natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
A Commission evaluation in 2004 of ÔEC interventions in the transport sector in third countriesŐ found that no EIA had been carried out for four of the fifteen projects evaluated. 
Komisija je leta 2004 z oceno „Pomoči ES v transportnem sektorju v tretjih državah“ ugotovila, da presoja vplivov na okolje ni bila izvedena za štiri od petnajstih ocenjenih projektov.
Even where more substantial EIAs had been completed, their focus was generally on the direct impact of the road project itself on the environment rather than the impact on the environment of the new economic activities brought about by the improved access. 
Tudi ko so bile izvedene obsežnejše presoje vplivov na okolje, so se te na splošno bolj osredotočile na neposreden vpliv cestnega projekta samega na okolje, kot na vpliv, ki so ga na okolje imele nove gospodarske dejavnosti, ki jih je omogočil izboljšan dostop.
This weakness is especially important for roads crossing sensitive areas such as tropical forests, where there is a direct link between the improved access and increasing deforestation and illegal hunting. 
Ta pomanjkljivost je še zlasti pomembna pri cestah, ki prečkajo občutljiva območja, kot so tropski gozdovi, kjer obstaja neposredna povezava med izboljšanim dostopom ter naraščajočim krčenjem gozdov in nezakonitim lovom.
Box 6 Environmental screening in the CommissionŐs delegation in Nicaragua The CommissionŐs Regional Delegation in Nicaragua deals with six countries and has over 140 staff. 
Okvir 6 Pregled projektov z okoljskega vidika v delegaciji Komisije v Nikaragvi Regionalna delegacija Komisije v Nikaragvi je zadolžena za šest držav in ima več kot 140 uslužbencev.
The audit found that no guidelines for environmental screening are used by the Delegation and no environmental screening leading to further detailed assessment had been carried out for projects and programmes in the 2002 to 2006 CSP. 
Z revizijo je bilo ugotovljeno, da delegacija za pregled projektov z okoljskega vidika ne uporablja nobenih smernic in da za projekte in programe iz državnih strateških dokumentov 2002–2006 ni bil opravljen noben pregled projektov z okoljskega vidika, ki bi vodil k nadaljnji natančni oceni.
Moreover, the Delegation did not have an environmental expert although such an expert could have supervised and provided support to environmental screening procedures. 
Poleg tega delegacija ni imela okoljskega strokovnjaka, čeprav bi tak strokovnjak lahko nadzoroval in podpiral preglede projektov z okoljskega vidika.
In practice, the main procedure used by the Commission for checking environmental screening is in the context of preparing project identification fiches, which are drawn up by Delegations at the beginning of the project cycle and submitted to the Europeaid Office Quality Support Group (OQSG). 
Glavni postopek, ki ga Komisija v praksi uporablja za preverjanje pregleda projektov z okoljskega vidika, je v okviru priprave opredelitev projektnih predlogov, ki jih na začetku projektnega cikla sestavijo delegacije in jih predložijo skupini za podporo kakovosti pri Uradu za sodelovanje EuropeAid.
The environment is, however, only one of a whole series of issues to be addressed by these fiches and the audit of 20 project identification fiches reviewed by the OQSG in 2005 found that environmental issues had not been adequately addressed in them: (a) although it was required to classify the project according to its environmental impact (1), in none of the 20 cases had this been done; (b) although it was required to explain how the environment was to be mainstreamed into the project design, in 16 cases this had not been done. 
Vendar je okolje samo eno izmed cele vrste vprašanj, obravnavanih v teh predlogih in pri reviziji 20 opredelitev projektnih predlogov, ki jih je leta 2005 pregledala skupina za podporo kakovosti, je bilo ugotovljeno, da okoljska vprašanja v njih niso bila ustrezno obravnavana: (a) čeprav je bilo treba projekt razvrstiti glede na njegov okoljski vpliv (1), to v nobenem od dvajsetih primerov ni bilo storjeno; (b) čeprav je bilo treba pojasniti, kako bo potekala integracija okolja v zasnovo projekta, to v šestnajstih primerih ni bilo storjeno.
