natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The main purpose of the present report is to look even further ahead, beyond 2006, preparing the ground forthe Commission’s proposals later this year on the kind of cohesion policies that will be needed in the enlarged Union.
Glavni namen sedanjega poročila je, da se ozremo v prihodnost, tj. po letu 2006, in pripravimo teren za predloge Komisije, ki jih bo sprejela v tem letu in ki bodo obravnavale obliko kohezijske politike, potrebne v razširjeni Uniji.
The report confirms that after enlargement, income and employment disparities between the regions willwiden considerably.
Poročilo potrjuje, da se bodo po širitvi v veliki meri povečale razlike v dohodkih in zaposlenosti med regijami.
It thus provides support to one of the principal conclusions in the great debate on the futureof cohesion policy, that the main challenge for the future will be to promote catching up on the part of both theless developed regions in the new, and in the present, Member States.
S tem potrjuje enega glavnih zaključkov v veliki debati o prihodnosti kohezijske politike, da je največji izziv v prihodnosti spodbujanje razvitosti manj razvitih regij v sedanjih kot tudi novih državah članicah.
A majority of contributions to the debate have also reinforced one of my own convictions on the need for anambitious cohesion policy for the period after 2006 capable of responding to expectations of allof its citizens.Increasingly, these same citizens look to Europe for help in finding solutions to the major threats posed, for example, in a global and more competitive economy, and in supporting their efforts to take advantage of the newopportunities of the knowledge economy.
Večina prispevkov v debati me je utrdila v prepričanju, da za obdobje po letu 2006 potrebujemo ambiciozno kohezijsko politiko, ki bo sposobna izpolniti pričakovanja vseh državljanov.Ti se vse bolj obračajo po pomoč na Evropo, da bi poiskala rešitve za vse grožnje, ki jih predstavlja npr. globalno in bolj konkurenčno gospodarstvo, in podpre njihova prizadevanja za iskanje novih priložnosti v na znanju temelječem gospodarstvu.
I believe that Europe must have the vision to respond to these demands by maintaining a policy that addressesthe many problems arising in the regions, while helping to exploit the opportunities, even in the more prosperous Member States.
Po mojem mnenju mora Evropa imeti vizijo, s katero bo lahko odgovorila na te zahteve z nadaljevanjem politike, ki se loteva mnogih problemov, ki se pojavljajo v regijah, in z zagotavljanjem pomoči pri izkoriščanju vseh priložnosti, tudi v bolj razvitih državah članicah.
Europe needs regional policy instruments that are well targeted, simple to use and whichguarantee the involvement of all the key actors at regional and local level.
Evropa potrebuje instrumente regionalne politike, ki so učinkoviti in enostavni ter zagotavljajo sodelovanje vseh ključnih faktorjev na regionalni in lokalni ravni.
The development of these ideas, and designing workable proposals for the future, represent my personalagenda for 2003.
Razvoj takih idej in oblikovanje delovnih predlogov o prihodnosti bosta glavni potezi mojega dela v letu 2003.
Michel Barnier Member of the European Commission responsible for Regional policy
Michel Barnier Član Evropske komisije, odgovoren za regionalno politiko
Update on the data used in the report
Posodobitev podatkov iz poročila
The second progress report on economic and socialcohesion is the follow-up to the undertaking by the European Commission to report to the Council regularly on the preparation of its proposals for the con-
Drugo poredku ekonomske in socialne kohezije pomeni spremljanje izopska komisija zavezala, da bo Svetu redno poripra-vah predlogov za nadaljevanje kohezijske politike po letu
The second progress report updates the data concerning regional GDP for 2000 and employment and therate of joblessness in 2001.
Drugo poročilo o napredku je dopolnjeno z zadnjimi podatki o regionalnem BDP-ju za leto 2000, zaposlitvi in stopnji nezaposlenosti v letu 2001.
the data concerning regional economic and social disparities, describes the state of the debate on thefuture of cohesion policy and outlines the results ofthe accession negotiations with the ten future Member States.
