natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission considers that while it is necessary for the Member States to establish selection criteria, they are not the only way to target the measure to objectives reflecting the structural and territorial needs and structural disadvantages as identified in the SWOT analysis of the rural development programme. 
Po mnenju Komisije je sicer nujno, da države članice določijo izbirna merila, vendar ta niso edini način za usmerjanje ukrepa v doseganje ciljev, ki odražajo strukturne in ozemeljske potrebe ter strukturne pomanjkljivosti, kot so opredeljene v analizi SWOT za PRP.
Targeting can also take the form of detailed eligibility rules, regional and sectoral differentiation and differentiation of aid intensities as well as aid ceilings by which the Member State can make a preselection among the potential beneficiaries. 
Ukrep je mogoče usmerjati tudi s podrobnimi pravili za upravičenost, regionalno in sektorsko diferenciacijo, diferenciacijo intenzivnosti pomoči ter zgornjih mej pomoči, s pomočjo katerih lahko države članice opravijo prvo selekcijo potencialnih upravičencev.
Nonetheless, the Commission has insisted on several occasions on the need for greater selectivity, for example, during annual meetings. 
Kljub temu je Komisija ob več priložnostih, kot so na primer letni sestanki, vztrajala, da je potrebna večja selektivnost.
Notably, at the beginning of the programming period a letter was sent from the Commission to the Managing Authorities of all programmes inviting them to take into account the importance of well-defined selection criteria for an effective implementation throughout the whole period. 
Tako je na začetku programskega obdobja organom upravljanja za vse programe poslala pismo, v katerem jih je pozvala, naj upoštevajo pomembnost dobro opredeljenih izbirnih meril za uspešno izvajanje v celotnem obdobju.
Furthermore, in 2009, another letter asked Member States to make sure that adequate selection criteria are specified and used for the allocation of funds. 
Poleg tega je leta 2009 v drugem pismu pozvala države članice, naj preverijo, ali so bila določena ustrezna izbirna merila in ali se uporabljajo za dodeljevanje sredstev.
In cases where the selection criteria were already specified in the programme on a voluntary basis, the Commission has invited the national authorities to consult the Monitoring Committee. 
V primerih, ko so bila izbirna merila že prostovoljno določena, je Komisija nacionalne organe pozvala, naj se posvetujejo z nadzornim odborom.
4 See Chapters 3 and 5 of the Luxembourg RDP. 
4 Glej poglavji 3 in 5 luksemburškega PRP.
Special Report No 8/2012 — Targeting of aid for the modernisation of agricultural holdings 36 Box 3 In the specific case of Poland, the documents provided to the Court show that the initial preference of the Polish authorities was to rely on eligibility criteria that they regarded as being stringent enough to ensure targeting. 
8/2012 – Usmerjanje pomoči za posodabljanje kmetijskih gospodarstev 36 Okvir 3 V specifičnem primeru Poljske dokumenti, predloženi Sodišču, kažejo, da so se želeli poljski organi na začetku opreti na merila za upravičenost, ki so bila po njihovem mnenju dovolj stroga za zagotavljanje usmerjenosti.
Subsequent experience proved otherwise and selection criteria were adopted following consultation of the programme Monitoring Committee in June 2009. 
Poznejše izkušnje tega niso potrdile in junija 2009 so bila po posvetovanju z nadzornim odborom sprejeta izbirna merila.
See reply to Box 3. 
Glej odgovor na okvir 3.
While individual RDPs may not all contain all elements of targeting, the possibility exists for Member States to subsequently adopt selection criteria in line with the objectives of the RDPs. 
Čeprav posamezni PRP morda ne vsebujejo vseh elementov usmerjanja, imajo države članice možnost, da izbirna merila sprejmejo pozneje v skladu s cilji PRP.
As for the Romanian rural development programme, it explicitly identifies the needs in its measure 121 form. 
Kar zadeva romunski PRP, so potrebe izrecno opredeljene v obrazcu za ukrep 121.
Those needs are also presented in the third chapter of the Romanian RDP. 
Te potrebe so predstavljene tudi v poglavju 3 romunskega PRP.
Selection criteria were also included in the RDP, e.g. investments in LFA and fostering semi-subsistence farms. 40. 
V PRP so bila zajeta tudi izbirna merila, npr. naložbe na območjih z omejenimi možnostmi in spodbujanje delno samooskrbnih kmetij.
Given that what constitutes modernisation or innovation differs widely across Member States , a common definition of what is actually ‘new’ would be neither meaningful nor desirable. 
