natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
26 EIF working paper 2016/34 (Helmut Kraemer-Eis, Simone Signore, Dario Prencipe), “The impact of EIF on the Venture Capital ecosystem”, Volume I of The European venture capital landscape: an EIF perspective, 2016. 
2016/34 (Helmut Kraemer-Eis, Simone Signore, Dario Prencipe), The impact of EIF on the Venture Capital ecosystem, zvezek I, The European venture capital landscape: an EIF perspective, 2016.
Table 2 – Indicators for the EFG and IFE 23 Instrument Indicators Target EFG Number of venture capital inves tments 360 - 450 Overall volume invested from €2.6 billion to €3.6 billion Leverage ratio 4-6 Additionality of the EFG Increase in the proportion of final beneficiaries that consider the EFG or the LGF to provide funding that could not have been obtained by other means compared to baseline IFE Total investments mobilised via venture capital investments €25 billion together for VC and debt financing Number of organisations funded 5 000 organisations funded via VC and debt Amount of private funds leveraged €35 billion of private funds leveraged (VC and debt) Company turnover and number of employees To be developed Source: ECA based on legislation and Commission documents. 
Tabela 2 – Kazalniki za kapitalsko shemo za rast in instrument IFE 23 Instrument Kazalniki Cilj Kapitalska shema za rast Število naložb tveganega kapitala 360–450 Skupni obseg naložb od 2,6 milijarde EUR do 3,6 milijarde EUR Količnik finančnega vzvoda 4–6 Dodatnost kapitalske sheme za rast povečanje deleža končnih upravičencev, ki obravnavajo kapitalsko shemo za rast ali jamstveno shemo za posojila za pridobivanje sredstev, ki jih ne bi mogli pridobiti drugače, glede na izhodiščno situacijo IFE Skupne naložbe, privabljene prek naložb tveganega kapitala skupno 25 milijard EUR za tvegani kapital in dolžniško financiranje Število financiranih organizacij 5 000 organizacij, ki so prejele financiranje prek tveganega kapitala ali dolžniško financiranje Znesek privabljenih zasebnih sredstev 35 milijard EUR privabljenih zasebnih sredstev (tvegani kapital in dolg) Promet in število zaposlenih podjetja v pripravi Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče na podlagi zakonodaje in dokumentov Komisije 46 Vmesno vrednotenje EFSI vsebuje priporočilo, da je treba s pomočjo hipotetičnih scenarijev pojasniti učinek pobude na finančni trg, zlasti na nedelovanje trga in morebitno izrivanje.
The interim evaluation recognised the EIB Group’s current efforts in testing such approaches for EFSI products, particularly in setting up the necessary data infrastructure27. 
V vmesnem vrednotenju so potrjena sedanja prizadevanja skupine EIB v zvezi s preizkušanjem teh pristopov za produkte EFSI, zlasti v zvezi z vzpostavljanjem potrebne podatkovne infrastrukture27.
The Commission lacked a comprehensive investment strategy 47 Improving access to finance for businesses through a pan-European venture capital market requires a coherent and comprehensive policy and investment strategy which, inter alia, aims to support less developed markets, decrease dependence on the public sector and simplify interventions. 
Komisija ni vzpostavila celovite naložbene strategije 47 Za izboljšanje dostopa podjetij do financiranja prek vseevropskega trga tveganega kapitala sta potrebni skladna in celovita politika ter naložbena strategija, katere cilji so med drugim podpora manj razvitim trgom, zmanjšanje odvisnosti od javnega sektorja in poenostavitev intervencij.
27 European Commission, “Independent Evaluation of the EFSI Regulation. 
27 Evropska komisija, Independent Evaluation of the EFSI Regulation.
Final Report”, June 2018, p. 
Final Report, junij 2018, str.
Demand-driven approach does not favour the development of less developed venture capital markets or sectors 48 To assess the Commission’s investment strategy, we analysed the current state of play in terms of the countries where the EU-backed venture capital funds and beneficiary companies were domiciled, development stages and sectors of activity. 
