natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Target areas eligible for support included raising awareness of issues such as fuel efficiency in commercial vehicles and insulation of buildings where independent expert opinion suggests that there is significant potential for cost-effective adoption of greenhouse gas-efficient 8 See for example the recent analysis “A Cost curve for Greenhouse Gas Reduction”, McKinsey Quarterly, 2007. 
Med ciljnimi področji, upravičenimi do podpore, je bilo osveščanje o vprašanjih, kot sta energetska učinkovitost komercialnih vozil in gradbena izolacija, kadar neodvisno strokovno mnenje kaže, da obstajajo 8 Glej, na primer, nedavno analizo ”A Cost Curve for Greenhouse Gas Reduction”, (Krivulja stroškov za zmanjšanje toplogrednih plinov), McKinsey Quarterly, 2007.
On the other hand the designation of as many as 63 target areas for a relatively small expenditure programme reduced the likelihood of the programme achieving a significant impact in any individual area. 
Po drugi strani se je zaradi določitve kar 63 ciljnih področij za relativno majhen program porabe zmanjšala verjetnost, da bi imel program pomemben vpliv na katerem koli posameznem področju.
IEE was not a clearly focused expenditure programme. 
IEE ni bil program porabe z jasno usmeritvijo.
The conclusions of a report funded by the programme9 provide a benchmark for the assessment of the arrangements for implementing the programme.The Commission’s work programme did not: – “make the policy model explicit” (i.e. explain how the provision of EU grants would assist in removing specific obstacles to the adoption of energy efficient technology); – set specific measurable and time-related objectives for the programme; – provide an analysis of the most important market actors. 
Zaključki poročila, financiranega iz programa9, nudijo referenčno merilo za oceno ureditev za izvajanje programa. V Komisijinem delovnem programu ni bilo: – ”jasno izraženega modela politike” (tj., ni bilo pojasnjeno, kako bo zagotovitev donacij EU pripomogla k odstranjevanju specifičnih ovir na področju uvajanja energetsko učinkovite tehnologije); – specifičnih, merljivih in časovno določenih ciljev programa; – zagotovljene analize najpomembnejših tržnih akterjev.
(An analysis of market actors is provided in the Work Programme for the successor programme, but this lists 41 “target groups” which are often broadly defined (“education system”, “craftsmen”, “media”, etc.)). MONITORING AND PROGRAMME EVALUATION 19. 
(Analizo tržnih akterjev vsebuje delovni program za naslednji program, vendar je v njem naštetih 41 ”ciljnih skupin”, ki so pogosto široko opredeljene (”izobraže-valni sistem”, ”obrtniki”, ”mediji” itd.)): SPREMLJANJE IN VREDNOTENJE PROGRAMA 19.
The Financial Regulation10 requires the Commission to set specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and timed objectives for all sectors of the budget and to monitor their achievement through performance indicators. 
Finančna uredba10 zahteva, da Komisija določi specifične, merljive, dosegljive, relevantne in časovno določene cilje za vse proračunske oddelke ter da njihovo doseganje spremlja s kazalniki uspešnosti.
The Commission only established monitoring arrangements at the level of individual projects, as folllows: – the grant agreement described the content of the project and its immediate products (deliverables) as well as the performance indicators agreed; – the grant agreement also covered reporting frequency and resulted in 9 Under IEE, ECOFYS produced a report evaluating 20 energy efficiency instruments, of which 17 were run within the Member States (“From Theory Based Policy Evaluation to SMART Policy Design” ECOFYS, april 2007 – http:// www.aid-ee.org/documents/ SummaryreportFinal.PDF?bcsi_ scan_522CC38ADEA72627=0&bcsi_ scan_filename=SummaryreportFinal. 
