natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
CAP context indicators C.35, C 40, C.41, C.45 (https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-indicators/context/2017_en); JRC (2012) State of Soil in Europe (http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ESDB_Archive/eusoils_docs/other/EUR25186.pdf); EEA (2015) State of the Nature in the EU (https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/state-of-nature-in-the-eu); DG AGRI, Facts and figures on EU agriculture and the CAP (https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/statistics/facts-and-figures_en). 10 6 7 8 9 
Kontextindikatorer fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken C35, C40, C41 och C45 (https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-indicators/context/2017_sv); JRC (2012): State of Soil in Europe (markens tillstnd i Europa), (http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ESDB_Archive/eusoils_docs/other/EUR25186.pdf); EEA (2015): State of the Nature in the EU (tillstndet fr naturen i EU), 6 7 8 9 12 2006.
(ii) Water quality: There is a persistent nitrogen surplus on EU farmland, averaging 50 kg nitrogen/ha. 
Sedan 1990 har populationer av odlingslandskapets vanliga fglar minskat med 30 % och av grsmarksfjrilar med nstan 50 %. ii) Vattenkvalitet: Det finns ett stndigt kvveverskott p EU:s jordbruksmark, med i genomsnitt 50 kg kvve/ha.
Since 1993, levels of nitrates have decreased in rivers, but not in groundwater. 
Sedan 1993 har kvveniverna minskat i floderna men inte i grundvattnet.
Nitrate concentrations are still high in some areas, leading to pollution in many lakes and rivers, mainly in regions with intensive agriculture. (iii)Air: Ammonia is an important air pollutant. 
Kvvekoncentrationerna r fortfarande hga i vissa omrden, vilket leder till froreningar i mnga sjar och floder, frmst i regioner med intensivt jordbruk. iii) Luft: Ammoniak r en betydande luftfrorenare.
Farming generates almost 95 % of ammonia emissions in Europe. 
Inom jordbruket genereras nstan 95 % av Europas ammoniakutslpp.
While emissions have decreased by 23 % since 1990, they started to increase again in 2012. (iv) Soil: Around 45 % of mineral soils in the EU have low or very low organic carbon content (0-2 %) and 45 % have a medium content (2-6 %). 
Utslppen har minskat med 23 % sedan 1990 men brjade terigen ka 2012. iv) Jord: Omkring 45 % av mineraljordarterna inom EU har lgt eller mycket lgt innehll av organiskt kol (0Đ2 %) och 45 % har medelhgt innehll (2Đ6 %).
Soil trends are difficult to establish due to data gaps, but declining levels of organic carbon content contribute to declining soil fertility, and increased risks of desertification. 
Jordfrndringar r svra att faststlla p grund av bristande uppgifter, men de allt lgre niverna av organiskt kol minskar jordens brdighet och kar riskerna fr kenspridning.
Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture accounted for 11 % of EU emissions in 2015. 
Vxthusgasutslpp frn jordbruket stod fr 11 % av EU:s utslpp 2015.
These emissions decreased by 20 % between 1990 and 2013, but started to rise again in 2014. 
Dessa utslpp minskade med 20 % mellan 1990 och 2013 men brjade ka igen 2014.
Net removals from land use, land use change and forestry offset around 7 % of all EU greenhouse gas emissions in 2015. 
Nettoupptag frn markanvndning, frndrad anvndning och skogsbruk kompenserade fr omkring 7 % av EU:s alla vxthusgasutslpp 2015.
Climate change has led to an increase in irrigation10. 
Klimatfrndringarna har lett till kad konstbevattning10.
Economic differences between rural and other areas have become less significant 17. 
De ekonomiska skillnaderna mellan landsbygdsomrden och andra omrden har blivit mindre tydliga 17.
According to Eurostat, in 2016 around 19.1 %11 of people in the EU lived in rural areas, compared to 19.7 % in 2007. In 2013, GDP per capita in rural areas was 73 % that of the EEA (2017). Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe 2016. 
Enligt Eurostat bodde omkring 19,1 % av EU:s befolkning i landsbygdsomrden 201611, vilket kan jmfras med 19,7 % r 2007. r 2013 uppgick BNP per capita i landsbygdsomrdena till 73 % av den totala ekonomins BNP per capita, vilket var en uppgng frn 70 % r 2008.
The EU average employment rate for rural areas is the same as for other areas, although rates differ between Member States. 
EU:s genomsnittliga sysselsttningsgrad fr landsbygdsomrdena r samma som fr vriga omrden, ven om den varierar mellan medlemsstaterna.
The poverty rate declined in rural areas from 31.4 % in 2007 to 25.4 % in 2016. 