Glede na to, da imajo države članice zelo različne predstave o tem, kaj predstavlja posodobitev ali inovacijo, ne bi bila opredelitev tega, kaj je dejansko „novo“, niti smiselna niti zaželena.
Member States develop their own definition and assess projects accordingly. 
Države članice pripravijo svoje opredelitve in v skladu z njimi ocenjujejo projekte.
In relation to the findings of the mid-term evaluation reports, further exchanges with Member States as regards measurement of this indicator are envisaged. 
Glede na ugotovitve iz poročil o vmesnem vrednotenju so predvidene nadaljnje izmenjave z državami članicami v zvezi z merjenjem tega kazalnika.
Although GVA is considered a valid indicator to capture economic performance at the level of holdings, experience has showed some difficulties in the collection of data in Member States. 
Čeprav se bruto dodana vrednost šteje kot ustrezen kazalnik za merjenje gospodarske uspešnosti na ravni gospodarstev, so izkušnje pokazale na nekatere težave pri zbiranju podatkov v državah članicah.
Therefore, the Commission has taken steps to address the problem and in a working paper of March 2010 provided guidance on the definition and the methodology to be used for measurement of this indicator. 
Zato je Komisija sprejela ukrepe za reševanje tega problema in v delovnem dokumentu iz marca 2010 izdala navodila za opredelitev in metodologijo, ki naj se uporabljata za merjenje tega kazalnika.
For the next programming period, the monitoring and evaluation system is being reviewed and improved to ensure relevance, usability and comparability at EU level of common indicators. 
Za naslednje programsko obdobje se sistem spremljanja in vrednotenja pregleduje in izboljšuje, da se zagotovijo koristnost, uporabnost in primerljivost skupnih kazalnikov na ravni EU.
The Commission considers that it was not necessary to change the modalities of support (aid rates, eligibility conditions, etc.) where measure 121 had already addressed these new challenges in the previous versions of the rural development programmes in question. 
Komisija meni, da načinov izvajanja podpore (stopnje pomoči, pogoji za upravičenost itd.) ni bilo treba spremeniti, če je ukrep 121 že obravnaval te nove izzive v prejšnjih različicah zadevnih PRP.
The ring-fenced amount of the ‘Health Check’/EERP was entirely programmed for related operations as identified under Annex II of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005. Special Report No 8/2012 — Targeting of aid for the modernisation of agricultural holdings 
Proračunski znesek, določen za „sistematski pregled“ SKP/ EERP, je bil v programih v celoti namenjen s tem povezanim dejavnostim, kot so opredeljene v Prilogi II k Uredbi Sveta št. 1698/2005. 40.
Prior to the ‘Health Check’, reporting on operations already addressing the new challenges was not a legal requirement. 
Poročanje o dejavnostih, ki so že obravnavale nove izzive, pred „sistematskim pregledom“ SKP ni bilo pravna zahteva.
This is why no comparison is possible. 
Zato primerjava ni mogoča.
However, with the ‘Health Check’, the amounts ring-fenced for new challenges for the period 2010–15 are clearly tracked. 
Vendar se po „sistematskem pregledu“ SKP proračunsko določeni zneski za nove izzive za obdobje 2010–2015 jasno spremljajo.
Only projects addressing the new challenges and declared to the Commission after the approval of the revised version of the programmes can qualify for ‘Health Check’/European Economic Recovery Plan funding. 
Samo projekti, ki obravnavajo nove izzive in so bili Komisiji prijavljeni po odobritvi pregledane različice programov, so lahko upravičeni do financiranja iz naslova „sistematskega pregleda“ SKP/EERP.
A separate financial table for ‘new challenges’ was introduced in the financial plan accompanying the Commission decision approving the programme revision and against which the reimbursements are followed. 
V finančnem načrtu, priloženem sklepu Komisije o odobritvi pregleda programa, je bila dodana posebna finančna razpredelnica za „nove izzive“, ki omogoča spremljanje povračil.
The legislator formulated Article 69(5a) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 so that an amount equal to the additional ‘Health Check’ and European Economic Recovery Plan resources shall be exclusively spent in the period from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2015 for operations of the types referred to in Article 16a of the regulation (‘new challenges’). 
Zakonodajalec je v členu 69(5a) Uredbe (ES) št. 1698/2005 določil, da se znesek, ki je enak dodatnim sredstvom iz naslova „sistematskega pregleda“ SKP in EERP, porabi izključno v obdobju od 1. januarja 2010 do 31. decembra 2015 za vrste dejavnosti iz člena 16a navedene uredbe („novi izzivi“).