Komisija je ureditve za spremljanje določila samo na ravni posameznih projektov, kot sledi: – V sporazumu o donaciji so bili opisani vsebina projekta in njegovi neposredni proizvodi (rezultati, predvideni v pogodbi) ter dogovorjeni kazalniki uspešnosti. – V sporazumu o donaciji je bila določena tudi pogostost poročanja, posledica česar so bila tri do štiri poročila, odvisno od trajanja projekta (pri 9 V okviru IEE je ECOFYS pripravil poročilo, v katerem je bilo ovrednotenih 20 instrumentov za energetsko učinkovitost, od katerih se jih je 17 izvajalo v državah članicah (”From Theory Based Policy Evaluation to SMART Policy Design” (Od teoretičnega vrednotenja politike do zasnove politike SMART), ECOFYS, april 2007.) http://www.aid–ee.org/documents/ SummaryreportFinal.PDF?bcsi_ scan_522CC38ADEA72627=0&bcsi_ scan_filename=SummaryreportFinal.
PDF – 10th June 2008). 
PDF, 10. junij 2008).
This report provides a benchmark for good practice in designing and monitoring programmes in the energy efficiency area. 
Poročilo zagotavlja referenčno merilo za dobro prakso pri zasnovi in spremljanju programov na področju energetske učinkovitosti.
Inter alia, the consultant’s report advised that an energy efficiency programm should: – involve an explicit policy model, (showing the expected link between expenditure, output and impact); – set specific targets to be achieved within specific time frames, and identify measurable indicators to be monitored; – estimate the possible impact of a possible package of policy instruments to achieve the targets 14 three to four reports depending on the project duration (small events set; were reported once only); – each project was assigned to a project officer who monitored the delivery of reports and progress against the contract project description; – within the executive agency each unit monitored its project officers; – an overview of this follow-up was reported to Energy and Transport DG. – analyse relevant markets and sectors, identifying key market actors, disincentives, barriers and obstacles to energy efficiency and the likely effectiveness of policy instruments in overcoming these problems. 
Svetovalci so v svojem poročilu med drugim svetovali, da bi moral program energetske učinkovitosti: – vsebovati jasen model politike, ki kaže pričakovano povezavo med odhodki, izložkom in učinkom; – določiti specifične cilje, ki morajo biti doseženi v določenih rokih, ter opredeliti merljive kazalnike za spremljanje; – oceniti možni učinek možnega paketa 14 majhnih projektih se je poročalo samo enkrat). – Vsak projekt je bil dodeljen projektnemu referentu, ki je spremljal oddajanje poročil in napredek, dosežen glede na opis v pogodbi o projektu. – V izvajalski agenciji je vsaka enota spremljala svoje projektne referente. – O pregledu tega spremljanja se poroča Generalnemu direktoratu za energetiko in promet. instrumentov politike za doseganje zastavljenih ciljev; – analizirati relevantne trge in sektorje ter pri tem opredeliti ključne tržne akterje, odpor, ovire in prepreke za energetsko učinkovitost ter verjetno uspešnost instrumentov politike pri premagovanju teh težav.
10 Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 
10 Člen 27 Uredbe Sveta (ES, Euratom) št. 1605/2002 (UL L 248, 16.9.2002, str.
SUCCESSES AND LIMITATIONS 21. 
USPEHI IN OMEJITVE 21.
These arrangements were similar to those of other EU programmes and allowed the Commission to monitor activities undertaken within individual projects. 
Te ureditve so bile podobne ureditvam za druge programe EU in so Komisiji omogočale spremljati dejavnosti, ki so se izvajale pri posameznih projektih.
On the other hand, the monitoring information requested and provided was not placed in the framework of a set of indicators to measure the success of the programme as a whole. 
Po drugi strani zahtevane in predložene informacije o spremljanju niso bile umeščene v okvir vnaprej določenih kazalnikov za merjenje uspeha programa kot celote.
The information was thus of limited use to the Commission in forming a view on the extent to which the programme was a success, and on whether it, or project requirements, should be amended11. 
Zato so bile te informacije za Komisijo pri ugotavljanju, v kolikšnem obsegu je bil program uspešen in ali bi ga bilo treba spremeniti, samo delno koristne11.
