OE SMU M M I S S I O N E N S SVAR 
ER XE PE CL YU OT I FV ET H E SC UO M M M M AI S R S Y I O N
7 iii) Kommissionens forvaltning udviste Ń isžr i begyndelsen af RP6Ős implementering Ń en ržkke svagheder, som indvirkede p aktionernes effektivitet, navnlig usikkerhed om de nye instrumenters sžrlige rolle, utilstržkkelig vejledning og svagheder ved projektovervgningen. iv) det Ń i forhold til RP5 Ń ikke lykkedes RP6 at skabe en vžsentlig forżgelse mlt i deltagernes FTU-investeringer. 
7 (iii) The Commission’s management revealed a number of weaknesses, in particular at the beginning of the implementation of FP6, which affected the effectiveness of the actions, in particular the uncertainty about the new instruments’ specific role, an insufficient guidance and weaknesses in project monitoring. (iv) As compared to FP5, FP6 did not succeed in generating a significant increase in terms of participants’ RTD investment.
Den private sektors deltagelse aftog endog mlt relativt. 
The participation of the private sector even diminished in relative terms.
Mlet om, at 15 % af RP6Ős samlede budget til udvalgte temaer skulle g til de deltagende SMV, blev ikke net. 
The target of 15 % of the total budget of FP6 thematic priorities for SME participation was not achieved.
Retten skal minde om sin tidligere anbefaling, at udgiftsprogrammer bżr baseres p en eksplicit interventionslogik, som knytter instrumenterne til realistiske ml. 
The Court recalls its previous recommendation that spending programmes should be based upon an explicit intervention logic, linking the instruments to realistic objectives.
I den forbindelse bżr det overvejes, om der kan fastsžttes t enkelt ml for hvert instrument med henblik p at sikre, at instrumentets specifikke rolle er klar. 
In this context, the possibility of setting one single objective for each instrument should be considered in order to ensure clarity of the instruments’ specific role.
For hvert program bżr der vžre velegnede resultatindikatorer til brug ved kontrollen af forventet output, udfald og effekt. 
For each programme there should be appropriate performance indicators to monitor the expected outputs, outcomes and impacts.
RK OE SMU M M I S S I O N E N S SVAR V. Retten anbefaler ogs, at: i) Kommissionen overvejer, om ekspertisenettene og samarbejdsprojekter, som minder om integrerede projekter, har fet realistiske ml og giver vžsentlige fordele frem for traditionelle instrumenter til forskningssamarbejde. 
ER XE PE CL YU OT I FV ET H E SC UO M M M M AI S R S Y I O N V. The Court also recommends that: (i) The Commission should consider whether NoEs and IP-like collaborative projects have 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. ii) Kommissionen undersżger de forskellige rsager til, at niveauet for deltagernes investeringer i forskning og teknologisk udvikling er relativt lavt sammenlignet med de ml, der efterstržbes, og foreslr specifikke foranstaltninger. 
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. (ii) The Commission should examine the various reasons 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. 
Appropriate data should be made available to monitor the catalytic effect of EU RTD funding.
Det bżr revurderes om de forventede ml, isžr for SMV og den private sektor, er realistiske. iii) Kommissionen Ń isžr med henblik p at gżre projekterne nemmere at forvalte, implementere efter hensigten og evaluere ordentligt Ń sikrer at der i tide gives klar vejledning, at kontrakttildelingen tager kortere tid, og at projekterne overvges bedre. Sžrberetning nr. 8/2009 Ń ČEkspertisenetteneÇ og Čde integrerede projekterÇ i Fžllesskabets forskningspolitik Ń nede de deres ml? 
The realism of expected targets, in particular for SMEs and the private sector, should be reassessed. (iii) In view of improving in particular the manageability of projects, their adequate implementation and appropriate evaluation, the Commission should ensure clear and timely guidance, a speedier contracting process and better project monitoring. Special Report No 8/2009 — ‘Networks of Excellence’ and ‘Integrated Projects’ in Community research policy: did they achieve their objectives?
8 INDLEDNING FŽLLESSKABETS FORSKNING OG TEKNOLOGISKE UDVIKLING (FTU) Ń ML OG RISICI POLICYML 1. 
8 INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES AND THREATS FACING COMMUNITY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT (RTD) POLICY OBJECTIVES 1.
Forskning og teknologisk udvikling (FTU) indvirker afgżrende p videnskabelig og teknologisk fremgang og fornyelse. 
Research and technological development (RTD) has a key influence on scientific and technological progress and innovation.