Fattigdomsnivn i landsbygdsomrdena minskade frn 31,4 % r 2007 till 25,4 % r 2016.
The economy of rural areas – like that of towns and cities – is dominated by the industrial and service sectors. 
Ekonomin i landsbygdsomrdena domineras av industri-och tjnstesektorerna Đ precis som ekonomin i stderna.
Together (according to Eurostat), these represent 96 % of the gross value added generated in rural areas. 
Tillsammans str dessa (enligt Eurostat) fr 96 % av det bruttofrdlingsvrde som genereras i landsbygdsomrdena.
Agriculture, forestry and fishery represents 4 % of the gross value added generated in rural areas, compared to 1.5 % in the whole economy. 
Jordbruk, skogsbruk och fiskeri str fr 4 % av det bruttofrdlingsvrde som genereras i landsbygdsomrdena, vilket kan jmfras med 1,5 % fr hela ekonomin.
This share has been stable over the last five years. 
Denna andel har varit ofrndrad under de senaste fem ren.
OUR REVIEW 19. 
VR ANALYS 19.
We structured our review around the ECA programme logic model (see Figure 4), which sets out how public intervention can achieve economy, efficiency and effectiveness. 
Vi strukturerade vr analys enligt vr programlogikmodell (se figur 4), som anger hur interventionstgrder kan leda till sparsamhet, effektivitet och ndamlsenlighet.
The claim, made in the Communication, that 55 % of EU population live in rural areas, results from merging “predominantly rural” regions with “intermediate” regions. 
Pstendet i kommissionens meddelande att 55 % av EU:s befolkning lever i landsbygdsomrden r en fljd av att regionerna Óutprglat landsbygdsomrdeÓ och Ómedelttt befolkat omrdeÓ har slagits ihop.
“Intermediate” regions could just as well be grouped together with “predominantly urban” regions, leading to a conflicting claim that 80 % of EU population live in urban regions. 
ÓMedelttt befolkat omrdeÓ skulle lika vl kunna ing i samma grupp som Óutprglat ttortsomrdeÓ, vilket ger ett helt annat resultat, nmligen att 80 % av EU:s befolkning lever i ttortsomrden. framsteg inom frdlingen av grdor.
Figure 4 – Programme Logic Model 13 Source: ECA, Performance Audit Manual. 
Figur 4 Đ Programlogikmodell 15 Behov Ml Input Spars amhet Yttre faktorer Proces s er Utfall Effekter Resultat Output Klla: Revisionsrtten, Handbok fr effektivitetsrevision.
Insufficient information to identify needs 20. 
Behov inom den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken Otillrckliga uppgifter fr att identifiera behov 20.
Better information is required to justify the need for several CAP measures12. 
Bttre information krvs fr att motivera behovet av flera GJP-tgrder12.
This is the case, in particular, for income support through direct payments, which currently consume more than 70 % of the CAP budget. 
Detta r framfr allt fallet nr det gller inkomststd genom direktstd, som fr nrvarande utgr mer n 70 % av budgeten fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken.
Article 39 of the Treaty stipulates that the objective of the CAP is “to increase agricultural productivity (...) thus to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture” (see Annex II). 
Artikel 39 i frdraget faststller att den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken ska ha som ml att Óhja produktiviteten inom jordbruketÓ och Óp s stt tillfrskra jordbruksbefolkningen en sklig levnadsstandard, srskilt genom en hjning av den individuella inkomsten fr dem som Matthews, A.
The word “thus” links the two CAP objectives. 
Orden Óp s sttÓ kopplar samman de bda mlen fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken.
Farmers’ earnings, and the living standard of their families were addressed initially through higher prices borne by consumers. 
Jordbrukarnas inkomster och deras familjers levnadsstandard frmjades till en brjan genom hgre konsumentpriser.
This gradually moved to direct income support funded by taxpayers. Even if the Treaty objective of ensuring a fair standard of living of the agricultural community is considered in isolation, there is not enough data to support the claim that farm households, taken as a whole, need significant support to achieve a fair standard of living. 
S smningom vergick man till direkt inkomststd genom skattebetalarna. ven om mlet i frdraget att tillfrskra jordbruksbefolkningen en sklig levnadsstandard betraktas separat, finns det inte tillrckliga uppgifter som styrker pstendet att jordbrukshushllen sammantaget behver betydande std fr att uppn en sklig levnadsstandard.
The Commission argues that there is a considerable gap between what farmers gain for their work on the farm and what average wages and salaries are in the economy as a whole. 