At the same time, as additionality was not required in the aforementioned article, it was decided to take into account the previous programming choices of the Member States where resources had already been allocated to support operations in relation to new challenges. 
Glede na to, da dodatnost v navedenem členu ni bila zahtevana, je bilo sklenjeno, da se upoštevajo prejšnje programske izbire držav članic, pri katerih so bila sredstva že dodeljena za podporo dejavnostim v zvezi z novimi izzivi.
Where the amounts were deemed already appropriate by the Member States, they were given the possibility to transfer funds programmed in the pre-‘Health Check’/EERP funds period for the period 2010–15 to other measures or operations. 
Če so države članice menile, da so ti zneski že primerni, so imele možnost, da sredstva, programsko načrtovana pred obdobjem „sistematskega pregleda“ SKP/EERP, za obdobje 2010–2015 preusmerijo v druge ukrepe ali dejavnosti.
It is not possible to compare amounts pre-and post-‘Health Check’/EERP amendment, as the amounts already allocated for similar operations were not ring-fenced before the programme revision. 
Zneskov iz obdobja pred spremembo, povezano s „sistematskim pregledom“ SKP/EERP, ni mogoče primerjati z zneski iz obdobja po njej, saj zneski, ki so že bili dodeljeni za podobne dejavnosti, pred pregledom programa niso bili proračunsko namensko določeni.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION 53–54. and Box 4 — Joint reply The modification following the implementation of the new priorities of the ‘Health Check’. and the European Economic Recovery Plan was indeed considered in line with Article 69(5a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005, as a considerable amount of the EAFRD funds was already committed to addressing the new priorities within the existing measures 121 and 214 defined in the initial RDP. 
ODGOVORI KOMISIJE Skupni odgovor na odstavek 53, okvir 4 in odstavek 54 Sprememba, ki je sledila izvajanju novih prednostnih nalog v skladu s „sistematskim pregledom“ SKP in EERP, se je dejansko štela kot skladna s členom 69(5a) Uredbe Sveta ES št. 1698/2005, saj so bile za precejšen znesek sredstev EKSRP že prevzete obveznosti v zvezi z obravnavanjem novih prednostnih nalog v okviru obstoječih ukrepov 121 in 124, opredeljenih v prvotnem PRP.
The Commission considers that further strengthening has taken place as the post-‘Health Check’ financial allocation to measure 121 has increased by 29 % The most important effect of the ‘Health Check’/EERP modification is that 26.1 million euro is now earmarked and has to be spent for this specific priority within measure 121 for the years 2010–15, regardless of what has already been spent before 2010. 
Komisija meni, da je prišlo do dodatne krepitve, saj se je finančna dodelitev ukrepu 121 po „sistematskem pregledu“ SKP povečala za 29 %. Najpomembnejši učinek spremembe zaradi „sistematskega pregleda“ SKP/EERP je, da je 26,1 milijona EUR zdaj namensko določenega in mora biti porabljenega za to specifično prednostno nalogo v okviru ukrepa 121 v obdobju 2010– 2015, ne glede na to, kaj je že bilo porabljeno pred letom 2010.
See reply to paragraph 52. 
Glej odgovor na odstavek 52.
The rural development programme indicates that the economic counsellor is responsible for establishing the development plan. 
V PRP je navedeno, da je za pripravo razvojnega načrta odgovoren gospodarski svetovalec.
This is an eligibility criterion for projects of more than 100 000 euro. 
To je merilo za upravičenost pri projektih v vrednosti nad 100 000 EUR.
In Hungary, eligible projects are ranked according to a scoring system. 
Na Madžarskem so upravičeni projekti razvrščeni po sistemu točkovanja.
The quality and soundness of the financial plan is one of the elements of this system. 
Kakovost in trdnost finančnega načrta sta elementa tega sistema.
Other elements include, for instance, the establishment of a business plan, which should demonstrate that the project would improve the overall performance of the holding through, for instance, the enhancement of the competitiveness of the farm, impact on biodiversity and positive energetic balance. 
Med elementi je, na primer, tudi priprava poslovnega načrta, iz katerega mora biti razvidno, da bo projekt izboljšal skupno uspešnost gospodarstva, na primer, s povečanjem konkurenčnosti kmetije, učinkom na biotsko raznovrstnost, pozitivno energetsko bilanco.
As the purpose of these elements is to rank eligible projects, a zero point for the financial plan does not, as such, predetermine the viability of the project itself which, in fact, remains eligible. 
