natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
ESF support is not only about money, as the fund’s contribution to national labour market policies can sometimes be small.
ESS skupaj z drugimi strukturnimi skladi in Kohezijskim skladom uresničuje pomen evropskih vrednot in solidarnosti.
In the larger and more diverse European Union we need cooperation across borders
Mislim, da je to najpomembnejši vidik zgodovine in prihodnosti Evropskega socialnega sklada.
Together with the other Structural and Cohesion Funds, the ESF transforms the meaning of Europe’s values and solidarity into reality.
Programi ESS se pogosto uporabljajo za preverjanje novih pristopov in zamisli ter učenje od drugih držav članic s sodelovanjem in povezovanjem, kar lahko ustvarja dodano vrednost pri nizkih stroških.
In my view, this is the most important aspect of the European Social Fund’s history and future.
V večji in bolj raznoliki Evropski uniji bolj kot kdaj koli prej potrebujemo čezmejno sodelovanje.
Signature of Act of Accession by Spain and Portugal
Podpis Akta o pristopu Španije in Portugalske
London European Council
Evropski svet v Londonu
Brussels European Council
Evropski svet v Bruslju
On 5 and 6 December 1986, the European Council
Evropski svet je 5. in 6. decembra 1986 v Londonu
On 11 and 12 March 1988, the European Council agreed in London on the Single European Act.
Evropski svet je 11. in 12. marca 1988 v Bruslju sprejel Enotni evropski akt.
agreed in Brussels on the first multiannual Commu- nity budget for the years 1989-1993, often referred to as the ‘Delors I Package’.
1989–1993, pogosto imenovan Delorsov paket I.
Although the origins of Community policies addressing regional imbalances can be traced back to the Treaty of Rome, it was not until 1975 that the European Regional Development Fund was created.
Čeprav je mogoče začetke politike Skupnosti, ki se ukvarja z regionalnim neravnovesjem, najti v Rimski pogodbi, je bil Evropski sklad za regionalni razvoj ustanovljen šele leta 1975.
In its early years, operations remained purely national, financing predetermined projects in the Member States with little European or subnational influence.
V prvih letih je bilo delovanje izključno nacionalno, pri čemer je sklad financiral vnaprej določene projekte v državah članicah z majhnim evropskim ali podnacionalnim vplivom.
An annual system of selecting and refinancing existing projects was applied in a similar way by other Community funds with territorial impact such as the European Social Fund and the European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund.
Letni sistem za izbiro in refinanciranje obstoječih projektov se je uporabljal podobno kot v drugih skladih Skupnosti s prostorskim vplivom, kot sta Evropski socialni sklad in Evropski kmetijski usmerjevalni in jamstveni sklad.
Hence, at the beginning of the 1980s 'efficiency' of Community instruments became an issue and their integration was sought for in a number of pilot programmes.
Zato je na začetku osemdesetih let 20. stoletja „učinkovitost“ instrumentov Skupnosti postala sporno vprašanje, pri čemer si je za njihovo združevanje prizadevalo v veliko pilotnih programih.
In 1986 key events brought with them the impetus for a more genuine ‘European’ Cohesion Policy, most notably the Single European Act, the accession of Greece, Spain and Portugal and the adoption of the single market programme.
Leta 1986 so ključni dogodki spodbudili bolj naravno evropsko kohezijsko politiko, predvsem Enotni evropski akt, pristop Grčije, Španije in Portugalske ter sprejetje programa za enotni trg.
In March 1988, the European Council in Brussels decided to allocate ECU 64 billion¹ to the Structural Funds which represented a doubling of annual resources over the period 1989-93.
Evropski svet se je marca 1988 v Bruslju odločil dodeliti 64 milijard ECU¹ strukturnim skladom, kar je pomenilo podvojitev letnih sredstev v obdobju 1989–93.
On 24 June 1988, the Council adopted the first regulation integrating the Structural Funds under the umbrella of Cohesion Policy.
Svet je 24. junija 1988 sprejel prvo uredbo, ki združuje strukturne sklade znotraj krovne kohezijske politike.
This landmark reform introduced key principles such as focussing on the poorest and most backward regions, multiannual programming, strategic orientation of investments and the involvement of regional and local partners.