Kommissionen hvdar att det finns avsevrda skillnader mellan jordbrukarnas lner fr arbetet inom jordbruket och de genomsnittliga lnerna i ekonomin som helhet.
However, the data presented by the Commission13 is affected by two significant limitations: (i) income sources outside farming are not included (see Box 1) and (ii) the averages mask a great variability of the income situation 14. 
De uppgifter som presenteras av kommissionen13 har emellertid tv stora begrnsningar: (i) inkomstkllor utanfr jordbrukssektorn r inte inkluderade (se ruta 1) och (ii) genomsnitten dljer stora olikheter i inkomstsituationen14.
15 Box 1 - Income sources other than farming According to Eurostat, the share of farm managers with gainful activities outside farming is around 30 % and is likely to be higher for their spouses and other household members. 
Ruta 1 Đ Andra inkomstkllor n jordbruk Enligt Eurostat uppgr andelen driftsledare med frvrvsarbete utanfr jordbrukssektorn till ca 30 %, och siffran r sannolikt hgre fr deras makar/makor och andra medlemmar i hushllet.
DG AGRI has previously published data15 indicating that more than 60 % of farm managers on farms of less than 5 ha spend less than 25 % of their time on their holdings and that around 80 % spend less than half their working lives on their holding. 
GD Jordbruk och landsbygdsutveckling har tidigare offentliggjort uppgifter15 som indikerar att ver 60 % av driftsledarna p jordbruksfretag med mindre n 5 ha tillbringar mindre n 25 % av sin tid p sina fretag och att ca 80 % tillbringar mindre n halva sitt arbetsliv p sitt fretag.
Only when farm size exceeds 20 ha do full-time managers outnumber those who spend less than 50 % of their working time on their holding. 
Frst nr jordbrukets storlek verstiger 20 ha r antalet heltidsanstllda driftsledare fler n de som tillbringar mindre n 50 % av sin arbetstid p sitt fretag.
According to a European Parliament study on farm household incomes16: “There is currently no EU statistical system that is capable of providing information on the living standards of the agricultural community”. 
Europaparlamentet om jordbrukshushllens inkomster16 finns det fr nrvarande inte ngot EU-statistiksystem som kan ge information om jordbruksbefolkningens levnadsstandard.
We have called repeatedly for this data to be produced to inform policy aimed at ensuring a fair standard of living of the agricultural community. 
Vi har vid upprepade tillfllen rekommenderat att sdana uppgifter ska tas fram som underlag fr den politik som syftar till att tillfrskra jordbruksbefolkningen en sklig levnadsstandard.
Data on farm household incomes from all sources are available for some Member States and suggests that such households are not necessarily worse off than other households. 
Uppgifter om jordbrukshushllens inkomster frn alla kllor finns tillgngliga fr vissa medlemsstater, och av dem framgr att dessa hushll inte ndvndigtvis har det smre stllt n andra hushll.
Farm incomes are higher (also per labour unit) for bigger farms17. 
Jordbruksinkomsterna r hgre (ven per rsarbetskraft) fr strre jordbruk17.
In calculating the income gap between farming and the economy as a whole, the Commission includes all 10.8 million EU agricultural holdings, including 7.2 million with less than 5 hectares, and 6 million with annual standard output below €4 00018. 
I kommissionens berkning av inkomstskillnaderna mellan jordbrukssektorn och ekonomin som helhet ingr EU:s alla 10,8 miljoner jordbruksfretag, inklusive 7,2 miljoner jordbruksfretag med mindre n 5 ha och 6 miljoner jordbruksfretag med en rlig standardoutput under 4 000 euro18.
The long tail of these very small farms, which often face inherent profitability challenges, distorts the picture. 
Det stora antalet mycket sm jordbruk, som ofta str infr naturliga utmaningar avseende lnsamhet, snedvrider bilden.
(2015) Comparison of farmers’ income in the EU Member States. 
(2015): Comparison of farmersŐ income in the EU Member States (jmfrelse av jordbrukarnas inkomster i EU:s medlemsstater).
Report prepared for the European Parliament This correlation is stronger if size is expressed in terms of output values. 
Rapport som utarbetats fr Europaparlamentet. Denna korrelation r starkare om storleken uttrycks i outputvrde.
Physical size is a worse indicator of income levels because many of the less profitable, extensive farms are large, while many profitable, intensive farms, especially in the meat and vegetable sectors, are relatively small in terms of hectares. 
Den fysiska storleken r en smre indikator fr inkomstniver, eftersom mnga av de mindre lnsamma jordbruken med extensiv produktion r stora, samtidigt som mnga lnsamma jordbruk med intensiv produktion, framfr allt inom ktt-och grnsakssektorerna, r relativt sm sett till antalet hektar.