Regionalni podatki o BDP-ju dveh držav, ki nista v načrtu za pristop k Uniji pred letom 2006 (Romunija in Bolgarija), so vključeni v poročilo, a niso upoštevani v izračunih povprečne- razlikah v regijah, opisuje stanje debate o prihodnji kohezijski politiki in povzema rezultate pristopnih pogajanj z ža
Economic and social convergence is continuing in theexisting European Union countries, with some slightvariations:
Ekonomska in socialna konvercah Evropske unije nadaljujeta z majhnimi razlikami:
•The ratio between the 10% of the most prosperousregions and the 10% of the least prosperous ones inthe EU25 is 4.4 (compared with 2.6 in the EU15).
• Razmerje med 10 % najbolj razvitih regij in 10 % najmanj razvitih regij v EU s 25 članicami znaša 4,4 (v EU s 15 članicami je to znašalo 2,6).
-at national level, the “cohesion” countries3 are con- tinuing to make up lost ground;
trudijo nadoknaditi zamujeno,
-at regional level in the EU, disparities are narrowing;
- na regionalni ravni se v EU razlike zmanjšujejo,
A balanced regional development strategy is neededtherefore for the whole of the territory of the Union.
Strategija uravnoteženega regionalnega razvoja je potre.
In the EU25, only30 regions in the current Member States (i.e. 47 million people representing 12% of the population) willbe below the threshold of 75% of the new average GDP.
V EU s 25 članicami bo 30 regij v sedanjih državah članicah (tj. 47 milijonov prebivalcev, ki predstavljajo 12 % prebivalstva EU) pod pragom 75 % novega povprečnega BDP-ja v EU.
In an EU 27 there would be only 18 suchregions (i.e. 24 million people representing 6% ofthe population).
V EU s 27 članicami bi bilo le 18 takih regij (tj. 24 milijonov prebivalcev, ki predstavljajo 6 % prebivalstva EU).
•15% of people in Europe are below the nationalpoverty threshold (without social transfers otherthan retirement pensions this figure would be 24%).
• 15 % prebivalcev Evropske unije živi pod pragom revščine (brez dodatnih socialnih transferjev poleg pokojnin bi bila številka precej višja, in sicer 24 %).
•Each euro disbursed by the Structural Funds in the
• Vsak evro, ki ga strukturni skladi porabijo v regijah v okviru
Objective 14 regions results in an increase in their
V letu 2001 je Unija doživela precejšen upad gospodarske rasti1,5 % v primerjavi s 3,5 % v letu 2000.
GDP of EUR1.33 and also has knock-on effects inmore prosperous regions: one quarter of originalexpenditure benefits other parts of the Union.
Cilja 1, povzroči rast njihovega BDP-ja za 1,33 evra, kar ima najrevnejše regije Unije.
In 2001 the Union experienced a significantdownturn in economic growth: GDP in the EU15rose by only 1.5% as against 3.5% in 2000.
tudi negativne učinke v bogatejših regijah: četrtina prvotnih izdatkov gre v druga področja Unije.
The impact on employment of the economic downturn has been less severe than expected.
Kohezijske države so še naprej zmanjševale razkorak z ostalimi državami Unije, razen Gr.
The main employment trends in the Union are the following:
Na Irskem so bili pr-ja na prebivalca po ki je dosegla 118 % povprupnosti v letu 2001 (številka je dosegla 115 % v letu 2000 in samo 64 % v letu 1988).
The cohesion countries continued to narrow thegap with the other countries in the Union, apartfrom Greece.
• V letu 2001 je bila rast zaposlenosti nizka, saj se je slednja povem, Nizozemskem in Švedskem ter najnižja v Italiji in Gr Obenem pa je raven nezaposlenosti rahlo porasla v prvi polovici leta 2002 in dosegla 7,7 %.
Ireland experienced a sustained rate ofgrowth with per capita GDP in purchasing power parity reaching 118% of the Community average in2001 (as against 115% in 2000 and only 64% in1988).
Še posebej je bila visoka v Italiji, Grvne skupine prizadetih sestavljale ženske in mladi.
Regional disparities within Member States continued to widenin 2000.