S to mejno reformo so bila uvedena ključna načela, kot so osredotočanje na najrevnejše in najbolj zaostale regije, večletno načrtovanje programov, strateško usmerjanje naložb ter vključevanje regionalnih in lokalnih partnerjev.
THE WAY TO REFORM
NAČIN REFORMIRANJA
Following the accession of Greece in 1981 and Portugal and Spain in 1986 regional disparities in the then European Community of 12 Member States had widened signicantly.
Po pristopu Grčije leta 1981 ter Portugalske in Španije leta 1986 so se regionalne razlike v takratni Evropski skupnosti 12 držav članic bistveno povečale.
Before accession one European in eight had an annual income 30 % below the Community average; this became one in five after accession in 1986.
Pred pristopom je bil letni prihodek vsakega osmega Evropejca 30 % pod povprečjem Skupnosti, po pristopu leta 1986 pa je to veljalo za vsakega petega Evropejca.
the Single Act: a new frontier for Europe’, later referred to as the ‘Delors I Package’, the Commission suggested rules to improve the budgetary discipline and procedure.
predlagala pravila za izboljšanje proračunske discipline in postopka.
The proposal concerned a new interinstitutional agreement under which Parliament, Council and Commission would agree on a multiannual financial perspective and budgetary priorities.
Predlog je zadeval nov medinstitucionalni sporazum, na podlagi katerega bi se Parlament, Svet in Komisija strinjali o večletni finančni perspektivi in proračunskih prednostnih nalogah.
In the light of the conclusions of the Brussels European Council of 11 and 12 February 1988, the three institutions concluded the Interinstitutional Agreement on 29 June 1988 which established for the first time a five-year financial perspective, from 1988 to 1992.
Glede na sklepe Evropskega sveta v Bruslju 11. in 12. februarja 1988 so vse tri institucije 29. junija 1988 sklenile medinstitucionalni sporazum, s katerim je bila prvič vzpostavljena petletna finančna perspektiva, in sicer za obdobje 1988–1992.
The Commission put forward a 'White Paper' on the completion of the common market by 1992 to the Council as early as 1985.
Komisija je Svetu že leta 1985 predložila Belo knjigo o dokončnem oblikovanju notranjega trga do leta 1992.
As a result of the budget crisis, and the desire to complete the internal market and to enhance economic and social cohesion, the Commission submitted proposals to the Parliament and to the Council for reforming the Community financial system.
Pozneje sta k razpravi o tem, kako doseči nadaljnje združevanje trga, prispevali poročili italijanskih ekonomistov Tommasa Padoa-Schioppe in Paola Cecchinija.
In its Communication of 15 February 1987 entitled ‘Making a success of
Medtem ko Cecchinijevo poročilo ocenjuje
Improving infrastructure
Izboljšanje infrastrukure
Jacques Delors, President of the European Commis-
Jacques Delors, predsednik Evropske komisije
Bruce Millan, Member of the European Commission sion between 1985 and 1995.
Bruce Millan, član Evropske komisije med med letoma 1985 in 1995.
between 1989 and 1995, responsible for Regional
letoma 1989 in 1995, zadolžen za regionalno politiko in odnose z Odborom regij.
While the Cecchini report estimated "the cost of non-Europe", i.e. the economic losses of the non-completion of the single market, between 4.25 % and 6.5 % of GDP, the Padoa-Schioppa report suggested "serious risks of aggravated imbalances in the course of market liberalisation” and proposed “adequate accompanying measures to speed up adjustments in structurally weak regions and countries".
„stroške Neevrope“, tj. gospodarske izgube zaradi nedokončanja enotnega trga, med 4,25 % in 6,5 % BDP, Padoa-Schioppovo poročilo omenja „resno tveganje zaradi vedno večjega neravnovesja med liberalizacijo trga“ in predlaga „ustrezne spremljevalne ukrepe za pospešitev prilagajanja v strukturno šibkih regijah in državah“.
The 'Delors I package' which the European Council finally adopted in March 1998, gave way to an ambitious '1992' programme including reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, strengthening Community action in the fields of Cohesion Policy, science, technology, environmental and transport policies.
