natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In this context, it is understandable that some initial targets may have been unrealistic and therefore it was appropriate to revise them down. 
V tem okviru je razumljivo, da so bile nekatere prvotne ciljne vrednosti mogoče nerealne in zato je bilo primerno, da so se popravile navzdol.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION 32. 
ODGOVOR KOMISIJE 32.
The inclusion of additional indicators is foreseen under Regulation 1698/2005 (Article 81(2)). 
Vključitev dodatnih kazalnikov je predvidena v okviru Uredbe (ES) št. 1698/2005 (člen 81(2)).
As stated in this article, the intention is not to have an exhaustive set of additional indicators, but rather to define some additional indicators to allow monitoring and evaluation of the specificities of the Rural Development Programmes. 
Kot je navedeno v tem členu, namen ni razpolaganje z obširnim sklopom dodatnih kazalnikov, ampak opredelitev nekaj dodatnih kazalnikov, da se omogočita spremljanje in vrednotenje specifičnosti programov razvoja podeželja.
Under the shared management and subsidiarity principle, it is up to the Member States to define which indicators are relevant. 
V okviru načel deljenega upravljanja in subsidiarnosti morajo države članice določiti, kateri kazalniki so pomembni.
The indicator ‘number of holdings introducing new products or new technologies’ was not considered by Czech Authorities relevant for the measures ‘modernising agricultural holdings’ and ‘adding value to agricultural products’, since innovation-focused projects are financed under M124. 
Kazalnika „število gospodarstev, ki uvajajo nove proizvode ali nove tehnike“ češki organi niso šteli za pomembnega za ukrepa „posodabljanje kmetijskih gospodarstev“ in „dodajanje vrednosti kmetijskim proizvodom“, saj so projekti, ki se osredotočajo na inovacije, financirani v okviru M124.
This explanation was provided following DG AGRI’s letter on the Annual Progress Reports 2010 and accepted because it reflects the CZ measures’ design. 
To pojasnilo je bilo posredovano v dopisu GD AGRI o letnih poročilih o napredku za leto 2010 in sprejeto, ker kaže obliko čeških ukrepov.
See replies to paragraphs 26-27 and 31. 
Glej odgovore na odstavke 26–27 in 31.
The Commission is well aware about the discrepancies in indicator definition, and in the new monitoring and evaluation framework it has paid a lot of attention to the proper definition of the indicators. 
Komisija se zaveda neskladij pri opredeljevanju kazalnikov in je v novem okviru spremljanja in vrednotenja posvetila veliko pozornosti primerni opredelitvi kazalnikov.
Establishing quantified targets for Rural Development was a new exercise, and was a learning experience for both Managing Authorities and the Commission. 
Uvedba količinsko opredeljenih ciljnih vrednosti za razvoj podeželja je bila nova naloga, ki je bila za organe za upravljanje in Komisijo poučna izkušnja.
Monitoring and evaluation systems are designed to provide information at 3 levels: output, result and impact. 
Sistemi spremljanja in vrednotenja so oblikovani za posredovanje informacij na treh ravneh: izložek, rezultat in vpliv.
All three levels of performance indicators are needed to be able to assess the policy on both short and long term. 
Vse tri ravni kazalnikov uspešnosti so potrebne tako za kratkoročno kot dolgoročno oceno politike.
The information on results is an integral part of the system. 
Informacije o rezultatih so sestavni del sistema.
Special Report No 12/2013 – Can the Commission and Member States show that the EU budget allocated to the rural development policy is well spent? 49 Common reply to paragraphs 37, 38 and 39 In the 2007 programming period, the CMEF was a new feature. 
12/2013 – Ali lahko Komisija in države članice dokažejo, da so bila proračunska sredstva EU, dodeljena za politiko razvoja podeželja, dobro porabljena? 49 Skupni odgovor na odstavke 37, 38 in 39 Za programsko obdobje 2007 je bil skupni okvir spremljanja in vrednotenja nova značilnost.