S pristopom, ki temelji na povpraševanju, se ne daje prednost razvoju manj razvitih trgov tveganega kapitala ali s tem povezanih sektorjev 48 Za oceno naložbene strategije Komisije je Sodišče analiziralo sedanje stanje v državah, v katerih imajo sedež skladi tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, in upravičena podjetja, ter razvojne faze in sektorje dejavnosti.
Underdeveloped venture capital markets benefited little from the EU's centrally managed interventions 49 Since the Commission began its venture capital activity in 1998, its funding allocation has been on the basis of projects’ merit and has not been driven by geographic location of venture capital funds or the investment sector. 
Slabo razviti trgi tveganega kapitala so imeli malo koristi od centralno upravljanih intervencij EU 49 Komisija je od leta 1998, ko je začela izvajati svojo dejavnost na področju tveganega kapitala, dodeljevala sredstva na podlagi kakovosti projektov, ne pa geografskega položaja skladov tveganega kapitala ali sektorja naložb.
50 In the absence of a strategy ensuring that adequate investment is channelled to underdeveloped markets, they may receive less support. 
50 Ker ni bila vzpostavljena strategija, ki bi zagotovila usmerjanje ustreznih naložb v slabo razvite trge, lahko ti prejmejo manj podpore.
This risk is confirmed by the Commission’s ex ante evaluations/impact assessments on its interventions in the 2014-2020 period (IFE and EFG), which pointed to a high concentration of venture capital investments in certain Member States. 
To tveganje so potrdila tudi predhodna vrednotenja / ocene učinkov, ki jih je v zvezi s svojimi intervencijami v obdobju 2014–2020 (instrument IFE in kapitalska shema za rast) izvedla Komisija in ki so pokazala, da so naložbe tveganega kapitala močno skoncentrirane v nekaterih državah članicah.
51 We found that, at the end of June 2018, the two Member States with the highest registration of EU-backed venture capital funds were France and Italy, with 20 % and 14 % of the total number of funds respectively. 
51 Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je bilo konec junija 2018 največ registriranih skladov tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, v Franciji (20 % vseh skladov skupaj) in Italiji (14 % vseh skladov skupaj).
These countries were followed by Luxembourg, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany and Finland. 
Tema državama so sledili Luksemburg, Združeno kraljestvo, Nizozemska, Nemčija in Finska.
No EU-backed venture capital funds have invested in funds registered in 12 Member States (see Figure 5). 
Skladi tveganega kapitala, ki jih ne podpira EU, so vlagali v sklade, registrirane v 12 državah članicah (glej sliko 5).
52 One of the factors that fund managers take into consideration when deciding where to register a venture capital fund is the applicable regulatory regime. 
52 Upravitelji skladov pri odločanju o kraju registracije sklada tveganega kapitala med drugim upoštevajo tudi veljavno regulativno ureditev.
According to a survey28 carried out by the EIF, “the fund managers called for supporting pan-European funds, more cross-border investments, and a harmonisation of legal frameworks and tax systems”. 
Po podatkih ankete28 Evropskega investicijskega sklada se upravitelji skladov zavzemajo za vseevropske sklade, povečanje čezmejnih naložb ter uskladitev pravnih okvirov in davčnih sistemov.
28 EIF Working Paper 2018/48, “EIF VC Survey 2018 – Fund managers' market sentiment and views on public intervention”, April 2018. 
2018/48, EIF VC Survey 2018 – Fund managers' market sentiment and views on public intervention, april 2018.
24 Figure 5 – EU-backed venture capital funds per country of registration as at 30 June 2018 25 Source: ECA based on EIF data. 
Slika 5 – Skladi tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, po državah, v katerih so registrirani, na dan 30. junija 2018 25 Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče na podlagi podatkov Evropskega investicijska sklada 53 Skladi tveganega kapitala vlagajo bodisi le v podjetja v državi, v kateri so registrirani, bodisi v podjetja v več državah.
As at 30 June 2018, 42 % of the EU-backed venture capital funds had a multi-country focus. 
