natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kommissionen henviser ligeledes til sin meddelelse af 20. september 2002 (KOM(2002) 528) om Čudviklingen i strukturfondenes budgetgennemfżrelse, isžr med hensyn til uindfriede forpligtelserÇ. 
The Commission would also refer to its communication of 20 September 2002 (COM(2002) 528) on the evolution of budget execution of the Structural Funds, in particular outstanding commitments (RAL).
SAMARBEJDET OM FORBEREDELSEN OG GENNEMFŻRELSEN 41. 
COOPERATION IMPLEMENTATION DURING PREPARATION AND 41.
P grund af de sžrlige forhold, der gžlder for hver af de tre linjer, blev partnerne ikke inddraget p samme vis. 
Due to the specificities of the three strands, the involvement of the various partners was different.
Som anfżrt i retningslinjerne (punkt 22 og 23) skulle programmerne for gržnseoverskridende samarbejde udarbejdes af de regionale eller lokale myndigheder i tžt samarbejde med de nationale myndigheder, mens programmerne for tvžrnationalt samarbejde skulle udarbejdes af de nationale myndigheder i tžt samarbejde med de regionale eller lokale myndigheder. 
As laid down in the guidelines (paragraphs 22 and 23), cross-border cooperation programmes were to be drawn up by the regional or local authorities in partnership with the national authorities, whereas transnational cooperation programmes were to be drawn up by the national authorities in close cooperation with the regional or local authorities.
Under Interreg III-programmets linje B forsżgte man for den nordvestlige region at nedsžtte en tvžrnational sammenslutning i form af en europžisk żkonomisk firmagruppe, der bde kunne fungere som forvaltningsmyndighed og som fžlles teknisk sekretariat for programmet. 
An attempt was made in the north-west Region Interreg III B programme to set up a transnational association in the form of a European Economic Interest Grouping to host the managing authority and the joint technical secretariat of the programme.
Det blev imidlertid konstateret under forhandlingerne, at det ikke er alle medlemsstaternes lovgivning, der tager hżjde for denne slags institution med offentligt ansvar. 
However, it was found during the negotiations that not all Member States provide for this type of institution with public responsibilities in their legislative systems.
Hvad angr muligheden for et nyt juridisk instrument for samarbejdet i den kommende periode, henviser Kommissionen til sit svar p punkt 16. 
Concerning a possible new legal instrument for cooperation in the new period, the Commission refers to its reply to at point 16.
Det fžlles tekniske sekretariat skal ifżlge retningslinjerne bist forvaltningsmyndigheden med gennemfżrelsen og den operationelle forvaltning af programmerne. 
The guidelines state that the joint technical secretariat should assist the managing authority with the implementation and operational management of the programmes.
Der lžgges vžgt p effektiviteten og de operationelle aspekter, mens de strategiske aspekter er forbeholdt forvaltningsmyndigheden og overvgningsudvalget. 
Emphasis is placed on effectiveness and operational aspects, while the strategic aspects are left to the managing authority and the monitoring committee.
Derfor stemmer et FTS, der oprettes p t sted med deltagelse af personer fra de forskellige involverede medlemsstater, som regel bedre overens med retningslinjerne. 
For this reason, a JTS set up in a single location and consisting of representatives of the Member States concerned is, as a rule, better adapted to the guidelines.
I sine retningslinjer foreslog Kommissionen, at det finansielle forvaltningssystem skulle give mulighed for overfżrsel fra EFRU og helst ogs fra de pgžldende nationale samfinansierings-ordninger (punkt 25 i retningslinjerne). 
In the guidelines the Commission had suggested that the system of financial management should allow a transfer from the ERDF, but preferably also national co-financing (point 25 of the guidelines).
56. a) Kommissionen henviser til sine svar p punkt 57 og 63-66. b) 57. regionaludviklings-og samhżrighedspolitikker og -instrumenter, mener Kommissionen, at det er de decentraliserede myndigheders opgave at fastlžgge samarbejdsomrderne. 
56. (a) The Commission would refer to its replies to paragraphs 57 and 63 to 66. (b) The Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 63. 57. effectiveness of regional development policies and instruments, the Commission believes that it is for the decentralised public authorities to identify areas of cooperation.
Beskrivelserne omhandler med rette udviklingsproble-mer, da det stżrste problem, der skabes af gržnserne, er de svage żkonomiske og sociale forbindelser mellem nžrtstende aktżrer, hvilket hžmmer udviklingen. 