(1) The three categories foreseen are: A Ń High Environmental Impact, B Ń Significant possible environmental risks and opportunities, C Ń Low Environmental Impact. 
(1) Tri predvidene kategorije so: A – Velik vpliv na okolje, B – Pomembna možna tveganja in priložnosti za okolje, C – Majhen vpliv na okolje.
29.9.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/13 Box 7 Environmental impact assessments for large infrastructure and mining projects In Tanzania, for the rehabilitation and upgrading of the Mwanza Border-Tinte and Isaka-Nzga Roads (eighth EDF, 85 million euro), what the Financing Proposal termed an EIA amounted to only one page in the feasibility study. 
29.9.2006 SL Uradni list Evropske unije C 235/13 Okvir 7 Presoja vplivov na okolje pri velikih infrastrukturnih in rudarskih projektih V Tanzaniji, pri sanaciji in nadgradnji cest Mwanza Border–Tinte in Isaka–Nzga (osmi ERS, 85 milijonov EUR), je bilo to, kar je bilo v predlogu o financiranju opredeljeno kot presoja vplivov na okolje, samo eno stran dolga študija izvedljivosti.
In Botswana, no EIA was carried out on a Sysmin project (eighth EDF, 30 million euro) which provided assistance to extend the life of the Selebi Phikwe copper/nickel mine without immediately addressing the serious risk of the collapse of tailings dam or the unacceptably high level of sulphur dioxide emissions from the smelter. 
V Bocvani presoja vplivov na okolje ni bila izvedena za projekt Sysmin (osmi ERS, 30 milijonov EUR), ki je zagotavljal pomoč za podaljšanje življenjske dobe rudnika bakra/niklja Selebi Phikwe, ne da bi takoj začel obravnavati resno tveganje za zrušitev odlagališča za jalovino oziroma visoke stopnje emisije žveplovega dioksida iz talilnice.
In Guatemala, no EIA was carried out for a project to resettle refugees (12 million euro) although resettlement projects can be considered a priori to have a potentially significant environmental impact. 
V Gvatemali ni bila izvedena presoja vplivov na okolje za projekt preselitve beguncev (12 milijonov EUR), čeprav se projekte preselitve lahko že vnaprej obravnava kot projekte z morebitnim pomembnim vplivom na okolje.
The resettlements caused significant damage to local ecosystems. 
Preselitve so lokalnim ekosistemom povzročile precejšnjo škodo.
Box 9 The follow-up of environmental impact assessments In the case of the Northern Plains Irrigation project in Mauritius (7th EDF, 9 million euro), although a detailed EIA for the replacement of a pipeline was carried out and the special conditions of the Financing Agreement provided for Ôa systematic monitoring of environmental impacts to ensure that mitigating measures proposed by the EIA are implementedŐ, no evidence of this was found. 
Okvir 9 Nadaljnje ukrepanje pri presojah vplivov na okolje V primeru projekta Namakanje severnih ravninskih predelov (Nor-thern Plains Irrigation) na Mauritiusu (sedmi ERS, 9 milijonov EUR), kljub izvedbi natančne presoje vplivov na okolje v zvezi z zamenjavo cevovoda ter posebnim pogojem sporazuma o financiranju, ki so določali „sistematično spremljanje vplivov na okolje, s katerim bi zagotovili izvajanje blažilnih ukrepov, predlaganih v presojah vplivov na okolje“, ni bilo nobenih dokazov o tem cevovodu.
In Mali, for the project ÔSupport to the Rice SectorŐ (eighth EDF, 15,4 million euro), the EIA recommended replanting trees around villages, monitoring the levels of water pollution and performing a study on recycling oil, but this was not included in the contractŐs technical specifications. 
