natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission's close engagement with the projects was hailed as a rare example of sup-port that went beyond funding to real commitment.
Dejstvo, da je Komisija tako vpletena v projekte, so pohvalili kot redek primer pomoｲi, ki se je iz golega «nanciranjaspremenilavresniｲnozavezanostprojektom.
The Daphne programme followed the general lines of the initiative, with three important in-novations: the ability for organisations from EFTA/EEA countries, central and east European countries, and Cyprus, Malta and Turkey to apply; the opening of the programme to local au-thorities as project leaders, not just partners; and the possibility of projects running for up to three years. This led to some complications.
Prva te™ava je bila ta, da je bilo anga™iranje dr™av neｲlanic EU pogojeno z okvirnimi sporazu-mi med EU in temi dr™avami, EU pa ni dokonｲno sklenila takega sporazuma þe z nobeno od dr™av kandidatk.
The « r s t w a s t h a t t h e i n c l u s i o nffo f t h e nffo n - mffe m b e r S t a t e cffo u n t r i e s d e p e n d e d o n f r a mffe w o r k a g r e e mffe n t s being in place between the EU and these States, and no agreement had as yet been « n a l i s e d b e t w e e n t h e E U a n d a p p l i c a n t S t a t e s .
To je povzroｲilo nekaj zmede med nosilci projektov, ki so ™e zaｲeli sodelo-vati s partnerji iz dr™av kandidatk › kar je bilo v nekaterih primerih zaradi programskih zahtev preprosto neizbe™no, zlasti v primeru projektov, ki so bili usmerjeni v ｲezmejne zadeve, kot so trgovina z ljudmi in migracije.
T h i s c a u s e d s o mffe cffo n f u s i o n a m o n g s t t h o s e submitting projects, since many projects went ahead and included full partners in the applicant States ̌ sometimes a clear programming imperative, especially in projects dealing with cross-border issues like tra/ckingandmigratioň andhadtobeaskedtorevisetheirprojects if they were to be recommended for funding.
Zaradi vsega tega je bila na te nosilce projektov naslovljena proþnja, da svoje projekte prilagodijo pogojem programa, ｲe ™elijo dobiti priporoｲilo za «nan-ciranje.
The need for the selection panel to suggest how such projects might be revised without det-riment to the outcomes (in order to provide suggestions to the organisations in the letter advising them of the successful outcome of their application) set a precedent for the selection panel to become more involved in suggesting improvements to funded projects right at the beginning of the process. In hindsight, this was a positive advance, since the selection panel included, at various times, experts in methodology, research and data collection, health issues, law enforcement, rights-based programming, dissemination and communication, and other areas of social programming.
Potreba, da odbor za izbiro projektov predlaga naｲine, kako te projekte popraviti, ne da bi ogrozili doseganje njihovih ciljev (da bi organizacijam zagotovili predloge, ki bi jim pomaga-li, da oddajo uspeþne prijave), je odbor ™e od samega zaｲetka spodbudila, da intenzivneje predlaga izboljþave «nanciranihprojektov.Tosejepoznejeizkazalokotpozitivno,sajjese-stava odbora pogosto vkljuｲevala strokovnjake na podroｲjih metodologije, raziskav in zbira-nja podatkov, zdravstva, odkrivanja nasilja in pregona storilcev, programov za zaþｲito pravic, razþirjanja in posredovanja informacij ter na drugih podroｲjih v okviru socialnih programov.
Without materially a.ectingthedesignoftheprojects,theex-perts were able to alert the Daphne programme coordinator to details that might need to be brought to the attention of the implementing organisation, or to suggest cuts in a project that seemed to be over-reaching capacity or, conversely, minor additions to project activity that would increase its impact or coverage.
Ne da bi kakor koli þkodovali oblikovanju projektov, so ti strokovnjaki koordinatorja programa Daphne opozarjali na doloｲene podrobnosti, pomembne za delo nosilcev projektov, pred-lagali skrｲitve projektov, za katere se je zdelo, da presegajo okvire zmogljivosti, ali manjþe razþiritve projektov, da bi poveｲali njihov uｲinek in doseg.
The second innovation, the opening-up of the call to local authorities as project leaders, was straightforward and gave rise to no new challenges, although in practice local authorities were slow to come forward as project leaders rather than partners.