There were no amendments to the criteria against which proposed projects were assessed over the course of Intelligent Energy for Europe (and for the SAVE and Altener components, these criteria were unchanged from previous programmes). 
Merila za ocenjevanje predlaganih projektov se v času izvajanja programa Inteligentna energija za Evropo niso spreminjala (za sestavne dele podprogramov SAVE in ALTENER so bila ta merila celo enaka kot v prejšnjih programih).
Useful evaluation of IEE was also handicapped by the rate of disbursement of funds12. 
Koristno vrednotenje IEE je bilo ovirano tudi zaradi stopnje razdeljevanja sred-stev12.
The mid-term evaluation of IEE was completed towards the end of the programme, in January 2006. 
Vmesno vrednotenje IEE je bilo dokončano proti koncu programa, januarja 2006.
However at this stage disbursements amounted to less than 5 % of total expenditure foreseen for the programme. 
Vendar so na tej stopnji razdeljena sredstva znašala manj kot 5 % skupnih odhodkov, predvidenih za program.
The study team concluded that “it is still too early for evaluations to identify [projects’] long-term impacts”. 
Skupina, ki je izvedla študijo, je ugotovila, da je še vedno prezgodaj, da bi lahko pri vrednotenjih opredelili dolgoročne učinke [projektov].
By the end of 2006, total payments had risen to just 46,8 million euro – indicating that 80 % of funds payable under the programme would be disbursed after the programme period. 
Do konca leta 2006 so se skupna plačila zvišala na samo 46,8 milijona EUR, kar je pomenilo, da bo 80 % sredstev za izplačilo v okviru programa razdeljenih po programskem obdobju.
The Intelligent Energy for Europe programme assumed that imperfect information was a significant barrier to the uptake of energy efficient products, processes and practices and to the use of renewable energy sources. 
Predpostavka programa Inteligentna energija za Evropo je bila, da so necelovite informacije precejšnja ovira za porast energetsko učinkovitih proizvodov, procesov in praks ter za uporabo obnovljivih virov energije.
“Good practice” programme monitoring would have incorporated measures of the extent to which decision-makers had become aware of relevant information, as a 11 The consultant employed to perform an ex-ante evaluation for IEE2 reported that “The indicator system of the current IEE programme at this stage of development is restricted to the project level, where proposers are required to suggest indicators against which their project’s progress can be measured. 
Komisija na ravni programa ni pridobila teh podatkov. 11 Svetovalec, ki je bil najet za izvedbo predhodnega vrednotenja za IEE2, je poročal, da je sistem kazalnikov sedanjega programa IEE na tej stopnji razvoja omejen na raven projektov, kjer morajo vložniki predlogov predlagati kazalnike, s katerimi je možno meriti napredek njihovega projekta.
However, there are no means of harmonising these indicators at the programme level. 
Vendar ni nobenega načina za uskladitev teh kazalnikov na ravni programa.
Consultations have revealed concern about this system. It is potentially confusing and prevents a meaningful impact monitoring as it encourages projects to measure different outputs, results and impacts. 
Pri posvetovanjih je bila izražena zaskrbljenost glede takšnega sistema, saj lahko povzroča zmedo in preprečuje smiselno spremljanje učinka, ker projekte spodbuja, da merijo različne izložke, rezultate in učinke.
Under this arrangement it will be very difficult for any evaluation to measure the impact, and thus draw conclusions, on the success of the programme.” 
Ob takšni ureditvi bo pri katerem koli vrednotenju zelo težko meriti učinek in sprejeti zaključke o uspešnosti programa.
(Ex-ante evaluation of a renewed multiannual Community programme in the field of energy (2007-2013) ECOTEC Research and Consulting Limited, p. 
(Ex–ante Evaluation of a Renewed Multiannual Community Programme in the Field of Energy (2007–2013) (Predhodno vrednotenje prenovljenega večletnega programa Skupnosti na področju energetike (2007–2013)) ECOTEC Research and 15 24.