V Maliju je za projekt Podpora sektorju za riž („Support to the Rice Sector“) (osmi ERS, 15,4 milijona EUR) presoja vplivov na okolje priporočala ponovno zasaditev dreves v okolici vasi, spremljanje ravni onesnaženosti vode ter izvedbo študije o recikliranju olja, vendar tega tehnične specifikacije v pogodbi niso vsebovale.
For the Rewa Bridge project in Fiji (seventh and eighth EDFs, 11 million euro), because of the potential impact on kai fisheries, the contract included a requirement for water quality monitoring. 
Za projekt Most Rewa (Rewa Bridge) na Fidžiju (sedmi in osmi ERS, 11 milijonov EUR) je pogodba zaradi možnega vpliva na gojišča slad-kovodnih školjk vsebovala zahtevo po spremljanju kakovosti vode.
This requirement was not met by the contractor but no penalties were stipulated in the contract for non-compliance. 
Pogodbenik te zahteve ni izpolnil, vendar v pogodbi niso bile določene sankcije za neizpolnjevanje.
Apart from large infrastructure, agricultural and mining projects, where an EIA is a necessity, there are many other kinds of projects where an EIA would be desirable or even essential. 
Razen obsežnih infrastrukturnih kmetijskih in rudarskih projektov, kjer je presoja vplivov na okolje nujnost, obstaja še veliko drugih vrst projektov, kjer bi bila presoja vplivov na okolje zaželena ali celo bistvena.
However, without clear guidelines or requirements on which projects should be subject to an EIA, there was a considerable risk that EIAs would not be carried out even when they should have been. 
Vendar je brez jasnih smernic ali zahtev, za katere projekte bi bile potrebne presoje vplivov na okolje, obstajalo precejšnje tveganje, da presoje vplivov na okolje ne bodo izvedene niti takrat, ko bi morale biti.
The Commission has no central register of ElAs carried out for development projects funded by the Commission. 
Komisija nima centralnega registra presoj vplivov na okolje, izvedenih za razvojne projekte, ki jih financira.
Such a register would also facilitate the publicŐs access to this information. 
Takšen register bi olajšal tudi dostop javnosti do teh informacij.
AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS AND FACTORS INFLUENCING EFFECTIVENESS Introduction 47. 
OCENA USPEŠNOSTI OKOLJSKIH PROJEKTOV IN DEJAVNIKI, KI VPLIVAJO NA USPEŠNOST Uvod 47.
In addition to measures to mainstream the environment into development cooperation, examined in the previous section, the Commission has also sought to address environmental issues by financing programmes and projects in the environment sector. 
Poleg ukrepov za integracijo okolja v razvojno sodelovanje, ki so bili preučeni v prejšnjem razdelku, je Komisija okoljska vprašanja skušala rešiti tudi s financiranjem programov in projektov v sektorju okolje.
Despite the fact that the sector was not a priority field in the 2000 development policy (see paragraph 9) and commitments in this area as a proportion of total aid funding has been relatively low (see Table), the Commission has remained active in this field and may become more so with the adoption of the new development policy where environment and natural resources will be a priority field (see paragraph 12). 
Kljub temu, da ta sektor ni bil prednostno področje razvojne politike iz leta 2000 (glej odstavek 9) in so bile na tem področju prevzete obveznosti glede na celotno financiranje pomoči relativno nizke (glej tabelo), ostaja Komisija na tem področju aktivna in lahko svojo aktivnost še poveča s sprejetjem nove razvojne politike, kjer bosta okolje in naravni viri prednostno področje (glej odstavek 12).
The audit sought to: (a) assess the effectiveness of environment projects funded by the Commission; (b) identify key factors influencing effectiveness. 
Revizija je skušala: (a) oceniti uspešnost okoljskih projektov, ki jih financira Komisija; (b) opredeliti ključne dejavnike, ki vplivajo na uspešnost.
Assessment of project effectiveness 48. 
Ocena uspešnosti projektov 48.
The Court examined 65 projects representing commitments of 560 million euro in 16 countries. 
Sodišče je preučilo 65 projektov, ki v 16 državah predstavljajo 560 milijonov EUR prevzetih obveznosti.