Uvajanje druge novosti, to je mo™nosti, da lokalne oblasti nastopijo kot vodje projektov, je bilo nezahtevno in poslediｲno neproblematiｲno, ｲeprav so se v praksi lokalne oblasti le redko odloｲale za vlogo vodij projektov.
The third change, however, the inclusion of multiannual projects, a.ectedthemanagementof the overall Daphne budget and, indirectly, the selection of projects signi«cantly.Inthe«rstyear of the Daphne programme, the funds for projects of more than 12 months' duration had to be allocated out of that single year's budget.
Tretja novost, vkljuｲevanje veｲletnih programov, pa je pustila moｲan peｲat na izvrþevanje proraｲuna programa Daphne in posredno tudi na postopek izbiranja projektov.
This could have seriously reduced the number of projects funded that year as, for example, one three-year project would take up the fund-ing for three one-year projects.
V prvem letu programa Daphne so morala biti sredstva za projekte, daljþe od 12 mesecev, dodeljena iz-kljuｲno iz enoletnega proraｲuna, kar bi lahko obｲutno zmanjþalo þtevilo prihodnjih projektov v danem letu, saj so na primer stroþki enega triletnega programa enaki stroþkom treh eno-letnih programov.
This would risk discouraging applicants.
To pa bi lahko kandidate odvraｲalo od prijave projektov.
As a result, it was decided to limit the number of multiannual projects in order not to seriously disadvantage those who felt that their capacity did not allow them to manage multiannual projects (for example, because the size of the organisation did not allow it to bear the burden of expend-iture against delayed reimbursement for more than one year at a time).
Zaradi tega je bila sprejeta odloｲitev, da se þtevilo veｲletnih programov omeji, da bi prepreｲili resno þkodo, ki bi jo lahko utrpeli tisti, ki jim njihove zmogljivosti ne bi dopuþｲale izvajanja veｲletnih projektov (kot na primer manjþa organizacija, ki se zaradi velikosti ne bi zmogla dolgoroｲno zadol™iti veｲ kot enkrat na leto).
The Daphne programme was as over-subscribed as the initiative had been.
Podobno kot v primeru pobude je povpraþevanje moｲno presegalo ponudbo programa Daph-ne.
In the «rstyear,415 submissions were received, totalling some EUR 40 million.
V prvem letu je bilo prijavljenih 415 projektov v skupni vrednosti okrog 40 milijonov evrov.
All of the activities recom-mended in the guidelines for applicants were covered in the project submissions, namely:
Projekti so pokrivali vse dejavnosti, priporoｲene v navodilih, ki so jih prejeli prosilci:
‡ production of common frameworks for violence;
‡ informativne akcije za ozaveþｲanje javnosti, medijev in/ali ciljnih strokovnih skupin;
‡ measurement of the impact of di.erenttypesofviolencetoestablishappropriatere-sponse;
‡ preuｲevanje razliｲnih vidikov nasilja in naｲinov, kako ga prepreｲiti;
‡ assessment of measures and practices to prevent and detect violence in order to prevent future exposure to violence;
‡ iskanje naｲinov, kako izboljþati prepoznavanje in prijavljanje nasilja, ter obvladovanje nje-govih negativnih uｲinkov.
‡ information campaigns to raise awareness in the public, media and/or targeted profes-sional groups;
Projekti so pokrivali nasilje v dru™ini, spolno nasilje vkljuｲno z incestom, seksistiｲno nasilje, nasilje v þolah, psiholoþko nasilje, vplive nasilja na zdravje, vkljuｲno s pohabljanjem ™enskih spolnih organov, odkrivanje in pregon nasilja ter otroþko pornogra«jonainternetu.Podro-bnejþa razvrstitev teh oblik nasilja je na voljo v prilogi.
‡ identi«cationofwaystoimproverecognition,reportingandmanagementoftheconse-quences of violence.
¶Glede dejavnosti znotraj podroｲja: spolno nasilje v vseh svojih pojavnih oblikah je brez dvoma na vrhu lestvice (spolno nasilje, 17 %, spolno zlorabljanje v komercialne namene, 8 %, trgovina z ljudmi, 7 %). Temu sledita seksistiｲno nasilje in nasilje v dru™ini (seksistiｲno nasilje, 8 %, nasilje v dru™ini, 7 %, nasilje v domaｲem okolju, 11 %).