In addition, the Commission services have and will continue (by working documents, Questions & Answers...) to provide further guidance to the Member States through different fora available (Rural Development Committee, Evaluation Expert Network and European Network for Rural Development). 
Poleg tega službe Komisije so in bodo še naprej (prek delovnih dokumentov, vprašanj in odgo-vorov...) zagotavljale dodatne napotke državam članicam prek različnih forumov, ki so na voljo (Odbor za razvoj podeželja, strokovna mreža za vrednotenje, Evropska mreža za razvoj podeželja).
However, according to the subsidiarity principle, some flexibility is left to the Managing Authorities in establishing their system. 
Vendar pa glede na načelo subsidiarnosti organom za upravljanje še ostaja nekaj prilagodljivosti pri vzpostavitvi njihovega sistema.
For the new programming period, from the onset the data needs for monitoring and evaluation were taken into account, balancing data needs and the reduction of administrative burden, preferring a system that where possible builds on existing data sources. 
Za novo programsko obdobje so se od začetka upoštevale podatkovne potrebe za spremljanje in vrednotenje, pri čemer se je oblikovalo ravnovesje med podatkovnimi potrebami in zmanjšanjem upravnega bremena, prednost pa je imel sistem, ki bi temeljil na obstoječih podatkovnih virih, kjer bi to bilo možno.
But Leader is part of the CMEF. 
Toda Leader je del skupnega okvira spremljanja in vrednotenja.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION The CMEF constitutes a significant improvement compared to the monitoring and evaluation of previous programming periods. 
ODGOVOR KOMISIJE Skupni okvir spremljanja in vrednotenja predstavlja znatno izboljšanje v primerjavi s spremljanjem in vrednotenjem prejšnjih programskih obdobij.
Nevertheless, the early years of its implementation have been a ‘learning by doing’ exercise for both the Commission and the Member States. 
Kljub temu so se Komisija in države članice v prvih letih njegovega izvajanja „učile prek delovanja“.
Box 1 While the differences pointed at by the Court might indeed not be fully explained by differences in measures, they may also be explained by the differences in the starting point for each Member State. 
Okvir 1 Čeprav razlike, ki jih izpostavlja Sodišče, morda res niso v celoti pojasnjene prek razlik v ukrepih, pa se lahko pojasnijo tudi prek razlik v izhodišču za vsako državo članico.
It is common use in Rural Development policy to consider that a ‘new product or technique’ meant one that was new to the region. 
V politiki razvoja podeželja je običajno, da se „nov proizvod ali nova tehnika“ razume kot proizvod ali tehnika, ki je bila nova v regiji.
The Commission works closely with the Member States to improve consistency as far as possible. 
Komisija tesno sodeluje z državami članicami, da bi se doslednost čim bolj izboljšala.
In some cases, depending on the measures and schemes implemented, the correct figures may be the same, but in most cases the data will differ. 
V nekaterih primerih, odvisno od izvajanih ukrepov in shem, so pravilne številke lahko iste, toda v večini primerov se bodo podatki razlikovali.
The mid-term evaluation did provide a good overview of the implementation of Rural Development Programmes. 
Vmesno vrednotenje je zagotavljalo dober pregled nad izvajanjem programov razvoja podeželja.
However, for multi-annual programmes such as the Rural Development Programmes, certain results, such as Gross Value Added and impacts can only be properly assessed well into the programming period, and afterwards. 
Vendar pa se lahko določeni rezultati, kot je bruto dodana vrednost, in vplivi za večletne programe, kot so programi razvoja podeželja, ustrezno ocenijo le, ko že preteče nekaj časa programskega obdobja in pa pozneje.
Such effects can only be measured after sufficient time since implementation has passed; for most interventions, this was not yet the case at the moment of the mid-term evaluation. 
Takšni učinki se lahko izmerijo le, ko od izvajanja preteče dovolj časa, za večino intervencij pa ob vmesnem vrednotenju ta pogoj še ni bil izpolnjen.