The projects were financed from the General Budget over the period 1995 to 2005 Box 8 Environmental impact assessments for other kinds of projects In the Pacific, at least four of the projects audited would have benefited from an EIA. 
Projekti so se v obdobju od 1995 do 2005 financirali iz splošnega proračuna Okvir 8 Presoje vplivov na okolje pri drugih vrstah projektov Na pacifiškem območju bi presoje vplivov na okolje koristile vsaj štirim od revidiranih projektov.
For example, for the Kiribati Seaweed Development project (seventh and ninth EDFs, 2,8 million euro), wooden posts needed to support seaweed cultivation were cut from the surrounding vegetation, including mangrove trees, which are important to marine ecosystems and coastal protection. 
Na primer, v Kiribatiju so bili za razvojni projekt gojitve alg (sedmi in deveti ERS, 2,8 milijona EUR), za oporo pri gojenju alg izsekani leseni stebri iz okoliške vegetacije, vključno z mangrovami, ki so pomembne za morske ekosisteme in varstvo obale.
In addition, protected turtles eating the seaweed plantations are killed by seaweed farmers. 
Poleg tega kmetje, ki gojijo alge, pobijajo zaščitene želve, ki se prehranjujejo z nasadi alg.
An EIA could have identified such issues prior to the project and recommended how to tackle them. 
Presoja vplivov na okolje bi taka vprašanja opredelila in priporočila rešitve pred začetkom projekta.
Insofar as EIAs had been carried out and mitigating measures identified, there was no system to ensure that these measures had been laid down in an environment management plan to be implemented during the course of the project. 
Tudi če so bile presoje vplivov na okolje izvedene in so bili opredeljeni blažilni ukrepi, pa noben sistem ni zagotavljal vključitve teh ukrepov v načrt ravnanja z okoljem, ki se izvaja v času trajanja projekta.
Nor was the inclusion of EIA recommendations, where appropriate, in the technical specifications of works contracts systematically allowed for. 
Prav tako ni bila omogočena sistematična vključitev priporočil v zvezi s presojo vplivov na okolje v tehnične specifikacije pogodb o delu, kjer bi bilo to ustrezno.
Where EIA recommendations were included in the contract, penalties were not always attached to non-compliance with the environmental stipulations in the contract. 
Kjer so bila priporočila o presoji vplivov na okolje vključena v pogodbo, na neupoštevanje okoljskih zahtev iz pogodbe niso bile vedno vezane kazni.
C 235/14 EN Official Journal of the European Union 29.9.2006 and from the seventh, eighth and ninth EDFs. 
C 235/14 SL Uradni list Evropske unije 29.9.2006 ter iz sedmega, osmega in devetega ERS.
Projects examined were of two main types: (a) 30 of the projects examined, representing approximately 15 % of the 560 million euro, were financed through specific environmental budget lines, notably the Environment and Forests budget line (see paragraphs 10 and 34). 
Preučeni sta bili dve glavni vrsti projektov: (a) 30 preučenih projektov, ki predstavljajo približno 15 % od 560 milijonov EUR, je bilo financiranih v okviru posebnih proračunskih vrstic za okolje, namreč iz proračunske vrstice okolje in gozdovi (glej odstavka 10 in 34).
Projects supported from this budget line were relatively small (typically 1,0 to 2,5 million euro) and generally implemented by NGOs following a call for project proposals from the Commission. 
Projekti, ki so bili podprti iz te proračunske vrstice, so bili relativno majhni (običajno 1,0 do 2,5 milijona EUR) in so jih potem, ko je Komisija objavila razpise za projektne predloge, večinoma izvajale nevladne organizacije.
These funds are allocated not on a country by country basis but according to what the Commission evaluates as the best proposals. (b) 34 of the projects examined, representing approximately 80 % of the 560 million euro, were financed from bilateral aid allocations made to countries by the Commission in the framework of the EDF and Asia, Latin America and Mediterranean cooperation budget lines. 