Delorsov paket I, ki ga je Evropski svet dokončno sprejel marca 1988, je prepustil mesto ambicioznemu programu iz leta 1992, vključno z reformo skupne kmetijske politike, in s tem krepitvi delovanja Skupnosti na področju kohezijske politike, znanosti, tehnologije, okoljske in prometne politike.
“Europe sees its future as striking a balance between competition and cooperation, collectively trying to steer the destiny of the men and women who live in it.
„Evropa vidi svojo prihodnost v uravnovešenju konkurence in sodelovanja, ki skupaj poskušata upravljati usodo moških in žensk, ki živijo v Evropi. Ali je to preprosto? Ne.
Market forces are powerful.
Tržne sile so močne.
If we left things to their own devices, industry would be concentrated in the north and leisure pursuits in the south.
Če bi se stvari prepustile same sebi, bi se industrija zgostila na severu in brezdelje na jugu.
But these market forces, powerful though they may seem, do not always pull in the same direction.
Vendar te tržne sile, čeprav se zdijo zelo močne, niso vedno usmerjene v isto smer. Prizadevanje in politična težnja ljudi je poskusiti razviti uravnoteženo ozemlje.“
The most important budgetary shift favoured the three Structural Funds and led to a remarkable increase of resources.
Najpomembnejša proračunska sprememba je podprla tri strukturne sklade in vodila do velikega povečanja sredstev.
While annual payments increased from about ECU 6.4 billion in 1988 to ECU 20.5 billion in 1993 , their relative share jumped from 16 to nearly 31 % of the EU budget.
Medtem ko so se letna plačila povečala s približno 6,4 milijarde ECU leta 1988 na 20,5 milijarde ECU leta 1993, se je njihov sorazmerni delež povečal s 16 % na skoraj 31 % proračuna EU.
This went hand in hand with a radical transformation in the way the funds were managed.
To je bilo usklajeno s temeljitim preoblikovanjem načina upravljanja skladov.
The European Social Fund (ESF) since 1958, the European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) since 1962, and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) since 1975, had – in accordance with the annual budget procedure and national quotas agreed in the referring regulations – developed a system of re-funding projects which were selected and introduced by the Member States.
Evropski socialni sklad, ustanovljen leta 1958, Evropski kmetijski usmerjevalni in jamstveni sklad, ustanovljen leta 1962, in Evropski sklad za regionalni razvoj, ustanovljen leta 1975, so v skladu s postopkom letnega proračuna in nacionalnimi kvotami, dogovorjenimi v navedenih uredbah, razvili sistem refinanciranja projektov, ki so jih izbrale in predstavile države članice.
Improving transport connections
Izboljšanje prometnih povezav, Grčija
Upgrading railways
Nadgradnja železnice, Irska
Improving water conservation
Izboljšanje varovanja vode
Construction of a new crossborder road between
Gradnja nove čezmejne ceste med Grčijo
Track upgrading for extension of the Dublin area
Nadgradnja proge za širitev železniškega in Bolgarijo, pokrajina Drama, Grčija.
Greece and Bulgaria, Drama, Greece.
omrežja za dnevne migracije na območju
> Objective 1: promoting the development and structural adjustment of regions whose development is lagging behind; > Objective 2: converting regions seriously affected by industrial decline; > Objective 3: combating long-term unemployment; > Objective 4: facilitating the occupational integration of young people; > Objective 5: (a) speeding up the adjustment of agricultural structures and (b) promoting the development of rural areas. To overcome this 'justeretour' system, the Commission began to develop and finance regional projects on a more autonomous and experimental basis which became the blueprint of Cohesion Policy’s method of implementation.
> cilj 1: pospeševanje razvojnega in strukturnega prilagajanja regij, ki zaostajajo v razvoju; > cilj 2: preoblikovanje regij, ki so resno prizadete zaradi upada industrije; > cilj 3: boj proti dolgotrajni brezposelnosti; > cilj 4: olajševanje poklicnega vključevanja mladih; > cilj 5: (a) pospeševanje prilagajanja kmetijskih struktur in (b) spodbujanje razvoja podeželja. in Evropskega kmetijskega usmerjevalnega in jamstvenega sklada ter leta 1979 sprožile majhne pilotne projekte v Neaplju in Belfastu ter nekaj let pozneje v departmaju Lozère v južni Franciji.