For example, measures under Axis 3 and Axis 4 take more time to implement and, as a consequence, for results and impacts to be visible. 
Na primer, za izvajanje ukrepov v okviru osi 3 in osi 4 je potrebnega več časa in posledično traja dlje, da rezultati in vplivi postanejo vidni.
Consequently, certain results and impacts of the programmes could not yet be measured, unlike the expenditure or outputs. 
Posledično se določeni rezultati in vplivi programov, za razliko od odhodkov ali izložkov, še niso mogli izmeriti.
The use of information from a limited number of cases to support conclusions for the whole measure or programme can be methodologically sound if correctly applied, it depends on the representativeness of the sample. 
Uporaba informacij iz omejenega števila primerov za podporo zaključkov za celoten ukrep ali program je lahko metodološko dobra, če je pravilno izvedena, kar je odvisno od reprezentativnosti vzorca.
See also reply to paragraph 56. 
Glej tudi odgovor na odstavek 56.
See reply to paragraph 43. 
Glej odgovor na odstavek 43.
For many programmes, the Mid-Term evaluations came too early to assess efficiency. 
Za mnogo programov so bila vmesna vrednotenja prezgo-dnja, da bi lahko ocenila učinkovitost.
This can only be done once the results/impacts of the programmes are visible. 
Ocene se lahko opravijo le, ko so rezultati/vplivi programov že vidni.
The Commission continues to encourage Member States to improve the quality and consistency of evaluations and provides methodological support. 
Komisija še naprej spodbuja države članice, naj izboljšajo kakovost in doslednost vrednotenj, in zagotavlja metodološko podporo.
Moreover, since most evaluators at this stage in the programme lifecycle focused on (implementation of) individual measures, it was too early to draw lessons on a more general level regarding the attainment of overall objectives at EU level. 
Ker se je poleg tega večina izvajalcev vrednotenja na tej stopnji obstoja programa osredotočila na posamezne ukrepe oz. njihovo izvajanje, je bilo prezgodaj, da bi se iz tega lahko kaj naučili na bolj splošni ravni v zvezi z doseganjem splošnih ciljev na ravni EU.
As stated, the CMEF was introduced for the first time for 2007-2013 programming period and the first years were a ‘learning by doing’ experience. 
Kot je navedeno, je bil skupni okvir spremljanja in vrednotenja prvič predstavljen za programsko obdobje 2007–2013, prvaletapajezaznamovalaizkušnja„učenjaprekdelovanja“.
The 3 reports referred to and submitted in July 2012 in accordance with the Regulation, had not been accepted by April 2013 because they required further corrections. 
Tri omenjena poročila, predložena julija leta 2012 v skladu z Uredbo, niso bila sprejeta do aprila 2013, saj so potrebovala dodatne popravke.
Nevertheless 89 of the 92 reports submitted for the year 2011 had been accepted. 
Sprejetih pa je bilo 89 od 92 poročil, predloženih za leto 2011.
In these Annual Progress Reports 2011, the set of output indicators was close to be complete. 
V teh letnih poročilih o napredku za leto 2011 je bil sklop kazalnikov izložkov skoraj dokončan.
For some of the indicators shown in Annex, although initially it was foreseen their values would be submitted every year as part of the monitoring data included in the Annual Progress Reports (APRs), it has been recognised that they require evaluators’ input in order to be calculated and/or a certain time to elapse before they can be measured. 
Za nekatere od kazalnikov, prikazanih v Prilogi, je bilo ugotovljeno, da je za njihovo oceno potreben vložek izvajalca vrednotenja in/ali da mine določena količina časa, preden se lahko izmerijo, se je pa na začetku predvidevalo, da bi se njihove vrednosti predložile vsako leto kot del podatkov o spremljanju, vključenih v letna poročila o napredku.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION 48. 
ODGOVOR KOMISIJE 48.
