natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Only one out of the 203 agri-environment contracts audited concerned a collective contract. 
Samo ena od 203 revidiranih kmetijsko-okoljskih pogodb je bila kolektivna pogodba.
The Leader approach to rural development can also be used to implement a collective approach. 
Za izvajanje kolektivnega pristopa je mogoče uporabiti tudi pristop za razvoj podeželja iz pobude Leader.
However, a recent audit by the Court 25 found that Member States generally restricted the scope of Leader, in some cases even excluding agri-environment. 
Vendar je bilo pri nedavni reviziji25, ki jo je opravilo Sodišče, ugotovljeno, da so države članice v glavnem omejile področje pobude Leader in v nekaterih primerih celo izključile kmetijsko-okoljsko področje.
In order to know whether agri-environment sub-measures are effective, a clear and demonstrated causal relationship between the agricultural practices and the environmental outcomes is required. 
Da bi vedeli, ali so kmetijsko-okoljski podukrepi uspešni, je potreben jasen in dokazan vzročni odnos med načini kmetovanja in izidi za okolje.
This can be done by using test plots, case studies, quantified impact model, surveys, etc. 
To je mogoče doseči s poskusnimi parcelami, študijami primerov, količinsko opredeljenimi modeli vplivov, raziskavami itd. Takšni trdni dokazi so zlasti pomembni za bolj zahtevne podukrepe, saj so njihovi učinki odvisni od posebnih zahtev za podukrepe in značilnosti območij, na katerih se izvajajo.
24 Article 70 of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 specifies for agri-environment a minimum EU contribution of 20 % of public expenditure, and maximum ones of 80 % in convergence regions and 55 % in other regions. 
24 Člen 70 Uredbe (ES) št. 1698/2005 za kmetijsko-okoljski ukrep določa najnižji prispevek EU v višini 20 % odhodkov iz javnih sredstev ter najvišji prispevek v višini 80 % za konvergenčne regije in 55 % za druge regije.
The contribution is increased to 85 % for programmes of the outermost regions and the smaller Aegean Islands. 
Prispevek se poveča na 85 % za programe najbolj oddaljenih regij in manjših egejskih otokov.
25 Special Report No 5/2010: Implementation of the Leader approach for rural development, paragraphs 84 and 85. 
25 Posebno poročilo št. 5/2010 – Izvajanje pristopa Leader pri razvoju podeželja, odstavka 84 in 85.
43 Special Report No 7/2011 – Is agri-environment support well designed and managed? 44 Anticipated environmental benefits are not demonstrated for 24 % of the contracts 89. 
7/2011 – Ali je podpora za kmetijsko-okoljske ukrepe dobro pripravljena in upravljana? 44 Pričakovane koristi za okolje niso dokazane pri 24 % pogodb.
However, the audit found that specific quantified evidence was used only in a minority of cases to design and manage agri-environment sub-measures. 
Vendar pa je revizija ugotovila, da so bili za pripravo in upravljanje kmetijsko-okoljskih podukrepov posebni količinsko opredeljeni podatki uporabljeni samo pri manjšini primerov.
For the 203 contracts reviewed by the Court, methods such as inquiries with beneficiaries, models/simulations or case studies were used respectively in only11%,14%and30%ofthecases.For24%ofthecontracts reviewed, Member States reported that the causal relationship between the farming practices and the anticipated environmental benefits were not demonstrated. 
Pri 203 pogodbah, ki jih je pregledalo Sodišče, so bile metode, kot so poizvedbe pri upravičencih, modeli/simulacije ali študije primerov uporabljene samo v 11 %, 14 % oziroma 30 % primerov. Za 24 % pregledanih primerov so države članice poročale, da vzročni odnos med načini kmetovanja in pričakovanimi koristmi za okolje ni bil dokazan.
These results are consistent with recent research 26 which concluded that ‘More than half of the [agri-environment sub-measures] surveyed were based on ‘common sense’ impact models, and thus were based on general beliefs about how agricultural practices are linked to environmental changes, rather than on documented evidence.’ 
Ti rezultati so skladni z novejšimi raziskavami26, v katerih je bilo ugotovljeno, da več kot polovica kmetijsko-okoljskih podukrepov, vključenih v raziskavo, temelji na modelih vplivanja po načelu zdrave pameti, torej na splošnem prepričanju o tem, kako so načini kmetovanja povezani z okoljskimi spremembami, ne pa na dokumentarnih dokazilih.
For some sub-measures, the Court did find evidence that the farming practices were effective in achieving their environmental benefits. 
Za nekatere podukrepe pa je Sodišče našlo dokaze, da so bili načini kmetovanja uspešni pri doseganju koristi za okolje.