A key weakness of programme evaluation has been that evaluation reports have not been available in time to influence legislative discussions, and have not provided meaningful analysis of the impact of the programme. 
Ključna slabost vrednotenja programa je bila, da poročila o vrednotenju niso bila pravočasno na voljo, da bi vplivala na zakonodajne razprave, in niso zagotovila smiselne analize učinka programa.
Evaluation reports on the SAVE and Altener sub programmes were not available before IEE was adopted. 
Poročila o vrednotenju za podprograma SAVE in ALTENER pred sprejetjem IEE niso bila na voljo.
The ex-ante evaluation of IEE2, which succeeded IEE, was produced before any information from IEE was available (the report13 was issued in September 2004: the deadline for the first call for proposals for IEE was April 2004, and grant agreements under IEE 2003-2006 were only signed in the autumn of that year). annual Programme for Action in the field of Energy “Intelligent energy – Europe, 2003-2006”, ECOTEC Research & Consulting Limited, United Kingdom. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/energy_ transport/evaluation/activites/doc/ reports/energie/no52_eie_midterm_ final_report.pdf 13 One factor in this was the timing of approval of the programme (see p. 
Consulting Limited, str. 38. 12 Mid Term Evaluation of the Multi– annual Programme for Action in the Field of Energy ”Intelligent energy – Europe, 2003–2006” (Vmesno vrednotenje večletnega programa za ukrepanje na področju energetike ”Inteligentna energija – Evropa, 2003–2006”), ECOTEC Research & Consulting Limited, Združeno kraljestvo. http://ec.europa. eu/dgs/energy_transport/evaluation/ activites/doc/reports/energie/no52_ eie_midterm_final_report.pdf.
EVALUATION OF LOCAL ENERGY AGENCIES: A CASE STUDY 25. 
VREDNOTENJE LOKALNIH AGENCIJ ZA ENERGIJO: ŠTUDIJA PRIMERA 25.
The EU has, under a series of programmes, co-financed the establishment of local energy agencies (Box 5) in the Member States over the last 15 years. 
EU zadnjih 15 let v okviru vrste programov sofinancira ustanavljanje lokalnih agencij za energijo v državah članicah (okvir 5).
Over this period, around 300 such agencies have been set up with EU support (with a maximum EU contribution of 200 000 euro). 
V tem obdobju je bilo s podporo EU ustanovljenih približno 300 takšnih agencij (največji prispevek EU je znašal 200 000 EUR).
The Commission argues that agencies are “promoters and implementers” of EU energy policy at local level, and act as “energy experts” for other local or regional activities. 
Komisija navaja, da agencije ”spodbujajo in izvajajo” energetsko politiko EU na lokalni ravni in da delujejo kot ”strokovnjaki za energetiko” za druge lokalne ali regionalne dejavnosti.
Under IEE, any public authority or other body proposing the creation of a local/ regional energy agency must present an initial work programme. 
V okviru IEE mora vsak javni ali drugi organ, ki predlaga ustanovitev lokalne/ regionalne agencije za energijo, predstaviti začetni delovni program.
This work programme must contain a combination of local/regional activities and activities with an EU dimension. 
Ta mora vsebovati kombinacijo lokalnih/regionalnih dejavnosti in dejavnosti z razsežnostjo EU.
It should also demonstrate that local/regional activities will benefit from inputs to the new agency coming from other parts of the EU. 
Prav tako mora dokazati, da bodo vložki v novo agencijo, ki prihajajo iz drugih delov EU, koristili lokalnim/regionalnim dejavnostim.
The Global Work Programme for 2003-2006 promised a selective approach to supporting the creation of new agencies (where they were “necessary and convenient, and there is a clear commitment by the local authorities to support such infrastructure in the long run”). 
V globalnem delovnem programu za obdobje 2003–2006 je bil obljubljen selek-tivni pristop k podpiranju ustanavljanja novih agencij (kjer so ”potrebne in primerne in obstaja jasna zavezanost lokalnih organov, da dolgoročno podpirajo takšno infrastrukturo”).