Regionalne razlike med državami članicami so se še naprej povečevale v letu 2000. Kot posledica konvergence med držae med reg emenjene.
•In 2001 the rate of growth of employment waslow, rising by 1.3%. It was highest in Denmark,the Netherlands and Sweden and lowest in Italyand Greece.
• Regionalne razlike v zaposlenosti so se zmanjšale, a so ostale precejšnje: v regijah z najvišjo ravnjo zaposlenosti leta znaša 78,1 %, medtem ko v tistih z najnižjo ravnjo znaša 48,6 %.
At the same time, the rate of unem-ploymentwas slightly up in the first half of 2002,reaching 7.7%.
Raven nezaposlenosti se giblje med 2,3 % in 19,7 %, odvisno od regije.
It was especially high in Italy,Greece and Spain, where women and young people were the main groups affected.
Med regijami v okviru iste države-diti v Franciji in Italiji.
In the Objective 1 regions,per capita incomeremained slightly above 71% of the Communityaveragein 2000. The catching-up effect is best measured over a five-year period, when the income gapclosed by 1.5 points between 1995 and 2000 and bytwo points in the regions eligible under Objective 1since 1989, underlining the long-term effectivenessof the Structural Funds.
V regijah v okviru Cilja 1 je dohodek na prebivalca ostal malo nad 71 % povprupnosti v letu 2000. o se je razlika v dohodkih ustavila pri 1,5 te med letom 1995 in letom 2000 in pri dveh tah v regijah, ki so upraviru Cilja 1 od leta 1989, s poudarkom na dolgorovitosti strukturnih skladov.
The EU25 will consist of three groups of countries(see graph on page16):
vljale tri skupine držav (glej grafikon na strani 16 ):
•Regional disparities in employmenthave nar-rowedbut remain significant: regions with thehighest rate of employment have an average of78.1%, while in those with the lowest rate, it is48%.
• Socialna kohezija še naprej kažeedek.
The gap in terms of unemployment ratesranges from 2.3% to 19.7% depending on region.Between regions within the same Member State,the widest gaps are to be found in France and Italy.
Razlika v skupnem dohodku med najrazvitejšimi in najrevnejšimi regijami se je zmanjšala, enako se je zgodilo s številom Evropejcev, ki živijo pod pragom re.
•the eight poorest future Member States (with a percapita GDP equivalent to 42% of the Communityaverage);
• osem najržaprebivalca, ki znaša 42 % povpr upnosti);
•an intermediary group (Spain, Cyprus, Portugal,Slovenia, Greece) with a per capita GDP between71% and 92% of the Community average;
• vmesna skupina (Španija, Ciper, Portugalska, Slovenija, Gr-jem na prebivalca med 71 % in 92 % pov-prupnosti;
In the candidate countries:
• je na zaposlenost vplivala gospodarska kriza iz leta 2001.
•a group that includes the other existing Member States, with an average per capita GDP equivalentto 115% of the Community average.
• skupina, ki vkpovprpovpr žave-jem na prebivalca, ki znaša 115 % upnosti.
•regional disparities in employment are smaller thanin the EU but remain significant.
• so regionalne razlike v zaposlenosti manjše kot v EU, a ostajajo precejšnje.
In 2001 the rate ofjoblessness was 13%; it was 24.3% in the mostaffected regions and 3.6% in those suffering least.
V letu 2001 je znašala raven nezaposlenosti 13 %. V najmanj prizadetih regijah je znašala 3,6 % in v najbolj prizadetih 24,6 %.
In the EU25, disparities in terms of employmentand social cohesion will widen.
V EU s 25 članicami se bodo razlike v zaposlenosti in socialni koheziji še povečale.
The average rate ofjoblessness will rise, in the same way as the share ofagricultural employment.
Povprven nezaposlenosti se bo povo tudi delež zaposlenosti v kmetijstvu.
Industrial employment will
Zaposlenost v industriji bo ostala nespremenjena in pomen storitev v celotni zaposlitveni strukturi se bo zmanjšal.
Once enlargement takes place, disparities are goingto widen.
Po širitvi Evropske unije se bodo razlike pov.