Den Europžiske Union og dens medlemsstater prioriterer forskning hżjt med henblik p opretholdelse og forbedring af deres borgeres hżje levestandard. 
Research is an important priority for the European Union and its Member States so that the high living standards of its citizens can be maintained and improved.
De overordnede ml for Det Europžiske Fžllesskabs FTU-politik1 er at styrke det videnskabelige og teknologiske grundlag for Fžllesskabets industri og at fremme udviklingen af dens internationale konkurrenceevne. 
The overall objectives of the European Community RTD policy1 are to strengthen the scientific and technological bases of Community industry and encourage it to become more competitive at international level.
Virksomheder, forskningscentre og universiteter opmuntres til at samarbejde om en FTU-indsats af hżj kvalitet for at udnytte mulighederne i det indre marked fuldt ud. 
Undertakings, research centres and universities are encouraged to cooperate with one another in high-quality RTD activities to exploit the internal market potential to the full.
1 Traktaten om oprettelse af Det Europpžiske Fžllesskab, afsnit XVIII (Forskning og teknologisk udvikling), artikel 163-173. 
1 Treaty establishing the European Community, Title XVIII (Research and Technological Development), Articles 163 to 173.
FIGUR 1 2 761 3 425 4 061 4 447 7 217 GENNEMSNITLIGE RLIGE FTU-UDGIFTER P FŽLLESSKABSBUDGETTET (FRA RP4 TIL RP7) 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 0 RP4 Ń EU 12 (1995-1998) RP5 Ń EU 15 (1999-2002) RP6 Ń EU 15 (2003-2006) RP6 Ń EU 25 (2004-2006) RP7 Ń EU 27 (2007-2013) Kilde: Vedtagne retsakter fra FP4 til FP7 (ekskl. Euratom). 
FIGURE 1 2 761 3 425 4 061 4 447 7 217 AVERAGE ANNUAL RTD EXPENDITURE FROM THE COMUNITY BUDGET (FP4 TO FP7) 8 000 7 000 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 2 000 1 000 0 FP4 — EU-12 (1995 to 1998) FP5 — EU-15 (1999 to 2002) FP6 — EU-15 (2003 to 2006) FP6 — EU-25 (2004 to 2006) FP7 — EU-27 (2007 to 2013) Source: Legislative decisions for FP4 to FP7 (excludes Euratom).
Sžrberetning nr. 8/2009 Ń ČEkspertisenetteneÇ og Čde integrerede projekterÇ i Fžllesskabets forskningspolitik Ń nede de deres ml? i millioner euro p.a. 
Special Report No 8/2009 — ‘Networks of Excellence’ and ‘Integrated Projects’ in Community research policy: did they achieve their objectives? in million euro p.a.
Siden 1984 er Det Europžiske Fžllesskabs FTU-aktiviteter blevet implementeret gennem flerrige rammeprogrammer (RPŐer), som for en nžrmere fastsat periode fastsžtter de videnskabelige og teknologiske ml, hovedlinjerne i aktionerne, det samlede budget og fordelingen af det p aktionerne samt de detaljerede regler for Fžllesskabets finansielle deltagelse. 
Since 1984, European Community RTD activities have been implemented through multiannual Framework Programmes (FPs) which define, for a given period, the scientific and technological objectives, the broad lines of the activities, the overall budget and its breakdown by action, and the detailed rules for Community financial participation.
Finansieringen i de successive EU-rammepro-grammer er blevet żget over tid. 
Funding in successive EU Framework Programmes has increased over time.
RPŐerne er den stżrste offentlige enkeltkilde til finansiering af forskning i Den Europžiske Union med en samlet andel p mellem 4 % og 5 % af den samlede offentlige finansiering af FTU. 
FPs are the largest single public source of research funding in the European Union, with an overall share between 4 % and 5 % of total public RTD funding.
EUROPŽISK FORSKNINGS STRUKTURELLE SVAGHEDER OG AMBITIONER 4. 
STRUCTURAL WEAKNESSES AND AMBITIONS OF EUROPEAN RESEARCH 4.
Europžisk forskning anses generelt for at lide under strukturelle svagheder. 
European research is widely held to suffer from structural weaknesses.
Kommissionen har understreget2, at: a) investeringerne i FTU er utilstržkkelige og spredte b) de menneskelige ressourcer inden for forskning er utilstržkkelige c) der er en begržnset evne til at omsžtte videnskabelige gennembrud i innovative og konkurrencedygtige produkter og tjenesteydelser d) den forskningspolitiske indsats i Europa er ukoordineret. 