It is quite right that descriptions should present development-related problems, because the main problem created by borders is that of the inadequate intensity of economic and social relations between neighbouring actors, which is an obstacle to development.
Det er et vanskeligt problem, som det vil tage lang tid at lżse, fordi det kržver en styrkelse af samarbejdet mellem administrationer og organisationer p begge sider af gržnsen. 
This is a tricky problem which takes time to resolve, as it involves developing cooperation between administrations and organisations of all kinds on both sides of the border.
Der henvises endvidere til svaret p punkt 17. b) Eksemplerne viser, at behovet for samarbejde er forskelligt for de forskellige programmer. 
On this point see the reply to paragraph 17. (b) The examples show the differences in cooperation needs between different programmes.
De er ogs udtryk for Kommissionens opfattelse af, at regionerne i vid udstržkning selv bżr kunne vžlge, hvilken form for samarbejde de finder mest presserende. 
They also confirm the CommissionŐs opinion that regions should have considerable scope to choose for themselves the types of cooperation they find most urgent.
Det er rigtigt, at de Čbottom-upÇ-principper, som efter Kommissionens mening er s vigtige for regionaludvikling, risikerer at komme i konflikt med princippet om, at de finansielle midler skal koncentreres om Čet begržnset antal mlsžtninger og foranstaltningerÇ (punkt 11 i retningslinjerne). 
It is true that the bottom-up approach, which the Commission considers essential in regional development, is potentially at odds with the principle of concentrating financial resources Ôon a limited number of topics and measuresŐ (point 11 of the guidelines).
Navnlig under de programmer, der bygger p et solidt samarbejdsgrundlag, og kun er forbundet med et mindre udviklingsefterslžb (ved de gamle indre gržnser), er der tendens til at styrke samarbejdet p en lang ržkke omrder i stedet for at koncentrere sig om et mindre antal omrder. 
In particular, for programmes where there is long experience of cooperation and a limited development gap (at old internal bor-ders), the tendency is to cover a large number of topics in order to take cooperation further, rather than concentrate on a limited number of topics.
7.12.2004 DA Den Europžiske Unions Tidende C 303/33 60. 
7.12.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 303/33 60.
Interreg-programmerne under linje A adskiller sig fra de traditionelle interventionsprogrammer, fordi de altid er rettet mod samarbejde og gżr brug af temmelig nyskabende ordninger for at n dette ml. 
The strand A Interreg programmes differ from traditional operation programmes in that they are directed at cooperation and use rather innovative mechanisms to achieve this goal.
I betragtning af de problemer, der er forbundet med disse regioner, jf. punkt 17, 21-22 og 58, er det normalt, at det er de samme omrder, der gr igen, som i de traditionelle programmer. 
In view of the problems facing these areas as set out in paragraphs 17, 21, 22 and 58, it is normal that the topics covered should be the same as in traditional programmes.
Derfor har EF-initiativprogrammerne under linje B nžsten alle sammen en struktur, der fżlger EFFUŐs prioriterede omrder, dvs. polycentrisk udvikling, forholdet mellem by og land, lige adgang til infrastrukturer for kommunikation og viden og forsvarlig forvaltning af natur og kulturarv. 
As a result virtually all the strand B CIPs have a structure related to the ESDP priorities, namely polycentric spatial development and a new urban-rural relationship, clarity of access to infrastructure and knowledge and wise management of the natural and cultural heritage.
Kommissionen erkender dog, at nogle af disse EF-initiativprogrammer med fordel kunne have vžret mere mlrettede, hvilket ikke altid er muligt, nr det drejer sig om tvžrnationale partnerskaber. 
The Commission does, however, acknowledge that some of these CIPs could have been more targeted, but this is not always possible in trans-national partnership.
Kommissionen henviser til sit svar p punkt 57. 
The Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 57.
Af de 4 ovennžvnte rsager mener Kommissionen, at Čbottom-upÇ-princippet giver de bedste resultater for EF-initiativprogrammerne. 
The Commission considers that, for the four reasons given above, for cross-border CIPs a bottom-up approach gives better results.
Denne tilgang vil uvžgerligt vžre mindre mlrettet end Čtop-downÇ-princippet, men den skal trods alt vžre i overensstemmelse med strategien og programmets prioriteter. 
This inevitably means less targeting than with a top-down approach, but it must still take into account programme strategy and priorities.
Den tager ogs i hżjere grad hensyn til interesserne for de ansvarlige myndigheder p udviklingsomrdet og de lokale aktżrer. 
It is also closer to the concerns of authorities which are responsible for development matters and of local actors.