This is particularly the case for organic farming, for which the effects are well documented 27. 
To velja še zlasti za ekološko kmetovanje, katerega učinki so dobro dokumentirani27.
This is also the case for outcome-based sub-measures (see paragraph 27), for which the expected environmental benefits are directly linked to the farming practices implemented. fAilures to focus pAyments on specific environmentAl problems 91. 
Isto velja tudi za podukrepe, ki temeljijo na izidih (glej odstavek 27), pri katerih so pričakovane koristi za okolje neposredno povezane z uporabljenimi načini kmetovanja. osredotočanje plačil v posamezne oKoljsKe probleme ni bilo uspešno 91.
A rational way to implement agri-environment policy is, on the basis of clearly identified environmental problems, to determine the required targets for impacts and participation levels and on this basis to determine the necessary financial resources. 
Racionalen način izvajanja kmetijsko-okoljske politike bi bil, da se na podlagi jasno opredeljenih okoljskih problemov opredelijo zahtevane ciljne vrednosti vplivov in ravni sodelovanja ter nato na tej podlagi določijo potrebna finančna sredstva.
Failure to apply this logic leads to an insufficient focus on environmental effects. 
Neupoštevanje te logike vodi do nezadostne usmerjenosti v okoljske učinke.
Thus, the audit found that in 39 % of the 203 contracts reviewed, there were no specific environmental pressures in the area where the contract was implemented, or such problems could not be identified by the Member States, as shown in Table 2. 
Tako je bilo pri reviziji ugotovljeno, da za 39 % od 203 pregledanih pogodb niso obstajali posebni pritiski na okolje na območju, na katerem se je pogodba izvajala, ali pa jih države članice niso mogle opredeliti, kot prikazuje tabela 2.
26 Primdahl,etal.,Current use of impact models for agri-environment schemes and potential for improvements of policy design and assessment, Journal of Environmental Management (2010), doi:10.1016/ j.jenvman.2009.12.012. 
26 Primdahl,etal.,Currentuse of impact models for agri-environment schemes and potential for improvements of policy design and assessment ( Trenutna uporaba modelov vplivanja za kmetijsko-okoljske sheme in možnost izboljšanja snovanja in ocene politike), Journal of Environmental Management (2010), doi:10.1016/ j.jenvman.2009.12.012.
27 The November 2005 evaluation of the agri-environment measures reviewed a total of 288 scientific studies of which a sample of around 30 studies were more specifically dedicated to organic farming. 
27 Pri vrednotenju kmetijsko-okoljskih ukrepov novembra 2005 je bilo pregledanih skupaj 288 znanstvenih študij, od katerih se je vzorec približno 30 študij nanašal posebej na ekološko kmetovanje.
The evaluation concluded that organic farming achieved positive effects on biodiversity (increase in vegetal, animal, habitats diversity) and water and air pollution through a reduction in inputs. 
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da ekološko kmetovanje zaradi zmanjšanja vnosov pozitivno vpliva na biotsko raznovrstnost (povečanje rastlinske in živalske raznovrstnosti ter raznovrstnosti habitatov) ter na onesnaženost voda in zraka.
The Community strategic guidelines (see glossary) identified organic farming as a holistic approach to sustainable agriculture, which improves the environment and the countryside, and recommended that its contribution to environmental and animal welfare objectives should be consolidated and strengthened. Special Report No 7/2011 – Is agri-environment support well designed and managed? 
Strateške smernice Skupnosti (glej glosar) opredeljujejo ekološko kmetovanje kot holističen pristop k sonaravnemu kmetijstvu, ki izboljšuje okolje in podeželje, ter priporočajo utrditev in krepitev njegovega prispevka k okoljskim ciljem in ciljem dobrega počutja živali. Posebno poročilo št. 7/2011 – Ali je podpora za kmetijsko-okoljske ukrepe dobro pripravljena in upravljana?
Budgets for agri-environment are based on past uptake rates and the targets set do not depend on environmental effects to be achieved, but on historical spending figures. 
Proračuni za kmetijsko-okoljsko področje temeljijo na preteklih stopnjah črpanja, opredeljene ciljne vrednosti pa niso odvisne od vplivov na okolje, ki jih je treba doseči, ampak od zneskov porabe v preteklosti.
Member States use data on participation levels for sub-measures for the day-to-day management but cannot analyse whether participation is adequate to produce the anticipated environmental effects. 
Države članice za dnevno upravljanje uporabljajo podatke o ravneh sodelovanja pri podukrepih, vendar pa ne morejo analizirati ustreznosti sodelovanja za doseganje pričakovanih vplivov na okolje.