The Commission has highlighted that2: (a) there is insufficient and dispersed investment in RTD; (b) insufficient human resources are devoted to research; (c) there is a limited capacity to translate scientific breakthroughs into innovative and competitive products and services; and (d) research policies in Europe are fragmented.
Kommissionen og Det Europžiske Rd mente, at oprettelsen af et Čeuropžisk forskningsrumÇ (EFR) er et afgżrende skridt til at overvinde disse strukturelle svagheder3. 
The Commission and the European Council considered that realising an ‘European Research Area’ (ERA) is a key step to overcome these structural weaknesses3.
EFR skulle fungere som et indre marked for forskning og teknologi og som et rum for bedre koordinering af nationale og regionale forskningsaktiviteter og -politikker. 
The ERA would constitute an internal market for research and technology, as well as a space for a better coordination of national and regional research activities and policies.
Det Europžiske Rd har for Unionen sat det ambitiżse ml Čat blive verdens mest konkurrencedygtige og dynamiske videnbaserede żkonomi, der har kapacitet til at sikre en bžredygtig żkonomisk vžkst med flere og bedre job og stżrre social samhżrighedÇ4. 
The European Council has set for the Union the ambitious goal ‘to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion’4.
I dette perspektiv bżr den europžiske forskningsindsats żges, s den nžrmer sig 3 % af bruttonationalproduktet senest i 2010 (mod 1,9 % i 2000). 
In this perspective, the European research effort should be increased, with the aim of approaching 3 % of gross domestic product by 2010 (up from 1,9 % in 2000).
To tredjedele af disse nye investeringer bżr komme fra den private sektor5. 
Two thirds of this new investment should come from the private sector5.
Kommissionen forslag til Rdets beslutninger om sžrprogrammer til gennemfżrelse af sjette rammeprogram, KOM(2002) 43 endelig af 30.1.2002, sektion 5.1 ČBehov for EU-foranstaltningerÇ, s. 
2 See the Commission proposal for Council decisions concerning the specific programmes implementing the Sixth Framework Programme, COM(2002) 43 final of 30.1.
3 Europa-Kommissionen stillede forslag om oprettelsen af et europžisk forskningsrum (EFR) i sin meddelelse ČMod et europžisk forskningsrumÇ i januar 2000. 
3 The creation of a European Research Area (ERA) was proposed by the European Commission in its communication ‘Towards a European Research Area’ of January 2000.
Sigtet med at oprette EFR tilsluttede EU sig kort efter p Det Europžiske Rd i Lissabon i marts 2000. 
The objective of creating ERA was endorsed by the EU shortly afterwards at the March 2000 Lisbon European Council.
4 Jf. konklusionerne fra Det Europžiske Rd i Lissabon i marts 2000, punkt 5. 
4 See the Conclusions of the European Council of Lisbon, March 2000, point 5.
5 Jf. konklusionerne fra Det Europžiske Rd i Barcelona i marts 2002, punkt 47. 
5 See the Conclusions of the European Council of Barcelona, March 2002, point 47.
SJETTE RAMMEPROGRAM 6. 
THE SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME 6.
Det Europžiske Fžllesskabs sjette rammeprogram (RP6)6 var et instrument, som skulle hjžlpe med til opfyldelsen af de ovennžvnte ambitiżse ml. 
The European Community Sixth Framework Programme (FP6)6 was an instrument intended to assist in achieving the ambitious objectives mentioned earlier.
Det havde til forml at finansiere aktiviteter, som medvirkede til bde innovation og oprettelse af EFR ved at skabe mere integration og koordination i Europas ukoordinerede forskningssektor. 
Its aim was to fund activities contributing both to innovation and to the creation of the ERA, by fostering more integration and coordination in Europe’s fragmented research sector.
RP6 džkkede i perioden 2002-2006 hele spektret fra grundforskning til anvendt forskning, udvikling af videnskabelig og teknisk ekspertise og koordinering af europžisk forskning. 
FP6 covered, for the period 2002 to 2006, the full spectrum from basic to applied research, the development of scientific and technical excellence and the coordination of European research.
Programmet var bygget op omkring tre hovedlinjer: Ń integration og styrkelse af det europžiske forskningsrum Ń strukturering af det europžiske forskningsrum Ń styrkelse af grundlaget for det europžiske forskningsrum. 
The programme was structured around three headings: — integrating and strengthening the European Research Area; — structuring the European Research Area; and — strengthening the foundations of the European Research Area.