Internet and child pornography are also signi«cant,with6 % of the total.'
Tudi internetna in otroþka pornogra«jastauvr-þｲeni visoko (6 %).ƒ
Submissions continued to fail because they were local and did not attempt to explore the potential of `European-ness'.
Nekateri predlogi projektov so bili vnaprej obsojeni na neuspeh, saj so bili preveｲ lokalni in premalo usmerjeni v izkoriþｲanje potenciala ¶evropskostiƒ.
However, those projects that did make e . o r t s t o ` b e E u r op e a n ' a c h i e v e d some success and, as monitoring visits, «nalreportsandevaluationsdemonstrated,there began to be a growing understanding of the value of truly `European' action.
Po drugi strani pa so bili ¶evropskoƒ usmerjeni projekti dokaj uspeþni, kar so potrdili tudi spremljanja, konｲna poroｲila in projektne ocene, tako da je razumevanje vrednosti ¶evropskeƒ usmerjenosti postajalo vse veｲje. Pro-jektna poroｲila so pokazala, da:
‡ they were able to identify not only di.erencesbetweentheproblems,responsesandwaysof working among Member States but also points of convergence, leading to successful sharing of methodologies and tools;
‡ je bilo v okviru projektov ugotovljeno ne samo to, da se te™ave, odzivi nanje in naｲini dela razlikujejo v razliｲnih dr™avah ｲlanicah, ampak tudi da med njimi obstajajo skupne toｲke, s pomoｲjo katerih so nosilci projektov uspeþno izmenjavali metodologije in orodja;
`The researchers, coming from di.erentcountriesandwithdi.erentworkhabits,appliedthemethods from their own vantage point, thus the material gathered is relatively ill-assorted.
¶Raziskovalci iz razliｲnih dr™av in z razliｲnimi delovnimi navadami so svoje delo opravljali vsak na svoj naｲin, zaradi ｲesar je zbrani material razmeroma slabo urejen.
Despite this, these di.erenceswereanalysedateachjointmeetingandputintoperspectivewithwork habits on the one hand and with the context, reception in the «eld,reactionofauthorities,etc. on the other.' [Project 99/025/C]
Ne glede na to so bile te razlike obravnavane na skupnih sestankih in analizirane z vidika delovnih navad, okoliþｲin, sprejemanja med delom na terenu, odziva oblasti itd. ƒ [Projekt 99/025/C]
‡ the value of comparative analysis ̌ for example of legal frameworks relating to sexual violence ̌ enhanced understanding and the ability to advocate for review and harmoni-sation;
‡ so pozitivni uｲinki primerjalne analize › na primer zakonskih okvirjev, ki urejajo spolno na-silje › poveｲali razumevanje razlik in prizadevanja za pregledovanje in usklajevanje;
‡ the potential for transfer of knowledge and the sharing of information, methodologies and tools was more evident as organisations got to know each other and understood better their speci«csituationsandneeds;
‡ je bil potencial za prenos znanja in izmenjavo informacij, metodologij in orodij vse bolj viden, saj so organizacije sｲasoma spoznale druga drugo in zaｲele bolje razumevati speci-«ｲneokoliþｲine,vkaterihsodelovalenjihovepartnerskeorganizacije,innjihovepotrebe;
‡ they were able to transcend language barriers and develop what some projects called `Daphne language', i.e. communication based on common understanding of the issues and responses.
‡ so projekti zaｲeli premagovati jezikovne ovire in razvijati nekaj, kar je bilo v nekaterih pro-jektih oznaｲeno kot ¶jezik Daphneƒ oziroma sporazumevanje, zasnovano na skupnem ra-zumevanju izzivov in odzivov nanje.
`The question of translating or interpreting a concept such as ``vulnerability'' is complex in itself.
¶Vpraþanje prevajanja ali tolmaｲenja pojma, kot je ,ranljivost` (angl. ,vulnerability`), je zelo za-pleteno.
There remained a concern, however, that the Daphne programme should not be just a short-term funding mechanism but a framework in which learning ̌ about violence and how to respond to it in terms of protection, prevention and support for victims ̌ might develop and build into a comprehensive response to this EU-wide problem.