The most up-to-date statistics show that 48regions in the EU15 (representing 18% of the population) had a per capital income below 75% of theaverage Community.
Najnovejše statistike kažejo, da je 48 regnicami (kar predstavlja 18 % prebivalstva) imelo dohodek na prebivalca pod 75 % povprupnosti.
In the EU25, there will be 67 ofthese regions representing 25% of the population.The ratio between the 10% of the most prosperousregions and the same percentage of the least prosperous ones in the EU25 will be 4.4 (as against 2.6 inthe EU15).
V EU s 25 ih regij, ki bodo predstavljale 25 % prebivalstva. Razmerje med 10 % najrazvitejših regij in enakim odstotkom najmanj razvitih reg
(See map on page 15)
Območja in kohezija
4.New data on the factors determining real convergence
Ena obravnava zadnje dosežke v otoških regijah.
5.Territories and cohesion
V neki drugi se ukvarjajo z gorsk Dve študiji obravnaeški kapital in njegovo vlogo v razvoju regij in globalnem, na znanju tgospodarstvu.
The European Commission has launched a series ofstudies on the territorial component of cohesion.One of these outlines the latest developments in theisland regions.
leta 2006 kaže spodbudne rezultate. Veljajo ocene, da bo celotni BDP na Portugalskem v tem obdobju 3,5 % nad tistim, ki bi ga ta država ustvarila brez podpore Skupnosti (2,2 % v Grin 1,1 % v Španiji).
Another deals with mountain areas.Two studies on human capital deal respectively withits role in regional development and in the globalknowledge-based economy.
Poleg tega pa ima podpora regijam v oke izven teh regij, saj grtina prvotnih izdatkov v druga podrdesetina v države, ki.
•Europe’s 286 islands have 10 million inhabitants.
• Na 286 evropskih otokih živi 10 milijonov prebivalcev.
•95% of these live on islands in the Mediterranean,mainly Sicily, Crete, the Balearic Islands and Corsica.
• 95 % jih živi na otokih v Sredozemskem morju, predvsem na Siciliji, Kreti, na Balearskih otokih in Korziki.
Those with the most serious problems havea population of less than 5 000.
Tisti z največjimi težavami imajo manj kot 5000 prebivalcev.
Objective 1, 11% by Objective 25 and 97% is eligible for the exceptions on public aid provided for in the Treaty.
• 87 % prebivalcev otokov pokriva Cilj 1, 11 % Cilj 2 in 97 % jih je upravičenih do izjem pri javni pomoči, za katero je poskrbljeno v Pogodbi o EU.
New indicators on the state of technologicaladvanceare available also and confirm that techno-logicalinnovation and the growth of the knowledgebased economy are lagging behind in the countries ofsouthern Europe.
Na voljo so tudi novi kazalci o stanju tehnološkega napredka, ki potrjujejo, da tehnološke inovacije in rast na znanju tva zaostajajo v državah južne Evrope.
The number of patents applied forper million of the population in Finland, Sweden and Germany is at least twice the European average compared with less than half in Ireland, Italy, Spain,Greece and Portugal.
Število prijavljenih patentov na milijon prebivalcev je na Finskem, Švedskvsaj dvakrat vot evropsko povpr, medtem ko je število manjše od polovice povprrskem, v Italiji, Španiji, Grortugalskem.
Regional disparities in this areaare very significant, and are even more so in the areaof advanced technologies.
Regionalne razlike na tem podrecejšnje in so še vnaprednih tehnologij.
•Support for the least developed regions mustremain a priority of cohesion policy but the conditions of eligibility for the aid and its use, in particular the adoption of a national approach, are stillbeing discussed.
• Ukrepanje Komisije je še naprej potrebno v ostalih regijah EU, vendar se bo moralo osredotrepe z visoko dodano vrednostjo in tiste, ki spodbujajo konkur
•Community action continues to be needed in theother regions of the EU but will have to focus more
Prvo poredku ekonomske kohezije, ki so ga Svetu predstavili 18. februarja 2002, je leta pozdravil z veliko mero nak
The first progress report on economic cohesion waswelcomed by the Councilto which it was presentedon 18 February 2002.