Participation is voluntary for farmers, meaning that sub-measures with less demanding requirements in relation to the aid amounts are easier to implement than those with higher requirements. 
Kmetje sodelujejo prostovoljno, kar pomeni, da je laže izvajati podukrepe, ki so glede na zneske pomoči manj zahtevni, kot tiste, ki so bolj zahtevni.
Two examples of this were Piedmont and France, which used respectively around 75 % and 85 % of the expenditure for a single basic sub-measure, without sufficient analysis or justification for this in their rural development programmes. 
Taka dva primera sta Piemont in Francija, ki sta 75 % oz. 85 % odhodkov porabila za en sam osnovni podukrep, ne da bi za to v svoja programa razvoja podeželja vključila ustrezno analizo ali utemeljitev.
45 TABLE 2 Environmental problem % of contracts 1 There are no specific environmental problems in the area within a range of 10 kilometres around the farm which holds the contract or it is not possible to identify problems 39 % Water pollution caused by farming 27 % Marginalisation and abandonment of land 22 % Threats to exceptional plant biodiversity (in areas of particular environmental importance — high nature value zones) 21 % Soil degradation (caused by wind erosion, loss of organic matter, overexploitation, compaction, etc.) 
45 TABELA 2 Okoljski problem Delež pogodb1 V območju 10 km okoli kmetije, s katero je bila sklenjena pogodba, ni posebnih okoljskih problemov ali jih ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti 39 % Onesnaženost voda zaradi kmetijstva 27 % Marginalizacija in opuščanje zemljišč 22 % Ogroženost izjemne biotske raznovrstnosti rastlin (na območjih s posebnim pomenom za okolje – območja z visoko naravno vrednostjo) 21 % Degradacija tal (ki jo povzroča vetrna erozija, izguba organskih snovi, čezmerno izkoriščanje, zbitost itd.)
18 % Threats to animal populations in areas with normal biodiversity 18 % Threats to exceptional animal biodiversity (in areas of particular environmental importance — high nature value zones) 18% Threats to plant communities in areas with normal biodiversity 18 % Degradation of landscape 10% Other 11 % MAIN ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEM(S) EXISTING WITHIN A RANGE OF 10 KILOMETRES AROUND THE FARM FOR A SAMPLE OF 203 CONTRACTS 1 There can be more than one problem in the area where the contract is implemented. Special Report No 7/2011 – Is agri-environment support well designed and managed? 
18 % Ogroženost živalskih populacij na območjih z običajno biotsko raznovrstnostjo 18 % Ogroženost izjemne biotske raznovrstnosti živali (na območjih s posebnim pomenom za okolje – območja z visoko naravno vrednostjo) 18% Ogroženost rastlinskih skupnosti na območjih z običajno biotsko raznovrstnostjo 18 % Degradacija pokrajine 10% Drugo 11 % NAJPOMEMBNEJŠI OKOLJSKI PROBLEMI V OBMOČJU 10 KM OKOLI KMETIJE ZA VZOREC 203 POGODB 1 Na območju, na katerem se izvaja pogodba, lahko obstaja več problemov. Posebno poročilo št. 7/2011 – Ali je podpora za kmetijsko-okoljske ukrepe dobro pripravljena in upravljana?
In all the Member States audited, the agri-environment budget was part of a single seven-year budget for all axis 2 measures. 
V vseh revidiranih državah članicah je bil proračun za kmetijsko-okoljsko področje del enotnega sedemletnega proračuna za vse ukrepe 2. osi.
This improves flexibility in the management of the available financial resources, but leads to a situation where there is no analysis of what would be the appropriate funding to address environmental needs. 
To povečuje fleksibilnost upravljanja razpoložljivih finančnih sredstev, obenem pa privede do tega, da ni analiz o ustreznem financiranju za zadovoljevanje okoljskih potreb.
The Court analysed whether Member States could justify that the money spent on agri-environment payments was in line with the main environmental pressures identified. 
Sodišče je analiziralo, ali države članice lahko utemeljijo, da je bil denar, porabljen za kmetijsko-okoljska plačila, skladen z najpomembnejšimi ugotovljenimi pritiski na okolje.
This was indeed the case for two out of the eight Member States audited (Austria and Sweden). However, for the other Member States, it was not, either because the relevant information was not available or not provided (Poland, Hungary and Piedmont) or because expenditure was not in line with the main pressures identified (Andalusia, Berlin and Brandenburg, France). 