At the beginning of the 1980s, more extensive experimental projects focussing on an integrated approach to regional planning were undertaken in other parts of the Community through the Integrated Development Operations (IDOs).
Na začetku osemdesetih let 20. stoletja so se v drugih delih Skupnosti začeli obsežnejši poskusni projekti, ki so se osredotočali na celostni pristop k regionalnemu načrtovanju z integriranimi razvojnimi operacijami.
Larger experimental programmes financed at European level were the Integrated Mediterranean Programmes (IMPs) allocated in 1986 to Greece, Italy and France.
Večji poskusni programi, ki so bili financirani na evropski ravni, so bili integrirani programi za Sredozemlje, leta 1986 dodeljeni Grčiji, Italiji in Franciji.
This development was underpinned by a paradigm shift in urban and regional development policies and studies suggesting more integrated, bottom-up approaches that favoured 'soft' measures instead of only focussing on physical investment in, e.g. enterprises and infrastructure.
Ta razvoj je podprla sprememba modela v urbanistični in regionalni razvojni politiki ter študijah, ki predlagajo celovitejši pristop od spodaj navzgor, pri čemer je ta podpiral „mehke“ ukrepe namesto osredotočanja na le materialne naložbe v, na primer, podjetja in infrastrukturo.
COHESIONPOLICYBETWEEN 1989AND1993
KOHEZIJSKAPOLITIKAMED LETOMA1989IN1993
The 1988 reform introduced a number of principles for Cohesion Policy and its instruments which since then remain the policy’s mode d'emploi.
Z reformo iz leta 1988 je bilo uvedenih veliko načel za kohezijsko politko in njene instrumente, ki od takrat ostajajo navodila za uporabo te politike. Ta načela so:
> Concentration on a limited number of objectives with the focus on the least developed regions; Covering 25 % or about 86.2 million inhabitants, the funding provided by the ERDF, the ESF and the EAGGF under Objective 1 totalled ECU 43.8 billion (64 % of the total).
> osredotočanje na omejeno število ciljev s poudarkom na najmanj razvitih regijah; > načrtovanje večletnih programov na podlagi analiz, strateškega načrtovanja in vrednotenja; > načelo dodatnosti, ki zagotavlja, da države članice ne nadomestijo nacionalnih izdatkov z izdatki EU; Financiranje, ki zajema 25 % ali približno 86,2 milijona prebivalcev, iz Evropskega sklada za regionalni razvoj, Evropskega socialnega sklada in Evropskega kmetijskega usmerjevalnega in jamstvenega sklada je na podlagi cilja 1 skupaj zagotovilo 43,8 milijona ECU (64 % celotnega zneska).
Major beneci-ary countries were Spain with an allocation of ECU 10.2 billion with 57.7 % of its population living in Objective 1 regions, followed by Italy (ECU 8.5 billion; 36.4 % of the population), Portugal (ECU 8.45 billion; 100 %), Greece (ECU 7.5 billion; 100 %) and Ireland (ECU 4.46 billion; 100 %).
Glavne države upravičenke so bile Španija z dodeljenimi sredstvi v višini 10,2 milijarde ECU, pri čemer 57,7 % prebivalcev živi v regijah iz cilja 1, Italija (8,5 milijarde ECU s 36,4 % prebivalcev), Portugalska (8,45 milijarde ECU s 100 % prebivalcev), Grčija (7,5 milijarde ECU s 100 % prebivalcev) in Irska (4,46 milijarde ECU s 100 % prebivalcev).
Smaller amounts were allocated to Germany for its eastern German Länder covered by Objective 1 as of 1990, France for Corsica and the French overseas departments, and the United Kingdom for Northern Ireland.
Manjši zneski so bili dodeljeni Nemčiji za vzhodnonemške dežele, ki so od leta 1990 zajete v cilju 1, Franciji za Korziko in francoske čezmorske departmaje ter Združenemu kraljestvu za Severno Irsko.