These two categories of smallest farms (by physical and by economic size) largely overlap. 
Dessa bda kategorier fr de minsta jordbruken (efter fysisk eller ekonomisk storlek) verlappar varandra i stor utstrckning.
Lack of clarity on EU value added 24. Making EU value added a core objective is one of Commission’s proposals for all future EU policies19. 
Bristande tydlighet i frga om europeiskt mervrde 24. Att gra europeiskt mervrde till en krnfrga r ett av kommissionens frslag fr all framtida EU-politik19.
EU value added is usually understood as additional results delivered by EU action that could not have been achieved by uncoordinated action at national, regional or local level. 
Europeiskt mervrde anses vanligtvis vara det ytterligare resultat som uppns genom EU-tgrder och som inte hade kunnat uppns genom osamordnade tgrder p nationell, regional eller lokal niv.
However, there is no commonly accepted definition for this concept. 
Det finns emellertid ingen allmnt accepterad definition av begreppet.
Agreeing on and applying such a definition would benefit public debate and decision-making on future EU spending. 
Om man kunde enas om och tillmpa en sdan definition skulle det gynna den offentliga debatten och beslutsfattandet om EU:s utgifter i framtiden.
Responding to long-term trends 25. 
Svar p lngsiktiga trender 25.
Under the current arrangements the proposal for the next multiannual financial framework (and for all major policy areas, including the CAP) is made two years before its start and payments for multiannual programmes (such as those under Pillar 2 of the CAP) continue for the first three years of the following multiannual financial framework. 
Inom det nuvarande systemet utarbetas frslaget till nsta flerriga budgetram (och till alla strre politikomrden, ven den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken) tv r innan den pbrjas, och utbetalningar till flerriga program (exempelvis de under pelare 2 i den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken) fortstter under de frsta tre ren av den efterfljande flerriga budgetramen.
This means that policy decisions will cover payments made up to 12 years later. 
Detta innebr att politiska beslut omfattar utbetalningar som grs upp till tolv r senare.
Account therefore needs to be taken of long-term developments with which the policy will interact. 
Drfr mste lngsiktiga trender som politiken kommer att vxelverka med beaktas.
The CAP’s impact on fairness and the single market 26. 
Den gemensamma jordbrukspolitikens inverkan p rttvisan och den inre marknaden 26.
Due to their link to farm area, the largest share of direct payments go to the largest farms (with around 80 % of the support received by 20 % of beneficiaries). 
P grund av dess koppling till jordbruksareal gr den strsta delen av direktstdet till de strsta jordbruken (dr ca 80 % av stdet gr till 20 % av stdmottagarna).
Various redistributive mechanisms used so far (e.g. capping and redistributive payments) have had a limited effect. The move to converge rates per hectare, both between and (in the case of the basic payment scheme) within Member States can increase payments to some larger farms. 
Olika omfrdelningsmekanismer som har anvnts hittills (t.ex. tak och omfrdelningsstd) har haft begrnsad effekt. vergngen till konvergens av stdsatserna per hektar, bde mellan och (nr det gller ordningen fr grundstd) inom medlemsstaterna kan ka stdet till vissa strre jordbruk.
Some Member States applying the basic payment scheme have also used the option to preserve high support levels resulting from past levels of subsidy. 
Vissa medlemsstater som tillmpar ordningen fr grundstd har ven anvnt sig av alternativet att behlla hga stdniver till fljd av tidigare bidragsniver.
Payment levels between Member States can therefore vary significantly. 
Stdniverna kan drfr skilja sig betydligt t mellan medlemsstaterna.
Payments per hectare can range from below €100 to over €1 000. 
Stdet per hektar kan variera frn under 100 euro till ver 1 000 euro.
CAP Objectives 17 What the Commission’s Communication says on objectives: • The three CAP objectives are: o to foster a “smart and resilient” agricultural sector; o to bolster environmental care and climate action and to contribute to the environmental and climate objectives of the EU; o to strengthen the socio-economic fabric of rural areas. • Need for consistency with commitments under the Paris Agreement on climate, agreed by the Conference of the Parties within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and Sustainable Development Goals. • Fair contribution to EU 2030 Climate and Energy targets. • The Commission would assess and approve CAP strategic plans and so maximise the CAP’s contribution to EU priorities and objectives and Member States’ climate and energy targets. • The CAP should lead a transition towards a more sustainable agriculture. 