De elementer, der er nžvnt i 3) og 4), skal fremg tydeligt af EF-initiativprogrammerne og integreres i SWOT-analysen. 
The steps referred to at 3 and 4 should be explained in the CIPs and integrated in the SWOT analysis.
Hvad angr det gržnseoverskridende samarbejde vil selv en yderligere mlretning endvidere ikke lżse alle de gržnserelaterede problemer, hvoraf nogle (f.eks. de forskellige skatte-og socialsikrings-systemer) ligger uden for EFRUŐs indsatsomrde eller kun kan berżres delvist (f.eks. det juridiske og administrative samarbejde, jf. bilag II, punkt 7). 
Finally, in the field of cross-border cooperation, even with more targeting the problems connected with borders would not all be resolved, some of them (e.g. differences between taxation and social security systems) are outside the scope of the ERDF or can only be addressed in part (e.g. judicial and administrative cooperation Ń See Annex II, point 7).
Det er udelukkende medlemsstaternes opgave at finde lżsningsmodeller p disse omrder. 
Applying solutions in these areas is the sole responsibility of the Member States.
Fremover bżr man for denne linje prżve at udvikle mere Čtop-downÇ-arbejdsmetoder, der inddrager de nationale administrationer. 
In future consideration should be given, for this strand, to developing more top-down working methods involving national administrations.
Komplementariteten ligger navnlig i det gržnseoverskridende samarbejde, der er fżjet til den traditionelle żkonomiske og sociale udviklingskomponent. 
Complementarity lies principally in the cross-border cooperation aspect which comes on top of the traditional and economic and social development.
De regionale programmer for to gržnseregioner kan f.eks. omfatte finansiering af erhvervsservice og suppleres af Interreg-programmer om udveksling af erfaringer vedrżrende finansieringen af denne service. 
For instance, two border regions will include the financing of business support in their regional programmes and, by way of complement, the exchange of experience in financing such services in Interreg.
For linje BŐs vedkommende er komplementariteten sikret ved, at der under EF-initiativprogrammerne finansieres tvžrnationale projekter, der er for komplicerede til at kunne finansieres gennem ČgžngseÇ tiltag. 
For strand B, complementarity is achieved in that the CIPs finance transnational projects which are too complex for mainstream financing.
For linje CŐs vedkommende er komplementariteten et resultat af mlsžtningen om at forbedre de regionale politikker og instrumenter, der bl.a. anvendes til at gennemfżre gžngse tiltag. 
For strand C complementarity derives from the objective of improving regional policies and instruments, some of which are used for implementing mainstream actions.
Udvžlgelsesudvalget skal kunne basere sine beslutninger p en vurdering af projekternes kvalitet og ved hjžlp af kvantificerbare kriterier hurtigt kunne fastlžgge hvert enkelt projekts stžrke og svage sider og drżfte dem i styringsudvalget. 
The selection committee must be in a position to base its decisions on its appraisal of the quality of the projects, as it is possible, with the quantified criteria, to quickly identify the strengths and weaknesses of each project and to discuss them in the steering committee.
Kommissionen er enig med Revisionsretten i, at det vil kunne forbedre mden, visse programmer udvžlges p, hvis der defineres et minimum af kvalitet. 
The Commission agrees with the Court that defining minimum quality would improve the selection system for certain programmes.
Et af de vigtigste krav, der i retningslinjerne stilles til projekterne, er, at de skal have en transeuropžisk karakter. 
The trans-European nature of projects is one of the principal requirements of the guidelines.
Revisionsretten ppeger med rette, at nogle af de projekter, der finansieres under Interreg-initiativets linje A, ikke gennemfżres i fžllesskab af partnere p hver sin side af gržnsen. 
The Court is quite right in underlining that some strand A projects financed by Interreg are not carried out jointly by partners on both sides of a border.
Dette er tilladt ifżlge retningslinjerne, hvor det kan godtgżres, at tiltaget har store fordele for den anden side af gržnsen. 
This is authorised by the guidelines where significant impact can be demonstrated on the other side of the border.
Efter Kommissionens mening kan organerne forbedre deres knowhow ved at deltage i erfaringsudvekslinger. 
The Commission considers that exchange of experience is a way for the bodies involved in these exchanges to improve their know-how.
Derved kan de i visse tilfžlde effektivisere deres indsats p lokaludvik-lingsomrdet, der bl.a. finansieres under gžngse programmer, eller gržnseoverskridende foranstaltninger, der finansieres under Interreg. Dette er tilfžldet for foranstaltningerne til forbedring af erhvervsservice og bekžmpelse af kysterosion. 