> Multiannual programming based on analysis, strategic planning and evaluation; 1989-93
> partnerstvo pri oblikovanju in izvajanju programov, ki vključujejo nacionalne in pod- 1989-93
Fighting unemployment
Boj proti brezposelnosti
Building bridges
Gradnja mostov, Španija
PAGE11 investment under Objective 1 was spent on infrastructure, namely in the field of transport and environment, 33.6 % on productive investment such as direct and indirect aid to enterprises, and 29.6 % on human resources.
STRAN11 prometa in okolja je bilo porabljenih 35,2 % naložb na podlagi cilja 1, 33,6 % sredstev je bilo porabljenih za produktivne naložbe, kot sta posredna in neposredna pomoč podjetjem, 29,6 % pa za človeške vire.
16.6 % or about 57.3 million inhabitants lived in Objective 2 areas and beneted from ECU 6.1 billion (9 % of the total) provided by the ERDF and the ESF.
Na območjih iz cilja 2 je živelo 16,6 % ali približno 57,3 milijona prebivalcev, ki so prejeli 6,1 milijarde ECU (9 % skupnega zneska) iz Evropskega sklada za regionalni razvoj in Evropskega socialnega sklada.
Major beneciary countries were the United Kingdom (ECU 2 billion; 35.5 % of the population), followed by Spain (ECU 1.5 billion; 22.2 %) and France (ECU 1.2 billion; 18.3 %).
Glavne države upravičenke so bile Združeno kraljestvo (2 milijardi ECU s 35,5 % prebivalcev), Španija (1,5 milijarde ECU z 22,2 % prebivalcev) in Francija (1,2 milijarde ECU z 18,3 % prebivalcev).
Apart from Greece, Ireland and Portugal, all other Member States beneted to a smaller extent from Objective 2 allocations.
Razen Grčije, Irske in Portugalske so vse druge države članice prejele manjše zneske z dodelitvijo sredstev za cilj 2.
Of the total investment, 55.1 % was spent on productive environment supporting small and medium-sized enterprises in particular, 23.9 % on physical regeneration and environment, often of formerly industrially used sites, and 20.9 % on human resources.
Od celotne naložbe je bilo porabljenih 55,1 % sredstev za produktivno okolje v podporo zlasti malim in srednje velikim podjetjem, 23,9 % za materialno obnovo in okolje, pogosto nekdanjih industrijskih lokacij, in 20,9 % za človeške vire.
“The Single European Act improves significantly the institutional system and sets new objectives for the Community, notably the completion of the internal market by 1992 and the strengthening of economic and social cohesion.
„Z Enotnim evropskim aktom se bistveno izboljšuje institucionalni sistem, v njem pa so določeni tudi novi cilji za Skupnost, predvsem dokončanje notranjega trga do leta 1992 ter krepitev ekonomske in socialne kohezije.
The realisation of these two objectives will also respond to the hopes and needs of the countries which have just joined and which rightly expect that their involvement in the Community should underpin their development and help raise their living standards through a combination of their own efforts and support from their partners.”
Uresničitev teh dveh ciljev bo tudi odgovorila na upe in potrebe držav, ki so pravkar pristopile k Skupnosti in upravičeno pričakujejo, da bo njihovo sodelovanje v Skupnosti okrepilo razvoj in pomagalo izboljšati njihov življenjski standard s kombinacijo lastnega prizadevanja in podpore partnerjev.“
Commission of the European Communities: Making a success of the Single Act: a new frontier for Europe, COM (87) 100 final, 15 February 1987
Komisija Evropskih skupnosti: Uspešnost Enotnega akta: novo področje za Evropo, COM(87) 100 konč., 15. februarja 1987.
Focussing on target groups for active labour market policies, programmes under Objectives 3 and 4 had no geographical concentration and were agreed at national level instead.
Programi na podlagi ciljev 3 in 4, ki so se osredotočali na ciljne skupine za dejavne politike trga delovne sile, niso bili geografsko osredotočeni, ampak so bili sprejeti na nacionalni ravni.
The total allocation for both objectives was about ECU 6.67 billion (10 % of the total) and provided by the ESF only.