19 19 Diskussionsunderlag om framtiden fr EU:s finanser, COM(2017) 358, 28.6.2017. Ml fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken 20 Av kommissionens meddelande framgr fljande i frga om ml: Ľ De tre mlen fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken r att o frmja en smart och motstndskraftig jordbrukssektor, o stdja miljvrd och klimattgrder och bidra till EU:s milj-och klimatml, o frbttra den socioekonomiska strukturen i landsbygdsomrdena.
The Communication’s post-2020 CAP interpretation of Treaty objectives is broadly in line with the CAP objectives for the current period (see Annex II). 
Den tolkning som grs i meddelandet av mlen enligt frdraget fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken efter 2020 verensstmmer i stor utstrckning med mlen fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken under den nuvarande perioden (se bilaga II).
Insufficient clarity and specificity of objectives 28. 
Bristande tydlighet och mlspecificering 28.
For example, the objective of the greening measure introduced with the last CAP reform – to enhance the CAP’s environmental 
Till exempel tfljdes inte de miljanpassningstgrder som infrdes vid den senaste reformen av den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken, och som syftade till att frbttra dess miljprestanda, av specifika ml fr
performance – lacked specific targets for the measure’s contribution to the environment and climate. 
21 tgrdernas bidrag till miljn och klimatet.
Objectives should be quantified where possible, not just for outputs, but also results and impacts20. 
Ml ska om mjligt kvantifieras, inte bara med avseende p output utan ocks p resultat och effekter20.
Need for consistency with other EU objectives 29. 
Behov av samordning med andra EU-ml 29.
EU policies cover many different issues, areas and sectors. 
EU:s politik omfattar mnga olika frgor, omrden och sektorer.
The CAP’s objectives should be consistent with those of other policies (including cohesion, climate action and environmental protection). 
Mlen fr den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken br verensstmma med de ml som finns inom andra politikomrden (bland annat sammanhllning, klimattgrder och miljskydd).
This also concerns EU objectives in the form of binding international commitments21. 
Detta gller ven EU-ml i form av bindande internationella taganden21.
Different EU policy areas have overlapping objectives regarding, for example, territorial balance/cohesion, social inclusion and reduction of poverty. 
Olika EU-politikomrden har verlappande ml vad gller exempelvis territoriell balans/sammanhllning, social inkludering och fattigdomsbekmpning.
Improving the CAP’s complementarity with other EU policies would be a positive development. 
Bttre komplementaritet mellan den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken och andra EU-politikomrden skulle vara en positiv utveckling.
For example, we found little evidence that the aims of complementarity and synergy between the ESI funds were put into practice in the partnership agreements (introduced for 2014-2020) and in the rural development programmes. 
Vi fann till exempel f belgg fr att mlen komplementaritet och synergieffekter mellan ESI-fonderna hade omsatts i praktiken i partnerskapsverenskommelserna (som infrts fr perioden 2014Đ2020) eller i programmen fr landsbygdsutveckling.
World Bank (2017) “Thinking CAP: Supporting Agricultural Jobs and Incomes in the EU”. 
20 21 Vrldsbanken (2017): Thinking CAP: Supporting Agricultural Jobs and Incomes in the EU (den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken i fokus: std till arbetstillfllen och inkomster inom jordbruket i EU).
21 For example under the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21), the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the World Trade Organisation (WTO). 20 
Till exempel i enlighet med den 21:a partskonferensen (COP21), FN:s ml fr hllbar utveckling och Vrldshandelsorganisationen (WTO).
The allocation of funds is not sufficiently based on needs or expected EU value added 31. 
Input inom den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken Tilldelningen av std r inte tillrckligt baserad p behov eller frvntat europeiskt mervrde 31.
CAP funds are allocated to Member States in the form of national ‘envelopes’, which are not determined on the basis of Member States’ needs nor commitments to deliver specific results. 
GJP-std tilldelas medlemsstaterna i form av nationella anslag, som inte faststlls p grundval av medlemsstaternas behov eller taganden om att uppn specifika resultat.
We noted that rural development programmes often do not provide convincing justification for the allocation of funds between measures and objectives. 
Vi noterade att programmen fr landsbygdsutveckling ofta inte innehller vertygande motiveringar till anslagen som frenar tgrder och ml.
Funding may be allocated where it is likely to be fully spent, rather than where it addresses key needs and produces results. 
Det finns en risk fr att std ges till omrden dr det sannolikt kommer att utnyttjas fullt ut och inte dr det tillgodoser grundlggande behov och ger resultat.
Co-financing rates do not, in general, reflect differences between different measures’ potential to deliver EU value added. 
Medfinansieringssatserna speglar i allmnhet inte skillnaderna mellan olika tgrders potential att ge ett europeiskt mervrde.