In a system of shared management, every partner has to assume their own responsibilities. 
V sistemu deljenega upravljanja mora vsak družbenik prevzeti lastno odgovornost.
Anomalies in the monitoring data and in Annual Progress Reports have been systematically discussed with Member States. 
O nepravilnostih pri podatkih o spremljanju in letnih poročilih o napredku je potekala sistematična razprava z državami članicami.
The Commission has requested the HU authorities to reintroduce the initial wording. 
Komisija je madžarske organe zaprosila, naj ponovno predstavijo prvotno različico.
For the new programming period, the Commission services and Member States have collaborated to define ex-ante the data definition and data sources. 
Za novo programsko obdobje so službe Komisije in države članice sodelovale pri predhodni določitvi opredelitve podatkov in virov podatkov.
As a complement to the information provided in Table 3, the Commission also publishes the evaluations carried out on its behalf with a quality assessment by the steering group. 
Kot dopolnilo k informacijam, posredovanim v tabeli 3, Komisija objavlja tudi vrednotenja, izvedena v njenem imenu, skupaj z oceno kakovosti usmerjevalne skupine.
The Quality judgement of the synthesis of the Mid-Term Evaluations, published by the Commission on the Europa website, states clearly ‘As the Mid-Term Evaluations reports used as source data are often of variable quality and detail as regards their information on particular topics, this fact is necessarily also reflected in the synthesis of the findings and can be a limiting factor to the overall quality of the findings’ (http://ec.europa. eu/agriculture/evaluation/rural-development-reports/ synthesis-mte-2007-2013_en.htm). 
Presoja kakovosti povzetka vmesnih vrednotenj, ki jo je Komisija objavila na spletni strani Europa, jasno navaja: „Ker so poročila o vmesnih vrednotenjih, ki se uporabljajo kot podatki virov, pogosto različnih kakovosti in vsebujejo različne podrobnosti glede njihovih informacij o določenih temah, se to dejstvo nujno kaže v povzetkih ugotovitev in je lahko omejevalen dejavnik za splošno kakovost ugotovitev“ (http://ec.europa. eu/agriculture/evaluation/rural-development-reports/ synthesis-mte-2007-2013_en.htm).
The Commission considers that it did not extrapolate the data, but recognises the need to improve the presentation of the Annual Activity Report table in question. 
Komisija meni, da ni ekstrapolirala podatkov, toda priznava potrebo po izboljšanju predstavitve zadevne tabele letnega poročila o dejavnostih.
The information provided in the document just reported on a state of play of a given situation versus estimated targets. 
Informacije, navedene v dokumentu, so poročale le o stanju danih razmer v primerjavi z ocenjenimi ciljnimi vrednostmi.
The legislation (Article 62(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1974/2006) refers to indicative (non-binding) target values. 
Zakonodaja (člen 62(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 1974/2006) se nanaša na okvirne (nezavezujoče) ciljne vrednosti.
Furthermore, the initial targets were set before the crisis affecting the world economy. 
Poleg tega so bile prvotne ciljne vrednosti določene pred krizo, ki je prizadela svetovno gospodarstvo.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Box 2 While targets should not be revised simply to reflect the latest projection of results, there is no point either to keep sticking to targets that are –despite best efforts-not realistic anymore, e.g. due to changing economic circumstances in which the measures are applied. 
ODGOVOR KOMISIJE Okvir 2 Čeprav se ciljne vrednosti ne bi smele spreminjati le zato, da bi kazale najnovejša predvidevanja za rezultate, pa ni smiselno vztrajati pri ciljnih vrednostih, ki kljub krepkim prizadevanjem niso več realne, npr. zaradi spreminjajočih se gospodarskih okoliščin, v katerih se izvajajo ukrepi.
The Commission considers that reducing result targets does not, per definition, represent a reduction in planned efficiency and/or effectiveness. 