Na dan 30. junija 2018 je bilo 42 % skladov tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, osredotočenih na več držav.
54 In terms of the amounts EU-backed venture capital funds had invested in companies, Figure 6 shows that the Member States which were attractive to venture capital29 benefited the most from the EU interventions. 
54 V zvezi z zneski, ki so jih skladi tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, vložili v podjetja, je na sliki 6 prikazano, da so imele največje koristi od intervencij EU tiste države članice, ki so najprivlačnejše za tvegani kapital29.
France, Germany and the United Kingdom stand out since they account for 50 % of these investments. 
Med njimi izstopajo Francija, Nemčija in Združeno kraljestvo, ki zajemajo 50 % teh naložb.
Since these Member States are the largest EU economies, concentrating on them does not help foster a European venture capital market. 
Ker so to države članice z največjimi gospodarstvi v EU, osredotočenje nanje ne prispeva k spodbujanju evropskega trga tveganega kapitala.
29 Venture Capital & Private Equity Country Attractiveness Index (https://blog.iese.edu/vcpeindex/). 
55 Do sredine leta 2018 noben od centralno upravljanih skladov tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, ni vlagal v podjetja na Cipru, Malti, v Sloveniji in na Slovaškem, obseg 29 Indeks privlačnosti držav za tvegani kapital in zasebni kapital (https://blog.iese.edu/vcpeindex/).
55 As at mid-2018, none of the centrally managed EU-backed venture capital funds had invested in Cyprus, Malta, Slovenia or Slovakia, and only limited investments (totalling €29 million) had been made in Bulgaria, the Czechia, Hungary, Poland or Romania. 
naložb v Bolgariji, na Češkem, Madžarskem, Poljskem in v Romuniji pa je bil omejen (skupaj 29 milijonov EUR).
Figure 6 – Investments in companies by EU-backed venture capital funds as at 30 June 2018 26 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 ESU 2001 200 100 0 IFE/EFSI SMEW equity product SW 2 GIF ESU 1998 EFSI SMEW equity product SW 1 EFG Source: ECA based on EIF data. 56 Our data analysis suggests that allocating assistance on the basis of demand favours the most developed venture capital markets. 
Slika 6 – Naložbe skladov tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, v podjetja na dan 30. junija 2018 26 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 IFE/poddel 2 produkta lastniškega kapitala dela za MSP v okviru EFSI GIF ESU 2001 ESU 1998 Poddel 1 produkta lastniškega kapitala dela za MSP v okviru EFSI Kapitalska shema za rast Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče na podlagi podatkov Evropskega investicijska sklada 56 Analiza podatkov, ki jo je pripravilo Sodišče, je pokazala, da dodeljevanje pomoči na podlagi povpraševanja bolj koristi najbolj razvitim trgom tveganega kapitala.
This does not contribute fully towards the EU’s stated aim of fostering a pan-European venture capital market as well as to some of the priorities mentioned in the delegation agreements. 
To ne prispeva v celoti k uresničevanju cilja, ki ga ja navedla EU, in sicer da se podpira vseevropski trg tveganega kapitala, in k nekaterim prioritetam, navedenih v sporazumih o prenosu pooblastil.
For example, for the three most recent equity instruments (i.e. EFG, IFE, EFSI) the legal base always makes reference to supporting the development of EU level venture capital. 
Za tri najnovejše lastniške instrumente (tj. kapitalsko shemo za rast, instrument IFE in EFSI) je na primer v pravni podlagi vedno navedeno, da se z njimi podpira tvegani kapital na ravni EU.
In addition, Article 2 of the GIF’s mandate agreement states that one objective of the facility is to reduce the equity and risk capital market gap with a view to improving the EU venture capital market. 
Poleg tega je v členu 2 sporazuma o mandatu za instrument GIF navedeno, da je eden od ciljev instrumenta zmanjšati tržno vrzel lastniškega in tveganega kapitala ter tako izboljšati trg tveganega kapitala v EU.