In some cases they may then be in a position to carry out more effectively local development actions financed, for instance, under mainstream or Interreg financed cross-border programmes. This applies to improvement in business support and the prevention of coastal erosion.
Efter Kommissionen mening er projekterne for erfaringsudveksling ofte en forudsžtning for nyskabende foranstaltninger og en bedre udnyttelse af offentlige midler. 
The Commission believes that projects for the exchange of experience are often a prerequisite for the development of innovative action and better use of public funds.
For s vidt angr bemžrkningen om den manglende mlretning, henviser Kommissionen til sit svar p punkt 63. 
As regards the observation on the lack of targeting, the Commission would refer to its reply to paragraph 63.
Som nžvnt i svaret p punkt 63 indebžrer Čbottom-upÇ-princippet, at der ved opstillingen af ml tages hensyn til partnernes synspunkter og ikke kun til SWOT-analysen. 
As explained in the reply to paragraph 63, the bottom-up approach means taking into account the opinions of partners in determining objectives and not only the SWOT analysis.
Som fżlge af EF-initiativprogrammernes generelle ml om at styrke samarbejdet mellem administrationer og organisationer p begge sider af gržnsen (jf. punkt 63) og mange af foranstaltningernes immaterielle karakter er det desuden vanskeligt at foretage en pržcis kvantificering af interventionernes virkninger (jf. punkt 21-22). 
In addition, the general objective of cross-border CIPs of developing cooperation between administrations and organisations of all kinds on both sides of the border (see paragraph 63) and the intangible nature of a good many of the activities chosen make it difficult to quantify exactly the impact of the operation (see paragraphs 21 and 22).
C 303/34 DA Den Europžiske Unions Tidende 7.12.2004 73. 
C 303/34 EN Official Journal of the European Union 7.12.2004 73.
Kommissionens tjenestegrene er ved at foretage en grundig analyse af rapporterne om midtvejsevalueringen for at rette op p de problemer og mangler, som Revisionsretten har konstateret med hensyn til indikatorernes relevans. 
Commission staff are in the process of analysing in detail the mid-term evaluation reports; this exercise will help to remedy the problems and shortcomings detected by the Court concerning the relevance of the indicators.
P dette trin af analysen kan Kommissionen konstatere, at det i mange af rapporterne bl.a. kritiseres, at hver enkelt projektholder selv kan fastsžtte sine indikatorer, og den vil i sin officielle reaktion p rapporterne igen anbefale, at projektholderne skal forpligtes til at anvende de indikatorer, der er fastsat i programmeringsdokumenterne (programmet og tillžgget). 
What the Commission has seen so far is that one point criticised in a good many reports is that project partners can each determine their own indicators; in its official reaction to the reports the Commission will recommend that project partners be required to use the indicators stipulated in the programming documents (programme and complement).
Formlet med kontekstindikatorerne er egentlig at fastlžgge udgangssituationen ved at give et żjebliksbillede af regionen, der kan benyttes som reference til at mle programmets eventuelle indvirkning p denne situation. 
The context indicators proper serve to define the starting situation, giving a snapshot of the region to which reference can be made to see whether the programme has had any impact on this situation.
Det er rigtigt, at disse indikatorer ikke altid pvirkes af interventionen, og at de derfor kan vžre af begržnset interesse for det pgžldende program. 
It is true that these indicators are not necessarily influenced by the operation, and that their value as far as the programme is concerned can be limited.
Tidligere evalueringer af Interreg-programmerne har ofte vist, at deres effekt ikke kan kvantificeres, hvis denne udgangssituation ikke er kendt. 
Many earlier Interreg evaluations found that impact objectives cannot be quantified if this starting situation is not known.
Kommissionen ppeger, at der kun er tale om et fżrste skridt, og at det ville have vžret mere interessant, hvis man havde sikret en ensartet anvendelse p alle EF-initiativprogrammerne. 
The Commission notes that a first step has been taken, but that harmonious application to all the CIPs would have been of more use.
Med hensyn til de kvantificerbare resultatindikatorer er det normalt stżttemodtagerne, der i deres rapporter angiver, hvilke ml der er net, eller i visse tilfžlde det fžlles tekniske sekretariat. 
As regards quantifiable indicators, i.e. of outputs and outcomes, as a rule it is the beneficiaries who state in their reports what has been achieved or, for some indicators, it is the joint secretariat.