• Podpora najmanj razvitim regijam mora ostati prioriteta kohezijske politike, a so pogoji za upra ejetje nacionalnega pristopa, v fazi razprave.
The positions of the variousdelegations are provisional and focus on thefollowing:
izadevanj, ki jih je treba ohraniti tudi po letu 2006, je špansko predsedstvo zavz, da je prag 0,45 % BDP-ja dobra primerjalna ocena glede na povitvi.
5.The aim of the Objective 2 programmes is to convert regions with structural difficulties.
Programi Cilja 2 so namenjeni preoblikovanju regij s strukturnimi težavami.
•On the question of the financial effort to be keptup after 2006, the Spanish Presidency took theview that a threshold of 0.45% of GDP was a goodbenchmark given the widening of disparities following enlargement.
• Poenostavitev postopkov za delovanje strukturnih skladov je bila vrat poudarjena. Evropska komisija je ob iložnostih v tem smislu uveljavila predloge ob veljavi pravne ureditve.
Other delegations reservedtheir position until later.
Vprašanje bo treba podrobneje pri tem zlasti razjasniti vlogo Komisije.
It also spoke in favour of reforming and simplifying the Structural Funds with a view to enlargement.
Evropski parlament je 6. novembra 2002 sprejel mnenje o prvem poredku ekonomske in socialne kohezije.
The European Commission has put forward proposals to this effect on several occasionsunder the Regulation in force.
V njem je potrdil svojo podporo Komisiji za ohranitev , vzajemne in skupne kohezijske politike in trajnega razvoja, ki spodbuja regionalno kohezijo in policentrni, skladni in uravnoteženi razvoj Unije, minimalno 0,45 % BDP-ja za subvencioniranje kohezije v Evropi, podporo za podrežavami, okrepitsodelovanja in nasprotovanje ponovni nacionalizaciji.
The issue will haveto be reviewed in greater detail after 2006 withthe role of the Commission in particular beingclarified.
Parlament je Komisijo pozval, da predstavir in predloge za izboljšanje medsebojne konsistentnosti politik EU, o Cilju
The Committee of the Regions,too, in its opinionof 10 October 2002, again emphasised the importance of regions lagging behind in their development,the coordination of Community policies and simplification.
Seminarja o prioritetah Unije na področju regionalne politike se je udeležilo 600 ljudi iz držažav kandidatk.
It noted that the European Commissionregarded the threshold of 0.45% of Community GDPas a minimum for the financing of regional policy.
Obravnavali so dodano vrednost v Skupnosti ovitnih skladov.
Itunderlined the need for a transitional period of adequate support for regions that were likely to be thevictims, following enlargement, of the statisticalimpact and took a stand in favour of an Objective 2aimed at eliminating regional imbalances.
Pojavile so se te splošnega sporazuma, med katerimi so bila spet vprašanja pomena kohezije in prioritete, ki jih morajo uživati najmanj razvite regije, potreba po nenehnem delovanju izven teh podr, poenostavitev postopkov, možnost ustanovitve enega vira financiranja in rezerve za nepredvidljive dogodke ali nadaljevanje sodelovanja med regijami.
2.The debate in the seminars arrangedby the Commission
Na seminarju so bile predstavljene tudi te, ki jih je treba podrobneje prz razjasnitvijo obveznosti Komisije, definiranje meril o izpolnjevanju pogojev, konsistentnost z drugimi politikami Skupnosti in strukturnimi skladi, oblika in vsebina tripartitnih pogodb, kiomisije, države in regije, sorazmernost postopkov za izvajanje glede na dodeljeno vsot
In it it affirmed its support for the Commission onmaintaining a strong, mutually-reinforcing and inclusive cohesion policy and sustainable development,promoting regional cohesion and the polycentric, harmonious and balanced development of the Union, aminimum of 0.45% of GDP to fundcohesion in Europe, support for areas with specific handicaps, thestrengthening of cooperation across frontiers andopposition to renationalisation.