Tako je bilo v dveh od osmih revidiranih držav članic (Avstrija in Švedska), v drugih pa ne, ker ustrezne informacije niso bile na voljo ali niso bile zagotovljene (Poljska, Madžarska in Pie-mont) ali pa ker odhodki niso bili skladni z najpomembnejšimi ugotovljenimi pritiski (Andaluzija, Berlin in Brandenburg ter Francija).
The latter case is described in Box 6. 
Zadnji primer je opisan v okviru 6.
46 BOX 6 ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR AGRI-ENVIRONMENT PAYMENTS IS NOT IN LINE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES Regulation (EC) No 1974/2006 states that each rural development programme must justify the various types of agri-environment payment in relation to the environmental needs and priorities identified in the programme. 
46 OKVIR 6 DODELITEV SREDSTEV ZA KMETIJSKO-OKOLJSKA PLAČILA NI SKLADNA Z OKOLJSKIMI IZZIVI Uredba (ES) št. 1974/2006 določa, da je treba v vsakem programu razvoja podeželja utemeljiti različne vrste kmetijsko-okoljskih plačil glede na okoljske potrebe in prioritete, opredeljene v programu.
The French programme establishes three main environmental challenges: biodiversity, water (quality and quantity) and climate change. 
V francoskem programu so opredeljeni trije najpomembnejši okoljski izzivi: biotska raznovrstnost, vode (kakovost in količina) in podnebne spremembe.
The planned agri-environment budget for biodiversity amounts to around 1 billion euro, which represents around three times the agri-environment budget set aside for water quality. 
Načrtovan kmetijsko-okoljski proračun za biotsko raznovrstnost znaša približno milijardo EUR, kar je približno trikrat toliko kot kmetijsko-okoljski proračun, rezerviran za kakovost vode.
Although the French authorities consider that the most material sub-measure in the programme dealing with preservation of extensive pastures also prevents climate changes through the storage of carbon, no agri-environment expenditure is reported as tackling climate change. 
Čeprav francoski organi menijo, da najpomembnejši podukrep v programu, namenjen ohranjanju ekstenzivnih pašnikov, obenem s skladiščenjem ogljikovega dioksida preprečuje podnebne spremembe, se za nobene kmetijsko-okoljske odhodke ne navaja, da bi bili namenjeni reševanju podnebnih sprememb.
The programme does not justify the allocation of funds to the main challenges identified. 
Program ne utemeljuje dodelitev sredstev za najpomembnejše ugotovljene izzive.
Agri-environment is a complex policy instrument: it aims to address a wide range of environmental issues (biodiversity, soil, water, air, landscape) in 27 Member States. 
Kmetijsko-okoljska plačila so kompleksen instrument politike. Namenjena so obravnavi cele vrste okoljskih vprašanj (biotska raznovrstnost, tla, vode, zrak, pokrajina) v 27 državah članicah.
Significant progress has been made in the little over 20 years since the policy was first introduced. 
V nekaj več kot 20 letih, odkar je bila politika prvič uvedena, je bil dosežen velik napredek.
Nevertheless, the Court also found that the policy was not designed and monitored so as to deliver tangible environmental benefits. 
Vendar pa je Sodišče ugotovilo tudi, da politika ni bila zasnovana in spremljana tako, da bi dala oprijemljive koristi za okolje.
The objectives were overall too vague to be useful for assessing the extent to which they have been achieved. 
Cilji so bili v glavnem premalo natančni, da bi bili uporabni za oceno tega, v kolikšni meri so bili doseženi.
In a number of cases, agri-environment payments are not clearly justified by the environmental pressures which have been identified in the rural development programmes. 
V več primerih kmetijsko-okoljska plačila niso nedvomno utemeljena s pritiski na okolje, opredeljenimi v programih razvoja podeželja.
The common monitoring and evaluation framework represents progress but produces little information on the environmental benefits achieved. 
Okvir skupnega spremljanja in vrednotenja pomeni napredek, vendar daje malo informacij o doseženih koristih za okolje.
RECOMMENDATION 1 The Commission and the Member States should for each agri-environment sub-measure ensure that: Ū clear objectives, which fit into the hierarchy of environmental objectives, are set in the rural development programmes; Ū rural development programmes clearly justify the sub-measures which they include and the link between environmental pressures and agri-environment payments. 
PRIPOROČILO 1 Komisija in države članice bi morale za vsak kmetijsko-okoljski podukrep zagotoviti, da: Ū se v programih razvoja podeželja določijo jasni cilji, ki ustrezajo hierarhiji okoljskih ciljev; Ū se v programih razvoja podeželja jasno utemeljijo podukrepi, ki jih vključujejo, ter povezava med pritiski na okolje in kmetijsko-okoljskimi plačili.