Det er normalt, at det er svžrt at afgżre, hvordan de specifikke projekter har bidraget til de overordnede ml. 
It is only to be expected that contributions to overall objectives made by specific projects should be difficult to determine.
Kommissionen har opfordret medlemsstaterne til at ind-skržnke sig til et minimum af relevante indikatorer. 
The Commission urged Member States to select only a limited number of relevant indicators.
Som led i forenklingsindsatsen (meddelelse af 25. april 2003 (K(2003) 1255)) har Kommissionen gentaget denne opfordring til medlemsstaterne. 
It reminded Member States of this recommendation in the simplification exercise (Communication of 25 April 2003 (C(2003) 1255)).
Kommissionen har opfordret medlemsstaterne til at indfżre edb-systemer til at forvalte projekterne og databaser til at indsamle oplysninger om indikatorerne. 
The Commission urged Member Stats to put in place computerised project management systems and databases to compile information for use as indicators.
KONKLUSION OG ANBEFALINGER 79. 
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 79.
Den forsinkede offentliggżrelse af retningslinjerne og godkendelse af programmerne har ikke haft afgżrende indvirkning p programmernes kvalitet (jf. svar p punkt 28-29 og 36-39). 
The delays in the publication of guidelines and in the approval of programmes did not have any decisive effect on the quality of programmes (see replies to paragraphs 28, 29 and 36 to 39).
Der er gjort fremskridt med evalueringen gennem en żget kvantificering af mlene, men disse fremskridt begržnses ofte af, at mlene er af immateriel karakter (jf. svar p punkt 21). 
As regards evaluation, some progress was made through the increased quantification of objectives, even though this progress was limited because of the intangible nature of many of them (see the reply to paragraph 21).
Forvaltningssystemet for EF-initiativprogrammerne er takket vžre Kommissionens retningslinjer blevet vžsentlig forbedret i forhold den til forrige periode. 
The Commission guidelines have produced significant advances in the CIP management system compared with the previous period.
Det forventes, at der vil blive gjort yderligere fremskridt p grundlag af den nuvžrende erfaring og udvekslingerne mellem forvaltningsorganerne som led i Interact-programmet. 
Further progress is expected on the basis of current experience and exchanges between management bodies under the Interact programme.
Kommissionen vil desuden foresl Rdet at indfżre et nyt juridisk instrument for den nžste programmeringsperiode, der kan gżre det lettere at oprette fžlles strukturer. 
The Commission is also planning to propose that the Council should introduce for the next programming period a new legal instrument to facilitate the creation of joint structures.
Hvad angr de tilgžngelige analyser henviser Kommissionen til sine svar p bemžrkningerne i punkt 18. 
On the matter of the analyses available, the Commission would refer to its replies to the observations in paragraph 18.
Som anfżrt i punkt 17 og 58 er det generelle forml med det gržnseoverskridende arbejde at udvikle en gržnseoverskridende żkonomi ved at oprette gržnseoverskridende żkonomiske og sociale centre med udgangspunkt i de to żkonomier p hver sin side af gržnsen. 
As stated in paragraphs 17 and 58, the general objective of cross-border cooperation is the development of a cross-border economy by developing cross-border socio-economic centres out of the two economies separated by the border.
Dette indebžrer at udnytte enhver lejlighed til at udbygge samarbejdet mellem administrationer og sociożkonomiske aktżrer p modsatte sider af gržnsen. 
This means that any opportunity for developing cooperation between administrations and socio-economic actors located on either side of the border should be promoted.
Derfor er indsatsomrdet med vilje forholdsvis bredt anlagt i retningslinjerne. 
Hence the guidelines deliberately provide a relatively wide field of action.
Under visse EF-initiativprogrammer har man ikke desto mindre fundet frem til specifikke gržnseoverskridende problemer, hvilket har det gjort det muligt at fastsžtte pržcise og mlbare ml og at koncentrere ressourcerne om disse ml. 
In some CIPs, however, specific cross-border problems were identified, by reference to which targeted and measurable objectives were defined and resources were concentrated on these objectives.
Disse to tilgange udelukker sledes ikke hinanden, hvilket ogs fremgr af de eksempler, som Revisionsretten giver p mlrettede lżsninger p sdanne problemer i punkt 58. 
These two approaches are not therefore mutually exclusive, as is shown by the examples of targeting on specific problems that the Court quotes in paragraph 58.
Kommissionen henviser til sine svar p punkt 26 og 55. 
The Commission would refer to its replies to paragraphs 26 and 55.