Several evaluations of the EU interventions carried out by or on behalf of the Commission have criticised the demand-driven approach and recommended that it give way to a more proactive approach. 
V številnih vrednotenjih intervencij EU, ki jih je izvedla ali naročila Komisija, je pristop, ki temelji na povpraševanju, negativno ocenjen in priporočeno je, naj se nadomesti s proaktivnejšim pristopom.
57 For instance, the 2018 impact assessment for the successor programme InvestEU (2021-2027 period) recommends balancing the demand-driven approach at the level of individual operations by more rigorously verifying compliance with policy objectives. 
57 Ocena učinka iz leta 2018 za program InvestEU (za obdobje 2021–2027), ki bo nadomestil sedanjega, na primer vsebuje priporočilo, naj se pristop, ki temelji na povpraševanju, na stopnji posameznih operacij uravnovesi s strožjim preverjanjem skladnosti s cilji politike.
The Commission has not specified how this balance would be achieved in practice or how it would affect the demand-driven approach. 
Komisija ni natančno navedla, kako to ravnovesje zagotoviti v praksi ali kako bi to vplivalo na pristop, ki temelji na povpraševanju.
France Germany UK Italy Netherlands Spain F in la nd Sweden Belgium Ireland Den mark P o r t u g al Greece Austria Lux embo urg Estonia Latvia Czechia Po la nd Romania Lithuania Bulgaria United States Switzerland Norway Other countries million euro as of 30/06/2018 
Nemčija Združeno kraljestvo Italija N i zo ze m s ka Španija Finska Švedska Belgija Irska Danska Po rtugalska Grčija Avstrija Luksemburg Estonija Latvija Češka Po ljska Romunija Litva Bolgarija Združene države Amerike Švica Norveška Drugedržave F r an c i ja v milijonih EUR na dan 30. 6. 2018
Funding needs were not quantified by development stage or sector of activity 58 Over the 20 years in which the Commission has been supporting venture capital funds through its various centrally managed interventions, it has invested in SMEs at different development stages. 
Potrebe po financiranju niso bile količinsko opredeljene v posameznih razvojnih fazah ali sektorjih dejavnosti 58 Komisija je v 20 letih, odkar zagotavlja podporo za sklade tveganega kapitala prek različnih centralno upravljanih intervencij, vlagala v MSP v različnih razvojnih fazah.
Figure 7 shows how much of the €4.6 billion invested by the EU-backed venture capital funds in this period was used at each company development stage. 
Na sliki 7 je ponazorjeno, koliko od 4,6 milijarde EUR, ki so jih vložili skladi tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, se je v tem obdobju porabilo v posameznih razvojnih fazah podjetij.
Figure 7 – Investments of the EU-backed venture capital funds per SME development stage Source: ECA based on EIF data. 59 Early stages (i.e. seed and start-up) represent 56 % of the total investment. 
Slika 7 – Naložbe skladov tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, po razvojnih fazah MSP Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče na podlagi podatkov Evropskega investicijska sklada 59 Zgodnji fazi (semenska in zagonska faza) predstavljata 56 % skupnih naložb.
Typically, venture capital funds invest in more companies in an early growth stage rather than in the later stages. 
Skladi tveganega kapitala običajno vlagajo v več podjetij v zgodnji fazi rasti in ne v poznejših fazah.
Nonetheless, the average amounts invested per SME are lower in the early stages. 
Vendar so povprečni zneski naložb na MSP v zgodnjih fazah nižji.
The EU-backed venture capital funds have invested, on average, €1.36 and €2.56 million per SME in the seed and start-up stages respectively, while the average investment in the growth and buy-out stages30 per SME were €4.82 and €7.16 million respectively. 
Skladi tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, so v povprečju vložili 1,36 milijona EUR na MSP v semenski in 2,56 milijona EUR na MSP v zagonski fazi, medtem ko je povprečje naložb na MSP v fazi rasti znašalo 4,82 milijona EUR in v fazi odkupa 7,16 milijona EUR30.