Ostalo pa je þe skrb zbujajoｲe dejstvo, da je program Daphne ostal zgolj kratkoroｲni mehani-zem «nanciranja,kljubtemu,dajebilnjegovciljvzpostavitiokvir,znotrajkateregabiselahkouｲenje › o nasilju in odzivu nanj v obliki zaþｲite, prepreｲevanja nasilja in ponujanju pomoｲi ™rtvam › razvijalo in preoblikovalo v celovit odziv na problem nasilja, ki pesti vse evropske dr™ave.
The key words for the remaining years of the Daphne programme, therefore, became `devel-opment', `building', `adapting' and `extending'.
V naslednjih letih so znotraj programa Daphne postale kljuｲne besede: ¶razvojƒ, ¶izgradnjaƒ, ¶prilagajanjeƒ in ¶razþiritevƒ.
The selection panel focused on projects that aimed to add value to work that had already been done, by:
Odbor za izbiro projektov se je usmeril v projekte, ki naj bi ™e opravljenemu delu dodajali dodatno vrednost, in sicer:
‡ evaluating and testing output and results, adapting them and taking them further;
‡ z vrednotenjem in preizkuþanjem izidov in rezultatov, njihovim prilagajanjem in izpopol-njevanjem;
‡ updating research and broadening it to cover all Member States and, where possible, can-didate countries and EFTA/EEA countries (plus Cyprus, Malta and Turkey);
‡ s posodabljanjem raziskav in njihovim þirjenjem na vse dr™ave ｲlanice, po mo™nosti pa tudi na dr™ave kandidatke in dr™ave EFTA/EGP (ter Ciper, Malto in Turｲijo);
‡ moving from studies and data collection to analysis and, on the basis of this, recommenda-tions and lessons at European level;
‡ s preusmerjanjem iz þtudij in zbiranja podatkov v analize, ki bi jim sledili priporoｲila in ko-ristne ugotovitve na evropski ravni;
‡ broader application of training and education modules, awareness-raising materials, and operational tools such as questionnaires;
‡ z razþirjeno uporabo izobra™evalnih orodij in orodij za usposabljanje, gradiv za ozaveþｲanje in operativnih orodij, kot denimo vpraþalnikov;
‡ compilation and documentation of resources made available by Daphne and other sources (web-based, human, publications, audiovisual, training methodologies and packages, etc.).
‡ z zbiranjem in dokumentiranjem virov znotraj programa Daphne in drugih virov (spletni, ｲloveþki, publikacije, avdiovizualni, izobra™evalne metodologije in paketi itd.).
If this were to be possible, it would also be necessary to reinforce partnerships, expand net-works and improve capacity, including through the continued exchange of information and perhaps s t a . , m o r e r e g u l a r « e l d v i s i t s i nffo t h e r Mffe m b e r S t a t e s , a n d mstu c h i m p r o v e d , m o r e t a r g e t e d conferences, workshops and other working meetings.
Za uresniｲitev vsega tega so bili nujni krepitev partnerstev, razþiritev omre™ij in poveｲanje zmogljivosti, vkljuｲno s poveｲanjem þtevila rednih terenskih obiskov v drugih dr™avah ｲlani-cah, kakor tudi z izboljþanimi in bolj specializiranimi konferencami, delavnicami in drugimi oblikami delovnih sestankov, kar naj bi dosegli z nadaljnjo izmenjavo informacij in osebja.
There were also new calls for projects that might develop evaluation indicators, support analysis of good practice and com-plete mapping and data collection exercises so that there would exist a comprehensive picture of violence in all its forms in Europe.
Zaznati je bilo tudi nove zahteve po projektih, ki bi lahko razvili kazalce za potrebe vrednote-nja, podprli analizo dobrih praks in opravili naloge na podroｲju zbiranja in razvrþｲanja poda-tkov, da bi na ta naｲin dobili celovito sliko stanja na podroｲju nasilja v vseh njegovih pojavnih oblikah v Evropi.
Achieving this within the limits of project funding became a real challenge and, as the Daphne programme progressed and submissions did rise to the challenge posed by the Commission's encouragement to improve, budgets became severely squeezed and the possibility of failure or incomplete activity became a reality for some organisations.