Ta sredstva se ne dodeljujejo glede na to, za katero državo gre, ampak glede na predloge, ki jih Komisija ovrednoti kot najboljše. (b) 34 preučenih projektov, ki predstavljajo približno 80 % od 560 milijonov EUR, je bilo financiranih iz sredstev, ki jih Komisija dodeli državam za dvostransko pomoč v okviru proračunskih vrstic za ERS ter azijsko, latinskoameriško in sredozemsko sodelovanje.
The size of these projects varied considerably, but on average it was in the order of 10 to 15 million euro. 
Velikost teh projektov se je precej razlikovala, v povprečju pa je bil ta razpon med 10 in 15 milijoni EUR.
In addition, one intervention examined was a budgetary support programme rather than a traditional project, a sectoral policy support programme for wastewater treatment in Mauritius (ninth EDF, 29,8 million euro). 
Poleg tega je bila ena preučena pomoč bolj program proračunske podpore kot tradicionalen projekt; to je bil program podpore sektorski politiki za ravnanje z odpadnimi vodami na Mauritiusu (de-veti ERS, 29,8 milijona EUR).
This reflects the limited use of such programmes in the environment and natural resources sector. 
To odraža omejeno uporabo takih programov v sektorju okolja in naravnih virov.
Five criteria were used for assessing the effectiveness of the projects: (a) relevance Ń whether the project objectives addressed the needs of the beneficiary countries; (b) outputs Ń whether the project had delivered the infrastructure, services and equipment specified in the project planning; (c) results Ń whether the project had produced the intended positive changes for beneficiaries; (d) impact Ń whether the project had had positive effects outside the project itself; (e) sustainability Ń whether the results achieved by the project would continue to exist after the end of Commission support. 
Za oceno uspešnosti projektov je bilo uporabljenih pet meril: (a) pomembnost – ali so cilji projekta obravnavali vse potrebe držav upravičenk; (b) učinki – ali je projekt zagotovil infrastrukturo, storitve in opremo, kot je bilo določeno pri načrtovanju projekta; (c) rezultati – ali je projekt ustvaril načrtovane pozitivne spremembe za upravičence; (d) vpliv – ali je projekt imel pozitivne učinke zunaj projekta samega; (e) trajnost – ali bodo rezultati, doseženi s projektom, še trajali po izteku Komisijine podpore.
The CourtŐs overall assessment for each of these five criteria is given in the chart below. 
Celovita ocena, ki jo je Sodišče podalo za vsako od teh petih meril, je prikazana v spodnjem diagramu.
A detailed table showing the CourtŐs assessment of each project according to these five criteria is given in Annex II and a narrative overview of project effectiveness by country is provided in Annex III. 
Podrobna tabela, v kateri je za vsak projekt prikazana ocena Sodišča v skladu s temi petimi merili, je prikazana v Prilogi II, v Prilogi III pa je opisan pregled uspešnosti projektov po državah.
Given that not all projects had been completed at the time of the audit and that definitive judgements on impact and sustainability may not be possible until well after the end of the project, the assessment is only to be considered as indicative. 
Ker v času revizije niso bili zaključeni vsi projekti in ker dokončne presoje o vplivu in trajnosti projektov do zaključka projekta ni možno podati, se ta ocena lahko šteje samo za okvirno. Diagram Revizijska ocena uspešnosti projektov
29.9.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/15 51. 
29.9.2006 SL Uradni list Evropske unije C 235/15 51.
The audit found that in virtually all cases projects were, to varying degrees, relevant to the needs of the beneficiary countries and frequently also addressed global conservation needs, particularly in relation to forest and biodiversity conservation. 
Z revizijo je bilo ugotovljeno, da so bili projekti v skoraj vseh primerih v različnem obsegu pomembni za potrebe držav upravičenk, pogosto pa so obravnavali tudi globalne potrebe po ohranitvi, zlasti v zvezi z ohranjanjem gozdov in biološke raznovrstnosti.