In particular programmes should specify whether the relationship between environmental pressures and sub-measures is direct or indirect and assess whether agri-environment support is more appropriate than are available alternative policies. 
Programi bi morali zlasti določati, ali med pritiski na okolje in podukrepi obstaja neposredna ali posredna povezava, ter oceniti, ali je kmetijsko-okoljska podpora primernejša od alternativnih politik, ki so na voljo.
The Member States should collect and report relevant and reliable data on environmental benefits and use it for monitoring purposes. Special Report No 7/2011 – Is agri-environment support well designed and managed? 
Države članice bi morale zbirati primerne in zanesljive podatke o koristih za okolje, o njih poročati ter jih uporabljati za spremljanje. Posebno poročilo št. 7/2011 – Ali je podpora za kmetijsko-okoljske ukrepe dobro pripravljena in upravljana?
Farmers are crucial to the success of agri-environment schemes, and without sufficient understanding and financial incentives, the policy will not be adequately implemented. 
Za uspeh kmetijsko-okoljskih shem so najpomembnejši kmetje. Brez zadostnega razumevanja in finančnih spodbud se politika ne bo ustrezno izvajala.
The audit found that farmers were generally well supported through guidance, although dissemination of best practices and feedback on the results could be improved. 
Pri reviziji je bilo ugotovljeno, da so z usmerjanjem kmetje na splošno dobili dobro podporo, toda razširjanje dobrih praks in povratne informacije o rezultatih bi bilo mogoče izboljšati.
The Court identified problems in the establishment of aid amounts. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo probleme pri določanju zneskov pomoči.
In addition, as aid amounts are not differentiated enough according to local conditions, and participation rates are not considered, the right incentives are not always given. 
Poleg tega spodbude niso vedno prave, ker zneski pomoči niso dovolj diferencirani glede na lokalne pogoje in se ne upoštevajo ravni sodelovanja.
48 RECOMMENDATION 2 The Commission should ensure, before approving programmes, that: Ū all relevant elements are included in the calculations; Ū the main assumptions and parameters used are appropriate; Ū reference levels always correspond to normal farming practices in the areas where the agri-environment sub-measures are implemented; Ū aid amounts for sub-measures aimed at maintaining existing farming practices are based on realistic costs; Ū aid amounts are differentiated in cases where this is justified. 
48 PRIPOROČILO 2 Komisija bi pred potrditvijo programov morala zagotoviti, da: Ū so v izračune vključeni vsi pomembni elementi; Ū so glavne predpostavke in parametri ustrezni; Ū referenčne ravni vselej ustrezajo običajnim načinom kmetovanja na območjih, na katerih se izvajajo kmetijsko-okoljski podukrepi; Ū zneski pomoči za podukrepe, namenjene ohranjanju obstoječih načinov kmetovanja, temeljijo na realnih stroških; Ū so zneski pomoči diferencirani, kadar je to utemeljeno.
Member States are required to make support available in accordance with specific needs. 
Od držav članic se zahteva, da pomoč dodeljujejo glede na posebne potrebe.
They had not considered the desirable degree of targeting to their needs on the basis of an analysis of costs and benefits involved. 
Vendar želene stopnje ciljnega usmerjanja glede na svoje potrebe niso pretehtale na podlagi analize stroškov in koristi.
Procedures to select projects which provide the best environmental value for money were only applied in a few cases because budget resources were sufficient. 
Postopki za izbiro projektov, ki so za okolje najbolj stroškovno učinkoviti, so bili uporabljeni le v nekaj primerih, ker je bilo na voljo dovolj proračunskih sredstev.
Other procedures, such as differentiated EU contributions, evidence based sub-measures and setting quantified targets for participation levels based on the required environmental effects were applied in only a minority of cases. Special Report No 7/2011 – Is agri-environment support well designed and managed? 
Drugi postopki, kot so diferencirani prispevki EU, podukrepi, ki temeljijo na podatkih, ter določanje količinsko opredeljenih ciljnih vrednosti za ravni sodelovanja na podlagi zahtevanih vplivov na okolje, so se uporabljali samo v manjšini primerov. Posebno poročilo št. 7/2011 – Ali je podpora za kmetijsko-okoljske ukrepe dobro pripravljena in upravljana?
49 RECOMMENDATION 3 The audit identified that most agri-environment expenditure is made for a limited number of sub-measures implemented on the whole programme area. 
49 PRIPOROČILO 3 Pri reviziji je bilo ugotovljeno, da se večina kmetijsko-okoljskih odhodkov porabi za majhno število podukrepov, ki se izvajajo na celotnem območju programa.