Komisija meni, da zniževanje ciljnih vrednosti rezultatov samo po sebi ne predstavlja zmanjšanja načrtovane učinkovitosti in/ali uspešnosti.
It can also be an acknowledgement of the changing economic context, which makes it harder to achieve a number of targets, e.g. job creation. 
Lahko je tudi potrditev spreminjajočih se gospodarskih razmer, ki otežujejo doseganje več ciljev, npr. ustvarjanja delovnih mest.
As targeting takes many forms, targeting takes into account identified structural and territorial needs and may result in directing the support to those in greatest needs while the support could have resulted in higher values for indicators in other areas. 
Ker ima ciljno usmerjanje mnogo oblik, upošteva ugotovljene strukturne in ozemeljske potrebe in lahko vodi v usmerjanje podpore k tistim, ki jo najbolj potrebujejo, medtem ko bi podpora lahko povzročila višje vrednosti kazalnikov na drugih področjih.
Targets should not been looked at in isolation but in the context of the strategy of the programme as a whole. 
Ciljne vrednosti se ne smejo opazovati same, ampak v okviru strategije programa kot celote.
The Commission publishes in due time the findings of the evaluations carried out on its behalf, but also the quality assessment by the steering group, which includes the usefulness of the report for the Commission. 
Komisija pravočasno objavi ugotovitve vrednotenj, izvedenih v njenem imenu, pa tudi oceno kakovosti usmerjevalne skupine, ki vključuje koristnost poročila za Komisijo.
The Commission publishes the complete reports of the independent evaluators on the Europa website. 
Komisija objavi vsa poročila neodvisnih izvajalcev vrednotenja na spletni strani Europa.
The evaluations of the Rural Development Programmes revealed certain difficulties in demonstrating the effectiveness, efficiency, achievements and impacts of investment measures in a comprehensive and consistent manner. 
Vrednotenje programov razvoja podeželja je razkrilo določene težave pri prikazu uspešnosti, učinkovitosti, dosežkov in vplivov naložbenih ukrepov na celovit in dosleden način.
For this reason, the Commission has launched an evaluation intended to improve capacity to identify and understand the impact of measures to support physical investments: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/calls-for-tender/tender-documents/2013/275093/specs_en.pdf; this tackles i.a. the issue of the assessment of deadweight. 
Zato je Komisija sprožila vrednotenje z namenom izboljšanja zmožnosti za ugotavljanje in razumevanje vpliva ukrepov za podporo fizičnih naložb: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/calls-for-tender/ten-der-documents/2013/275093/specs_en.pdf; to med drugim reši vprašanje ocene mrtve izgube.
It should also improve the demonstration of policy achievements and also contribute to future policy development and implementation. 
Izboljšati bi moralo tudi predstavitev dosežkov politike in prispevati k prihodnjemu razvoju in izvajanju politike.
The reporting of results in the annual progress reports is intended to give a picture of progress in achieving the objectives of the Rural Development Programmes (as well as in the Annual Activity Report of DG AGRI) not necessarily its evaluation. 
Poročanje o rezultatih v letnih poročilih o napredku ima namen podati podobo napredka pri doseganju ciljev programov razvoja podeželja (tudi v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih GD AGRI) in ne nujno vrednotenja.
Furthermore, useful information is provided by the Annual Progress Reports on implementation as regards financial execution and outputs. 
Poleg tega letna poročila o napredku posredujejo koristne informacije o izvajanju v povezavi s finančnim izvajanjem in izložki.
See also Commission reply to paragraph 43. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na odstavek 43.
Regarding how well the EU budget allocated to Rural Development has been spent, certain results and impacts can only be properly assessed well into the programming period and afterwards through evaluations. 
V zvezi s smotrnostjo porabe proračunskih sredstev EU, dodeljenih za razvoj podeželja, se lahko določeni rezultati in vplivi ustrezno ocenijo le, ko že preteče nekaj časa programskega obdobja in pa pozneje prek vrednotenj.