Doseganje tega cilja v okviru sredstev, ki so bila na voljo projektom, je postalo resniｲno velik izziv. Bolj ko se je program Daphne razvijal in bolj ko so bili projekti uspeþni pri izpolnjevanju zahtev Komisije po izboljþavah, bolj so se krｲili proraｲuni, tako da so se nekatere organizacije zaｲele vse bolj sooｲati z dejstvom, da jim morda ne bo uspelo dokonｲati svojih projektov ali da jih bodo izpeljali le delno.
The Commission's project monitoring visits therefore focused more urgently on helping organisations to manage their budgets and to «ndnewwaystoachieveresultswithoutputtingthebudgetunderpressure.Nevertheless, it was observed that some areas of activity began to be neglected, especially the relatively expensive activities of external evaluation (usually needing a fairly costly exter-nal consultant or institution) and dissemination (translation, especially, was often neglected, thus limiting dissemination, and strange decisions were made concerning the languages of dissemination ̌ for example, a project with Belgian, Italian and Spanish partners decided to
Kljub temu so opazovanja pokazala, da so organizacije zaｲele nekatere dejavnosti zanemarjati, zlasti razmeroma drago zunanje vrednotenje (za katero je obiｲajno treba najeti razmeroma dragega zunanjega svetovalca ali ustanovo) in þirjenje informacij (dejavnost, ki je bila dana najveｲkrat na stranski tir, je bilo prevajanje, kar je dodatno ote™evalo postopek raz-þirjanja informacij. Sprejete so bile precej nenavadne odloｲitve glede jezika za razþirjanje in-formacij › tako se je denimo nosilec projekta, ki je sodeloval z belgijskimi, italijanskimi in þpanskimi partnerji, odloｲil, da vse svoje publikacije objavi izkljuｲno v angleþｲini, namesto da bi dal prednost enemu od jezikov svojih partnerjev!)
‡ a `library' of awareness-raising materials that had been produced in projects was begun in 2002 and produced both as a printed resource and in electronic form posted to the website.
‡ ¶knji™nicaƒ gradiv za ozaveþｲanje, izdelanih v okviru projektov, je zaｲela delovati leta 2002 in je na voljo tako v obliki publikacije kot tudi v elektronski obliki na spletnih straneh Daph-ne.
This allowed organisations to download graphics «lesforposters,forexample,sothatananti-violence message developed and tested in one project could be replicated across other Member States with minimum expense and maximum consistency;
To je organizacijam dalo mo™nost, da z interneta prenaþajo gra«ｲnedatotekeinjihuporabijo za izdelavo sporoｲil proti nasilju, ki so se nato prenaþala iz ene v drugo dr™avo ｲlanico po najni™jih stroþkih in z najveｲjo usklajenostjo;
‡ a series of `illustrative cases' was produced to give examples of the kinds of projects that Daphne had funded and to show how they had succeeded and what their impact had been;
‡ izdelana je bila serija ¶ilustrativnih primerovƒ projektov, ki jih je program Daphne «nanciral,vkljuｲno z opisom njihove uspeþnosti in njihovih uｲinkov;
‡ the idea of Daphne News was reprised through regular e-mail communications to all or-ganisations who had worked with Daphne, containing information on newly funded projects, updates to the website, and other milestones.
‡ zasnova Novic Daphne je bila preoblikovana za uporabo v obliki redne elektronske kore-spondence z vsemi organizacijami udele™enkami v programu Daphne. Ta korespondenca je vkljuｲevala informacije o projektih, ki jim je bila odobrena «nanｲnapodpora,informaci-je o posodobitvah spletnih strani in informacije o drugih pomembnih dogodkih.
Projects had always had to identify a minimum of 20 % co-«nancingfortheirprojects,andincreasingly monitoring visits were used to encourage them to seek ongoing funding so that their Daphne-funded activity could continue without Commission support.
Nosilci projektov so morali zagotoviti najmanj 20 odstotkov lastnih sredstev za so«nanciranjesvojih projektov, tako da so bili delovni obiski vse bolj usmerjeni v spodbujanje organizacij, da nenehno iþｲejo « n a n ｲ n o p o d p o r o , d a b i l a h k o s v oj e d e j a v n o s t i , z a ｲ e t e v o k v i r u p r o g r a m a D a p h n e , nadaljevali tudi brez podpore Komisije.