Priority was to be given to establishing agencies in the (then) candidate countries. 
Prednost naj bi imelo ustanavljanje agencij v (takratnih) državah kandidatkah.
In practice, this was not achieved: the greatest number of agencies was created in existing Member States, and was concentrated in those Member States which already had the greatest number of local energy agencies. 
V praksi to ni bilo doseženo: največ agencij je bilo ustanovljenih v obstoječih državah članicah in koncentriranih v tistih državah članicah, ki so že imele največ lokalnih agencij za energijo.
16 BOX 5 LOCAL ENERGY AGENCIES Agencies are typically small bodies (from two to ten staff) set up at the initiative of local authorities. 
16 OKVIR 5 LOKALNE AGENCIJE ZA ENERGIJO Agencije so običajno majhni organi (od dva do deset uslužbencev) in so ustanovljene na pobudo lokalnih organov.
They are headed by a Director who reports to a management committee which may include private sector representatives, but will have a majority drawn from the public sector. 
Vodi jih direktor, ki poroča upravnemu odboru, v katerem so lahko tudi predstavniki zasebnega sektorja, vendar je večina članov iz javnega sektorja.
The most commonly reported activity is the provision of advice (either to local decision-makers, or to consumers). 
Dejavnost, o kateri se najpogosteje poroča, je svetovanje (bodisi lokalnim odločevalcem ali potrošnikom).
The Commission has not obtained an independent assessment of the impact of local energy agencies. 
Komisija ni pridobila neodvisne ocene učinka lokalnih agencij za energijo.
It did obtain a study14 on the outputs, performance and future perspective of SAVE’s energy agencies, based on the work of experts drawn from energy agencies in the Czech Republic, France, Italy and the United Kingdom. 
Pri-dobila pa je študijo14 o izložkih, uspešnosti in prihodnjih možnostih agencij za energijo v okviru SAVE, ki je temeljila na delu strokovnjakov iz agencij na Češkem, v Franciji, Italiji in Združenem kraljestvu.
This paid particular attention to the support provided to local energy agencies by the Commission, but also raised concerns about the monitoring of agencies and their coordination with private sector and public sector bodies in the field of energy efficiency. 
V njej je bila posebna pozornost namenjena podpori, ki jo je Komisija zagotovila lokalnim agencijam za energijo, vendar je bila izražena tudi zaskrbljenost glede spremljanja agencij in njihove koordinacije z organi zasebnega in javnega sektorja na področju energetske učinkovitosti.
Despite this IEE2 provides more support for the creation of new energy agencies: the maximum amount of funding rising to 250 000 euro (from 200 000 euro) and to 75 % of eligible costs (previously 50 %). 
IEE2 kljub temu zagotavlja več podpore za ustanavljanje novih agencij za energijo. Največji možni znesek financiranja se je zvišal na 250 000 EUR (z 200 000 EUR) in na 75 % upravičenih stroškov (prej 50 %).
ENERGY AGENCIES SET UP UNDER SAVE II 19982004 14 “Study of outputs, performance and future perspectives of SAVE energy agencies” Final Report ECUBA srl 2005. 
14 ”Study of Outputs, Performance and Future Perspectives of SAVE Energy Agencies” (”Študija izložkov, uspešnosti in prihodnjih možnosti agencij za energijo v okviru SAVE”), končno poročilo ECUBA srl 2005.
17 ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS: PREPARING PROPOSALS, REPORTING ON PROJECTS AND PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT 30. 
ADMINISTRATIVNI STROŠKI: PRIPRAVA PREDLOGOV, POROČANJE O PROJEKTIH IN UPRAVLJANJE PROGRAMA 30.
Administrative costs related to the Intelligent Energy for Europe programme are incurred by: – participants in the programme (and sometimes by their sponsors); – since 2006 by the Executive Agency set up to run the programme, and by the responsible Commission services (principally Energy and Transport DG). 