The Commission considers that improving the implementation (as far as monitoring is concerned) or the design (evaluation) and accountability are the prime purposes of the monitoring and evaluation system. 
Komisija meni, da sta izboljšanje izvajanja (kar se tiče spremljanja) ali oblike (vrednotenje) in odgovornost glavna namena sistema spremljanja in vrednotenja.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Box 3 – First paragraph The Commission would also like to point out that ‘creat-ing new jobs’ is only one of the concrete objectives linked to the implementation of Axis III where the overarching objective is to improve the quality of life in rural areas and to encourage diversification of economic activity. 
ODGOVOR KOMISIJE Okvir 3 – Prvi odstavek Komisija želi tudi poudariti, da je „ustvarjanje novih delovnih mest“ le eden od konkretnih ciljev, povezanih z izvajanjem osi III, pri kateri je glavni cilj izboljšati kakovost življenja na podeželskih območjih in spodbuditi diverzifikacijo gospodarske dejavnosti.
The Commission considers that this can partly explain the differences in public expenditure per ‘job created’. 
Komisija meni, da lahko to deloma pojasni razlike v javnih odhodkih na „ustvarjeno delovno mesto“.
The RDP of Campania is an example of this. 
Primer tega je program razvoja podeželja Kampanije.
See Commission reply to paragraph 61. 
Glej odgovor Komisije na odstavek 61.
The explicit introduction of commonly defined target indicators underpinned by an indicator plan for the new programming period as proposed by the Commission should make it easier to assess planned outputs and financial resources against the targets to be achieved. 
Jasna uvedba skupno opredeljenih kazalnikov za ciljne vrednosti, podprtih z načrtom kazalnikov za novo programsko obdobje, kot ga predlaga Komisija, bi morala olajšati oceno načrtovanih izložkov in finančnih sredstev v primerjavi z zastavljenimi ciljnimi vrednostmi.
It takes time for the results and impacts of a programme to become visible, therefore it can be expected that the modifications to programmes particularly during the early part of the programming period are more related to input-or output related factors (e.g. budgetary constraints or lack of uptake). 
Da rezultati in vplivi programa postanejo vidni, je potreben čas, zato se lahko pričakuje, da so spremembe programov, zlasti v začetnem delu programskega obdobja, bolj povezane z dejavniki, ki se navezujejo na vložke ali izložke (npr. proračunske omejitve ali pomanjkanje vnosa).
However, the conclusions derived from the Mid Term Evaluations, which were among others using available monitoring data, were taken into consideration in programme amendments. 
Vendar pa so se zaključki vmesnih vrednotenj, ki so med drugim uporabljala dostopne podatke o spremljanju, upoštevali pri spreminjanju programov.
Amendments to the programmes to avoid ‘decommitment’ need to be assessed in the context of the overall strategy. 
Spremembe programov v izogib „prenehanju prevzetih obveznosti“ se morajo oceniti v okviru splošne strategije.
Establishing quantified targets for rural development measures was a new exercise, and was a learning experience for both Managing Authorities and the Commission. 
Uvedba količinsko opredeljenih ciljnih vrednosti za ukrepe razvoja podeželja je bila nova naloga, ki je bila za organe za upravljanje in Komisijo poučna izkušnja.
Where Rural Development Programmes were adopted with an incomplete set of targets there was a commitment to complete them. 
Kjer so bili programi razvoja podeželja sprejeti z nedokončanim sklopom ciljnih vrednosti, je bila prisotna odločenost, da se ga dokonča.
Certain Member States had obviously overestimated the results that could achieve with the funds allocated and have afterwards corrected these estimates. 
Določene države članice so očitno precenile rezultate, ki naj bi jih dosegle z dodeljenimi sredstvi, in so pozneje popravile svoje ocene.
Furthermore, the economic context has been changed drastically and required certain adaptation of the expected results. 
Poleg tega so se gospodarske razmere močno spremenile, kar je zahtevalo določeno prilagoditev pričakovanih rezultatov.