30 Investment stage classification used by the EIF on purchasing the majority or controlling stake of an company, typically in an advanced development stage, such as the growth or scale up stage. 27 Buy-out 12 % Seed 11 % Growth 32 % Start-up 45 % 
30 27 Faza odkupa 12 % Semenska faza 11 % Faza rasti 32 % Zagonska faza 45 % Razvrstitev po fazah naložb, ki jo Evropski investicijski sklad uporablja za nakup večinskega ali nadzornega deleža družbe, običajno v pozni razvojni fazi, kot sta faza rasti ali razširitvena faza.
60 In our survey, 68 % of the venture capital fund managers who responded considered that public participation in venture capital was most needed for investments in the seed and start-up stages. 
60 68 % upraviteljev skladov tveganega kapitala, ki so sodelovali v anketi Sodišča, je menilo, da je javna udeležba v tveganem kapitalu najbolj potrebna za naložbe v semenski in zagonski fazi.
61 As far as the sectoral distribution is concerned, companies operating in computer and consumer electronics and the life sciences sectors represent more than 50 % of the total investments made by the EU-backed venture capital funds (see Figure 8). 
61 V zvezi s sektorsko razporeditvijo se je izkazalo, da se več kot 50 % skupnih naložb skladov tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, nameni za podjetja, ki delujejo na področju računalniške in potrošniške elektronike ter bioloških znanosti (glej sliko 8).
Figure 8 – Investments of the EU-backed venture capital funds per sector Source: ECA based on EIF data. 62 Although the EU has invested in different development stages and sectors of activity, the allocation of funds was not based on a thorough analysis of supply and demand on the European venture capital market. 
Slika 8 – Naložbe skladov tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU, po sektorjih Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče na podlagi podatkov Evropskega investicijska sklada 62 Čeprav je EU vlagala v različne razvojne faze in sektorje dejavnosti, dodeljevanje sredstev ni temeljilo na izčrpni analizi ponudbe in povpraševanja na evropskem trgu tveganega kapitala.
The Commission’s ex ante evaluations lacked data on the funding gap for the different development stages or sectors of activity (see paragraph 36). 
V predhodnih vrednotenjih Komisije ni bilo podatkov o vrzeli v financiranju v različnih razvojnih fazah ali sektorjih dejavnosti (glej odstavek 36).
63 We note that in its impact assessment for InvestEU (period 2021-2027), the Commission suggested that equity instruments could be targeted “on a sectoral basis 28 Consumer goods and retail 7% Computer and consumer electronics 33 % Other sectors 9 % Energy and environment 10 % Communications 10 % Business and industrial products 13 % Life sciences 19 % [...] and a company life cycle basis (on the basis of a funding gap analysis)”31. 
63 Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je Komisija v svoji oceni učinka za program InvestEU (obdobje 2021–2027) predlagala, da bi lahko lastniške instrumente usmerjali na podlagi sektorja in življenjskega ciklusa podjetja (na podlagi analize vrzeli v 28 Potrošniško blago in prodaja na drobno 7% Računalniška in potrošniška elektronika 33 % Drugi sektorji 9 % Energija in okolje 10 % Komunikacije 10 % Poslovni in industrijski izdelki 13 % Biološke znanosti 19 %
The assessment makes no mention of targeting or analysis by Member State. 
V oceni ni omenjeno ciljno usmerjanje ali analiziranje po državah članicah.
The EU venture capital market is not attractive enough to private investors 64 EU-backed interventions should address market failures or, more specifically, those which – to observe the subsidiarity principle and achieve added value – Member States cannot address themselves32. 
Trg tveganega kapitala EU ni dovolj privlačen za zasebne vlagatelje 64 Z intervencijami, ki jih podpira EU, je treba obravnavati nedelovanje trga ali natančneje tiste primere nedelovanja trga, ki jih države članice ne morejo obravnavati same, da se spoštuje načelo subsidiarnosti in zagotovi dodana vrednost32.
The ultimate objective of public intervention is to attract private investors in order to develop a sustainable venture capital market. 