Skupna dodelitev za oba cilja je bila približno 6,67 milijarde ECU (10 % skupnega zneska) in jo je zagotovil le Evropski socialni sklad.
Major beneciary countries were the United Kingdom (ECU 1.5 billion), followed by France (ECU 1.44 billion) and Germany (ECU 1.05 billion).
Glavne države upravičenke so bile Združeno kraljestvo (1,5 milijarde ECU), Francija (1,44 milijarde ECU) in Nemčija 1,05 milijarde ECU).
All other countries received smaller amounts with the exception of Greece, Ireland and Portugal for which ESF allocations were integrated under Objective 1.
Vse druge države so prejele manjše zneske, razen Grčije, Irske in Portugalske, za katere so bile dodelitve sredstev iz Evropskega socialnega sklada vključene v cilju 1.
Improving road signs at the border
Izboljšanje prometnih znakov na meji
Bridge over the Guadiana river linking
Most nad reko Guadiana, ki povezuje
Clearing up confusion for trucks crossing the borders
Odpravljanje zadreg za tovornjake, ki prestopajo
Renovating the Temple Bar area in Dublin, Ireland.
Obnova območja Temple Bar v Dublinu, Irska.
ADMINISTRATION ANDGOVERNANCE
UPRAVLJANJE IN VODENJE
Germany (ECU 1.4 billion) and Italy (ECU 0.96 billion) as the major beneciary countries.
Nazadnje, cilj 5 je znašal 6,3 milijarde ECU (9,2 % skupnega zneska), Francija (2,3 milijarde ECU), Nemčija (1,4 milijarde ECU) in Italija (0,96 milijarde ECU) pa so bile glavne države upravičenke.
While interventions under Objective 5a had no general geographical concentration, those under Objective 5b were concentrated on rural areas representing a population of 17.6 million or 5 % of the total.
Medtem ko posegi na podlagi cilja 5a niso bili na splošno geografsko osredotočeni, so bili posegi na podlagi cilja 5b osredotočeni na podeželje, kjer živi 17,6 milijona ljudi ali 5 % skupnega prebivalstva.
While expenditure under Objective 5a concerned productive investment, funding under Objective 5b was made available for new economic activities in rural areas (47.2 %), infrastructure and human resources (20 % each) and environment (12.1 %).
Medtem ko so stroški na podlagi cilja 5a zadevali produktivne naložbe, je bilo financiranje na podlagi cilja 5b na voljo za nove gospodarske dejavnosti na podeželju (47,2 %), infrastrukturo in človeške vire (po 20 % za vsako področje) ter okolje (12,1 %).
Administration of the Structural Funds between 1989 and 1993 was governed by a set of five Council regulations providing for their eective-ness and coordination, their implementation and general provisions, and for the implementation of each of the three funds.
Upravljanje strukturnih skladov med letoma 1989 in 1993 je urejalo pet uredb Sveta, s katerimi so se zagotavljali učinkovitost in usklajevanje skladov, njihovo izvajanje in splošne določbe ter izvajanje vsakega od treh skladov.
While the coordination regulation was adopted on 24 June 1988, the Council decisions on the other four were taken on 19 December 1988.
Medtem ko je bila uredba o usklajevanju sprejeta 24. junija 1988, so bili sklepi Sveta o drugih štirih uredbah sprejeti 19. decembra 1988.
All of them entered into force on 1 January 1989.
Vse uredbe so začele veljati 1. januarja 1989.
The coordination regulation dened the objectives and principles mentioned above, the tasks of the funds, the dierent forms of assistance, the most important of them being 'Operational Programmes', the obligation for the Member States to introduce for each of the objectives specic 'regional development plans' (for the Objectives 1,2 and 5b) or 'national plans' (for the Objectives 3 and 4).
V uredbi o usklajevanju so določeni navedeni cilji in načela, naloge skladov, različne oblike pomoči, med drugim tudi najpomembnejši operativni programi, in obveznost držav članic, da za vsak cilj uvedejo posebne načrte za regionalni razvoj (za cilje 1, 2 in 5b) ali nacionalne načrte (za cilja 3 in 4).