Ker so ti elementi namenjeni razvrščanju upravičenih projektov, nič točk za finančni načrt samo po sebi ne prejudicira ekonomske upravičenosti samega projekta, ki je dejansko upravičen. Posebno poročilo št.
Special Report No 8/2012 — Targeting of aid for the modernisation of agricultural holdings 
8/2012 – Usmerjanje pomoči za posodabljanje kmetijskih gospodarstev
In its proposal of September 2010 for the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 and in respect of investment operations under measures falling within the scope of Article 42 of the Treaty, the Commission has proposed that only expenditure which has been incurred after an application has been submitted to the competent authority shall be considered eligible. 
Komisija je v svojem predlogu iz septembra 2010 za spremembo Uredbe (ES) št. 1698/2005, in sicer za naložbene dejavnosti, ki spadajo v obseg člena 42 Pogodbe, predlagala, da se za upravičene štejejo samo odhodki, ki so nastali po tem, ko je bila vloga oddana pristojnemu organu.
See reply to paragraph 62. 
Glej odgovor na odstavek 62.
The legislative proposal for the next programming period5 foresees that only expenditure which has been incurred after an application has been submitted to the competent authority shall be considered eligible. 
V zakonodajnem predlogu za naslednje programsko obdobje5 je predvideno, da se za upravičene štejejo samo odhodki, ki so nastali po tem, ko je bila vloga oddana pristojnemu organu.
This mitigates the risk of deadweight, in the Commission's view. 
To po mnenju Komisije zmanjšuje tveganje mrtvih izgub.
Box 5 The first provision of the Commission proposal for the 2014–20 rural development period6 has been introduced to align the agricultural measures to general state aid rules. 
Okvir 5 Prva določba v predlogu Komisije za razvoj podeželja v obdobju 2014–20206 je bila uvedena zaradi uskladitve kmetijskih ukrepov s splošnimi pravili o državnih pomočeh.
5 Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), COM(2011) 627 final/2 of 19 October 2011 6 COM(2011) 627 final/2 —-Commission’s proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), presented by the Commission in the legislative framework for the CAP in the period 2014–20. 
5 Predlog Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o podpori za razvoj podeželja iz Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja (EKSRP), COM(2011) 627 final/2 z dne 19. oktobra 2011. 6 COM(2011) 627/ final/2 – Predlog Komisije za Uredbo Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o podpori za razvoj podeželja iz Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja (EKSRP), ki ga je Komisija predstavila v zakonodajnem okviru za SKP v obdobju 2014–2020.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 66. 
ODGOVORI KOMISIJE ZAKLJUČKI IN PRIPOROČILA 66.
Targeting of the aid can be achieved in many ways: through selection criteria, detailed eligibility criteria, sectoral or regional differentiation and differentiation of aid intensities by type of beneficiary or by type of investment or by setting aid ceilings. 
Pomoč je mogoče usmerjati na veliko načinov: z izbirnimi merili, podrobnimi pravili za upravičenost, sektorsko ali regionalno diferenciacijo, diferenciacijo intenzivnosti pomoči po vrstah upravičencev ali naložb ali pa z določanjem zgornjih mej pomoči.
In accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and shared management, Article 71(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 stipulates that selection criteria may be defined after programme approval in consultation with the Monitoring Committee and they are not subject to a Commission decision. 
V skladu z načeloma subsidiarnosti in deljenega upravljanja člen 71(2) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št.
See also joint reply for paragrahs 29 to 38. 
Glej tudi skupni odgovor na odstavke od 29 do 38.
Special Report No 8/2012 — Targeting of aid for the modernisation of agricultural holdings 
Posebno poročilo št. 8/2012 – Usmerjanje pomoči za posodabljanje kmetijskih gospodarstev
39 Recommendation 1 According to the Commission's proposal for the next programming period, strategic programming will be further reinforced, with the result of an improved strategic targeting through the Union priorities for rural development and their focus areas. 
39 Priporočilo 1 V skladu s predlogom Komisije za naslednje programsko obdobje bo strateško načrtovanje programov še okrepljeno, kar bo prineslo boljše strateško ciljno usmerjanje prek prednostnih nalog Unije na področju razvoja podeželja in njihovih osrednjih področij.
Besides carrying out a SWOT analysis, Member States/ regions will have to establish ex ante quantified targets (close to result-type indicators) for the RDP. 
Države članice/regije bodo morale za PRP poleg izvedbe analize SWOT predhodno določiti količinsko opredeljene cilje (podobne kazalnikom rezultatov).
The content of the programme shall contain a description of the strategy which includes the target setting for each of the focus areas of the Union priorities for rural development included in the programme. 