Ekonomsko-socialni odbor EU je pojasnil svoje poglede v dveh mnenjih, ki podpirata nadaljevanje subvencioniranja v okviru Cilja 1 po letu 2006, pov% praga BDP-ja za subvencioniranje kohezije, utrditev Pobud Skupnosti, sprejetje koordinacije za spopadanje z gospodarskimi in socialnimi problemi v regijah v okviru Cilja 2, prioriteto investiranja v zapostavljanih regijah in ustanovitev vira za stabilizacijo regionalnega dohodka v primeru neprovane gospodarske krize in za premo-stitodprl je tudi uvedbo reform in poenostavitev postopkne-ga sklada z vidika širitve EU.
It also pointed to concerns, including the need to takeaccount of other indicators of eligibility for the Structural Funds, to improve consistency between different Community policies, to improve administrativecapacity in the candidate countries, and to simplify orstrengthen regional competitiveness.
Seminar o prioritetah, ki so povezane z zaposlenostjo in socialno kohezijo, je osvveko-vega kapitala in poudaril dodano vrednost ukrepov, ki zadevajo npr. doživljenjsk. Nekateri udeleženci so dejali, da je potrebna boljša koordinacija štirih stebrov evropske strategije zaposlovanja in evropskega socialnega sklada.
Parliamentcalled on the Commission to present a timetable andproposals for improving the mutual consistency of EUpolicies, on Objective 2 and on the future of Community Initiatives6.
Vsi, ki se zavzemajo za socialno vkskozi partnerstvo, bi morali biti deležni podpore s strani strukturnih skladov. Pri vprašanju o enakih priložnostih je treba dati prednost integralni obravnavi vprašanj, ki zadevajo politiko spolov.
The European Economic and Social Committeestated its views in two opinions favouring the continuation after 2006 of the grant of aid under Objective1, the raising of the 0.45% of GDP ceiling for the
Tudi Odbor regij je v svojem mnenju z dne 10. oktobra 2002 ponovno poudaril pomen regij, ki zaostajajo v razvoju, koordinacijo politike Skupnosti in poenostavitev
The seminar on the Union’s priorities for theregionswas attended by 600 participants from the Member States and candidate countries who discussed Community value added and the effectiveness of structural assistance.
Seminarja o mestnih območjih, ki je potekal v Londonu, se je udeležilo vot 600 ljudi, ki so vkograme
Points of generalagreement emerged, foremost among which onceagain were the importance of cohesion and the priority to be given to the least developed regions, theneed for continued action outside those areas, simplification, the possibility of a single source offinancing and a reserve for contingencies or continuing cooperation between regions.
6 nih skladov: Interregionalno sodelovanje ter sodelovanje med narodi, Leader spodbuja v boja proti vsem oblikam diskriminacije in neenakosti na trgu delovne sile ter Urban spodbuja gospodarsko in socialno
6.The Community Initiatives are additional to assistance under the Structural Funds: Interreg promotes cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation, Leader promotes rural development, Equal provides for the development of new ways of combating all forms of discrimination and inequality in thelabour market and Urban encourages the economic and social regeneration of cities and neighbourhoods in crisis.
Pobude Skrazvoj podeželja, Equal skrbi za razvobnovo mest in okolic, ki so v težavah.
Several topics were the focus of discussions held onthe future of cohesion policy in 2002.
• Najbolj oddaljene evropske regije (Kanarski otoki, Azori, Guadeloupe, Francoska Gvajana, Réunion, Martinique, Madeira) imajo 3,8 milijona prebivalcev in se uvrščajo v okvir Cilja 1 ter so upravičene do izjem pri javni pomoči, za katero je poskrbljeno v Pogodbi o EU.
The seminar on the priorities linked to employment and social cohesionhighlighted the importance of the role of human capital and emphasisedthe added value of actions targeting, for example,life-long learning.
URBAN, in tudi veliko županov. Poudarili so glavni prispevek programov URBAN za razvoj njihovih mest in dodano vrednost programa, kiovito, vidno ter takojšnje ukrepanje na mestu samem, visoko stopnjo partnerstva in doživljenjsk.