Where possible, ideas were shared on where funding might be sourced; nevertheless, ongoing funding re-mained a challenge.
Kjer je bilo mogoｲe, je potekala izmenjava izkuþenj glede mo™nih virov «nanciranja,kljubtemupajestalno«nanciranjeostaloizziv,s katerim so se morali nosilci projektov þele sooｲiti.
At the Commission itself, consideration was given as early as 2002 to the future of the Daphne programme and its possible renewal.
Znotraj Komisije so se zamisli o prihodnosti programa Daphne in o mo™nosti ponovne uved-be programa pojavile ™e leta 2002.
Lessons from the seven-year Daphne experience were built into preliminary proposals, including the need for increased funding to allow bigger projects to be supported, and some means of allowing the Commission to actively commis-sion projects to « l l g a ps i d e n t i « e d a s i m po r t a n t t o t h e Cffo m mstu n i tffy bu t nffo tp r o po s e d b y o r - g a n i s a t i o n s .
Iz izkuþenj, pridobljenih med sedemletnim izvajanjem programa Daphne, so nastali okvirni predlogi, ki so vkljuｲevali potrebo po viþjih «nanｲnihsredstvih, ki bi zagotovila podporo tudi veｲjim projektom, in po sredstvih, ki bi Komisiji po-magala, da po potrebi naroｲa projekte, ki bi zapolnili vrzeli na podroｲjih, ki so za Skupnost pomembna, nosilci pa se jih s svojimi projekti þe niso lotili.
`The Daphne programme is acknowledged as an important multidisciplinary instrument in the campaign against violence and it has acquired international renown.'
¶Program Daphne se je izkazal kot odliｲno multidisciplinarno orodje kampanje boja proti na-silju in si na tem podroｲju izgradil mednarodni ugled.•
Resolution of the European Parliament on the mid-term review of the Daphne programme 2000›03
(Poroｲilo Evropskemu parlamentu o vmesnem pregledu programa Daphne 2000›2003, Odbor za pravice ™ensk in enake mo™nosti)
So what is violence anyway?
Kaj pravzaprav je nasilje?
Seven years of action, 303 projects funded, hundreds of organisations working and thousands of people touched by this work, and still Daphne has never de«ned`violence'.
Kljub sedmim letom trdega dela, tristo trem «nanciranimprojektom,stotinamsodelujoｲihorganizacij in tisoｲem ljudi, ki se jih je program dotaknil, pojem ¶nasiljaƒ ni bil nikoli natanｲno opredeljen znotraj programa Daphne.
This is not an oversight.
Pomanjkanje te opredelitve ni pomota.
From the outset, it was recognised that violence is not one single thing and that attempting to de«neitwouldonlylimitnotonlysubmissionsreceivedbut,impor-tantly, perception of what constituted violence and what did not.
Oblikovalci programa so od samega zaｲetka vedeli, da nasilje ni eno samo dejanje in da bi vsak poskus opredelitve tega pojma omejil ne le þtevi-lo prijavljenih projektov, temveｲ predvsem naþo predstavo o tem, katera dejanja so nasilna in katera niso.
Instead, the Daphne initia-tive and programme sought to explore violence as understood by the people of Europe them-selves ̌ leaders, partners, participants and b e n e « c i a r i e s o f D a p h n e - f u n d e d a c t i o n s ̌ a n d t hffu s to map out the whole gamut of actions, structures, frameworks and attitudes that are `violence' in Europe.
V luｲi tega sta se pobuda in program Daphne raje usmerila v preuｲevanje nasilja, kakor ga razumejo prebivalci Evrope › vodilne osebnosti, partnerji, udele™enci in posamezni-ki, ki jim je bila pomoｲ Daphne namenjena ›, da bi priþla do celotnega spektra dejavnosti, struktur, okvirov in miselnih vzorcev, ki tvorijo ¶nasiljeƒ v Evropi.
There is consequently no de«nitionofviolenceincludedinthedecision (10) establishing the Daphne programme 2000›03.
Iz istega razloga tudi Odloｲba o uvedbi programa Daphne 2000›2003 ne vsebuje nikakrþne opredelitve nasilja.