Vsebina programa bo zajemala opis strategije, skupaj z določanjem ciljev za vsako osrednje področje prednostnih nalog Unije na področju razvoja podeželja, ki je zajeto v program.
Specific needs, linked with specific conditions at regional or subregional level, have to be demonstrated. 
Prikazati bo treba specifične potrebe, povezane s specifičnimi pogoji na regionalni ali podregionalni ravni.
The programme shall also demonstrate, inter alia, that the allocation of financial resources is balanced and adequate and that an appropriate approach has been defined laying down principles with regard to the setting of selection criteria for projects, which takes into account relevant targets. 
Iz programa bo moralo biti med drugim tudi razvidno, da so finančna sredstva razdeljena uravnoteženo in primerno ter da je bil opredeljen ustrezen pristop, ki vsebuje načela glede določanja izbirnih meril za projekte, pri katerem so upoštevani relevantni cilji.
The definition and application of selection criteria shall aim to ensure equal treatment of applicants, better use of financial resources and targeting of measures in accordance with the Union priorities for rural development. 
Opredelitev in uporaba izbirnih meril bosta namenjeni zagotavljanju enake obravnave vseh vlagateljev, boljši uporabi finančnih sredstev in ciljnemu usmerjanju ukrepov v skladu s prednostnimi nalogami Unije na področju razvoja podeželja.
Moreover, in order to further improve targeting, Member States shall ensure that the ex ante evaluator is engaged from an early stage in the process of development of the rural development programme, including the development of the SWOT analysis, the design of the programme’s intervention logic and the establishment of the programme’s targets. 
Poleg tega bodo zaradi dodatnega izboljšanja usmerjanja države članice poskrbele, da predhodni ocenjevalec sodeluje že od samega začetka priprave PRP, vključno s pripravo analize SWOT, zasnovo intervencijske logike programa in določitvijo ciljev programa.
The Commission considers that the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework constitutes a relevant and integrated set of indicators that was jointly prepared by the Commission and Member States to capture the policy's objectives. 
Komisija meni, da okvir skupnega spremljanja in vrednotenja predstavlja pomemben in povezan niz kazalnikov, ki so ga skupaj pripravile Komisija in države članice, da bi zajel cilje politike.
It marks the first time that a comprehensive, yet very demanding, monitoring and evaluation system for rural development has been implemented at EU level. 
To je prvič, da je bil na ravni EU izveden izčrpen in zelo zahteven sistem spremljanja in vrednotenja za področje razvoja podeželja.
It is the combination of all the measures which should be considered when assessing whether the EU's priorities are well addressed. 
Je kombinacija vseh ukrepov, ki bi jih bilo treba upoštevati pri ocenjevanju, ali so prednostne naloge EU dobro obravnavane.
REPLY OF THE COMMISSION Measure 121 should be assessed against the objective of improving competitiveness. 
ODGOVORI KOMISIJE Ukrep 121 bi bilo treba ocenjevati glede na cilj izboljšanja konkurenčnosti.
The current 'learning by doing' experience shows that the definition of result indicators in this field is challenging and the Commission, Member States and various stakeholders have devoted much effort to continuously improve methodology, reliability and comparability. 
Sedanje izkušnje z učenjem skozi prakso kažejo, da je opredelitev kazalnikov rezultatov na tem področju izziv, Komisija, države članice in različne udeležene strani pa so vložile veliko naporov v stalno izboljševanje metodologije, zanesljivosti in primerljivosti.
This experience will also be used for the future monitoring and evaluation system. 
Te izkušnje bodo uporabljene tudi pri pripravi prihodnjega sistema spremljanja in vrednotenja.
Recommendation 2 The monitoring and evaluation system is subject to review by the Commission and Member States in order to improve its efficiency and effectiveness, especially in terms of reliability and comparability, and foster ownership by sharing good practices and building capacity. 
Priporočilo 2 Komisija in države članice pregledujejo sistem spremljanja in vrednotenja, da bi izboljšale njegovo učinkovitost in uspešnost, zlasti njegovo zanesljivost in omogočanje primerljivosti, ter spodbudile občutek lastništva z izmenjevanjem dobrih praks in gradnjo zmogljivosti.
According to the Commission proposal for the future rural development policy, quantified result indicators will be used to assess progress towards targets established ex ante at programme level. 
V skladu s predlogom Komisije za prihodnjo politiko razvoja podeželja se bodo za ocenjevanje napredka pri doseganju predhodno določenih ciljev na ravni programa uporabljali količinsko opredeljeni kazalniki rezultatov.