Končni cilj javne intervencije je privabiti zasebne vlagatelje, da se razvije trajnostni trg tveganega kapitala.
We examined whether the Commission managed to encourage other public and private investors to provide funds alongside the EU. 
Sodišče je preučilo, ali je bila Komisija uspešna pri spodbujanju drugih javnih in zasebnih vlagateljev k vlaganju sredstev poleg EU.
The 2013 ex ante evaluation of IFE highlighted low returns as one of the main reasons for private investors’ mute interest in venture capital. 
V predhodnem vrednotenju instrumenta IFE iz leta 2013 je nizka donosnost poudarjena kot eden glavnih razlogov za zadržano zanimanje zasebnih vlagateljev za tvegani kapital.
“Apart from the dot.com bubble period from 1997-2000, the average annual return to European venture capital funds has been below 10 %, and for the past ten years or so, negative, with not even the performance of the best-managed funds high enough to deliver the returns sought by institutional investors”33. 
Razen v obdobju internetnega balona 1997–2000 je bila povprečna letna donosnost evropskih skladov tveganega kapitala nižja od 10 %, v zadnjih približno desetih letih pa je bila negativna, tako da niti najbolje upravljani skladi niso bili dovolj uspešni, da bi zagotovili donosnost, ki so jo pričakovali institucionalni vlagatelji33.
65 In order for the EU's intervention to be consistent with state aid rules, the Commission set minimum targets for the share of private investors in the EU-backed venture capital funds. 
65 Da bi bile intervencije EU skladne s pravili o državni pomoči, je Komisija določila minimalne cilje za delež zasebnih vlagateljev v skladih tveganega kapitala, ki jih podpira EU.
These targets were fixed at 50 % for the early instruments such as ESU 1998 and ESU 2001, but were then dropped to 30 % by the 2014-2020 interventions. 
Ti cilji so bili določeni na 50 % v zgodnjih instrumentih, kot sta bila programa ESU 1998 in ESU 2001, nato pa so se za intervencije v obdobju 2014–2020 znižali na 30 %.
This is even more important since the Commission considers own-risk investments by the EIF/EIB and by promotional banks as independent and private. 
To je še toliko bolj pomembno, saj Komisija šteje, da so naložbe z lastnim tveganjem Evropskega investicijskega sklada / EIB in spodbujevalnih bank neodvisne in zasebne.
Otherwise, the Commission did not set any targets for private sector participation. 
Drugače pa Komisija ni določila nobenih ciljev za udeležbo zasebnega sektorja.
66 The Commission did not set attaining high returns as an objective for its interventions, nor did it ask the EIF to make a profit with EU funds. 
66 Komisija med cilje svojih intervencij ni uvrstila dosege visoke donosnosti niti ni od Evropskega investicijskega sklada zahtevala, da mora s sredstvi EU ustvariti dobiček.
However, the EIF is required by the legislation and the delegation agreements to apply the pari passu principle, according to which public and private investors participate on an equal 31 Commission Staff Working Document, Impact Assessment, SWD(2018) 314 final of 6.6.2018. 
Vendar mora Evropski investicijski sklad v skladu z zakonodajo in sporazumi o prenosu pooblastil uporabljati načelo pari passu, ki določa, da javni in zasebni vlagatelji enakovredno prispevajo v sklade tveganega kapitala ter delijo enake dobičke in izgube. 31 32 33 29 Delovni dokument služb Komisije, Impact Assessment, SWD(2018) 314 final, 6.6.2018.
32 Article 209 of the Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 
Člen 209 Uredbe (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 18. julija 2018 o finančnih pravilih, ki se uporabljajo za splošni proračun Unije (UL L 193, 30.7.2018, str.
33 Commission ex ante evaluation, “Financial instrument facilities supporting access to risk finance for research and innovation in Horizon 2020”, 2013. 
Predhodno vrednotenje Komisije, Financial instrument facilities supporting access to risk finance for research and innovation in Horizon 2020, 2013.