Administrativne stroške v zvezi s programom Inteligentna energija za Evropo imajo: – udeleženci v programu (in včasih njihovi sponzorji); – od leta 2006 izvajalska agencija, ustanovljena za izvajanje programa, ter pristojne službe Komisije (v glavnem GD za energetiko in promet).
Administrative costs both for the Commission and participants should be commensurate with the scale of the programme and no higher than needed for effective implementation of the programme. 
Tako za Komisijo kot za udeležence bi morali biti administrativni stroški sorazmerni z obsegom programa in ne višji, kot so potrebni za uspešno izvajanje programa.
The Commission does not have guidance or benchmarks, based for example on comparable programmes, on the cost of administration and does not collect comprehensive information on these costs. 
Komisija glede administrativnih stroškov ni imela smernic ali meril presoje, ki bi na primer temeljila na primerljivih programih, niti ne zbira izčrpnih informacij o teh stroških.
The Court used a survey to obtain participants’ estimates of the cost of preparing proposals and project reporting. 
Sodišče je z anketo med udeleženci pridobilo ocene o njihovih stroških priprave predlogov in poročanja o projektih.
The average cost of submitting and negotiating a proposal reported by respondents is around 10 % of the amount requested. 
Povprečni stroški predložitve predloga in pogajanj o njem so po odgovorih anketirancev znašali okoli 10 % zneska, za katerega so zaprosili.
Reporting costs are estimated as amounting to at least a further 6 % of EU funding (these costs are eligible for EU support). 
Stroški poročanja pa po njihovi oceni znašajo vsaj še dodatnih 6 % financiranja EU (ti stroški so upravičeni do podpore EU).
Applied to the 15 The figure of 22 million euro represents 10 % of total grant applications awarded (199,2 million euro – see Table 1) plus 6 % of total payments made to beneficiaries in the period 2003-2006 (43,6 million euro). 
Če se to uporabi za program kot celoto, kaže, da so stroški uspešnih vložnikov 15 Znesek 22 milijonov EUR predstavlja 10% vseh vlog za donacijo, ki so jim bila odobrena sredstva (199,2 milijona EUR – glej tabelo 1) plus 6% vseh plačil upravičencem v obdobju 2003–2006 (43,6 milijona EUR).
However, proposal costs will have also been incurred for unsuccessful proposals, and reporting costs will eventually relate to the whole amount paid to projects (likely to be close to 200 million euro). 
Vendar so stroški nastali tudi pri pripravi neuspešnih predlogov, stroški poročanja pa se bodo nazadnje nanašali na celotni znesek, izplačan za projekte (ki bo verjetno blizu 200 milijonov EUR).
Figures 1 and 2 present the applicants’ estimates of the cost of making a proposal as a percentage of the funding requested. 
V diagramih 1 in 2 so predstavljene ocene vložnikov o stroških priprave predloga v odstotkih sredstev, za katera so zaprosili.
Figure 3 presents applicants’ estimates of the cost of reporting as a percentage of funding16. 
V diagramu 3 so prikazane ocene vložnikov o stroških poročanja v odstotkih financiranja16.
More than half of participants thought the time required to fill in an application was fair, but this figure fell to 40 % for project coordinators. 
Več kot polovica sodelujočih je menila, da je bil čas, potreben za izpolnitev vloge, ustrezen, pri koordinatorjih projekta pa je ta ocena padla na 40 %.
Similar concerns over the cost of preparing a proposal, and of negotiating with the Commission were reflected in the findings of the mid-term evaluation: “the contract negotiation process was highlighted as taking up more and more time, with the applicant having to supply a large number of documents. 
Podobna zaskrbljenost zaradi stroškov priprave predloga in pogajanj s Komisijo se je odražala v ugotovitvah vmesnega vrednotenja: poudarjeno je bilo, da je proces pogajanja o pogodbi čedalje daljši, pri čemer mora vložnik predložiti številne dokumente.