In the absence of comprehensive assessments of the environment it was not possible to establish whether projects funded were the most relevant to beneficiariesŐ needs. 
Ker ni bilo izčrpnih ocen okolja, ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti, ali so bili financirani projekti najpomembnejši za potrebe upravičencev.
However, the increasingly systematic use from 2005 onwards by the Commission of Country Environment Profiles (see paragraph 33), which are intended to provide a full assessment of environmental issues in each beneficiary country, should enable it to better identify the highest priority projects. 
Komisija bo od leta 2005 naprej vse bolj sistematično uporabljala državne okoljske profile (glej odstavek 33), katerih namen je zagotoviti celovito oceno okoljskih vprašanj v vsaki državi upravičenki, kar bi ji moralo omogočiti boljšo opredelitev projektov z najvišjo prednostjo.
According to the CourtŐs assessment in 63 % of projects outputs had been or were likely to be fully achieved. 
V skladu z oceno Sodišča so bili v 63 % projektov učinki v celoti doseženi ali pa je bilo verjetno, da bodo.
In 37 % of cases outputs had been partially achieved, or were likely to be partially achieved within the project timeframe. 
V 37 % primerov so bili učinki delno doseženi ali pa je bilo verjetno, da bodo v časovnem okviru projekta delno doseženi.
In 58 % of projects most of the results had been achieved, in 21 % of projects some results had been achieved and in a further 21 % of cases few results had been achieved. 
V 58 % projektov je bila dosežena večina rezultatov, v 21 % projektov je bilo doseženih nekaj rezultatov in v nadaljnjih 21 % primerov je bilo doseženih malo rezultatov.
Clearly results will generally not be met if outputs have not been produced. 
Jasno je, da dosežki na splošno ne bodo doseženi, če niso bili ustvarjeni učinki.
In 42 % of projects was the impact assessed as being, or likely to be, medium to high, while in 58 % of cases impact was assessed as low. 
V 42 % projektov je bil vpliv ocenjen kot srednji do velik, ali pa verjetno srednji do velik, medtem ko je bil v 58 % primerov vpliv ocenjen kot majhen.
While impact is always a key issue, it was particulary important issue for many environment projects examined, since they were designed as pilot or demonstration projects with a view to their then being replicated in other regions of the beneficiary country. 
Čeprav je vpliv vedno ključno vprašanje, je bilo to vprašanje pri mnogih preučenih okoljskih projektih še posebej pomembno, saj so bili zasnovani kot poskusni ali pred-stavitveni projekti, namenjeni poznejšemu izvajanju tudi v drugih regijah države upravičenke.
In 45 % of projects were the prospects for sustainability considered to be good, while in 55 % of cases they were considered to be limited. 
V 45 % projektov so izgledi za trajnost veljali za dobre, medtem ko so v 55 % primerov veljali za omejene.
Financial viability is a particularly key aspect of sustainability since, in so far as environment projects focus on conservation rather than development, they may require beneficiary countries to continue to provide financial support for conservation activities after the end of donor assistance while forgoing potential economic benefits. 
Finančna sposobnost je ključni vidik trajnosti, saj lahko v primerih, ko se okoljski projekti, ki se bolj kot na razvoj osredotočajo na ohranjanje, od držav upravičenk zahtevajo, da po izteku donatorske pomoči nadaljujejo z zagotavljanjem finančne podpore za dejavnosti oh-ranjanja, pri čemer se odrečejo morebitnim gospodarskim koristim.
The general trend that emerges from these figures is that, while projects are almost always relevant, they do not always produce all the planned outputs. 
Čeprav so projekti skoraj vedno pomembni, ti podatki kažejo na splošni trend, da ne proizvedejo vedno vseh načrtovanih učinkov.
A little more than half fully achieve the results planned and somewhat less than half have a significant impact beyond the project and are likely to be sustainable. 
Nekaj več kot polovica jih v celoti doseže načrtovane rezultate, nekaj manj kot polovica pa jih ima precejšen vpliv izven projekta in je verjetno, da bodo trajnostni.