natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The ‘guiding principles for the selection of opera‐ tions’ and ‘output indicators, including the quantified target value’ have to be part of the 2014–20 ESIF programmes and are subject to the negotiations with the Commission. 
De Óvgledande principerna fr urval av insatserÓ och Óoutputindikatorer, inklusive det kvantifierade mlvrdetÓ mste finnas med i programmen fr EU:s struktur-och investeringsfonder 2014Đ2020 och r freml fr frhandlingar med kommissionen.
The type of selection princi‐ ples and detailed selection criteria will depend on the specific objective and context of the co‐funded investment. 
Typen av urvalsprinciper och detaljerade urvalskriterier kommer att bero p den medfinansierade investeringens specifika ml och sammanhang.
Member States with identified weaknesses in those areas are requested to describe in the programme (ex ante conditionality, action plan) what actions the authorities are planning to take in order to improve project selection procedures and administrative burden to beneficiaries. 
Medlemsstater med konstaterade svagheter p dessa omrden ombeds beskriva i programmet (genom frhandsvillkor och tgrdsplan) vilka tgrder myndigheterna planerar att vidta fr att frbttra urvalsfrfarandet fr projekt och stdmottagarnas administrativa brda.
Where relevant, Member States are encouraged to use technical assistance in a proactive and focused way for envisaged improvements. 
Dr det r relevant uppmuntras medlemsstaterna att proaktivt och fokuserat erbjuda tekniskt std till planerade frbttringar.
In addition, the Commission will advise managing authorities to include the recommendations of the European Court of Auditors in the selection process and selection criteria of digital growth projects. 
Kommissionen kommer dessutom att rda frvaltningsmyndigheterna att infrliva revisionsrttens rekommendationer i urvalsprocessen och urvalskriterierna fr projekt som rr digital tillvxt.
IV (c) The Commission partly accepts this recommendation. 
IV c) Kommissionen samtycker delvis till denna rekommendation.
In particular, the Commission agrees in principle to having a mechanism introduced that ensures that payments are linked to performance. 
Kommissionen samtycker principiellt till att infra en mekanism som skerstller att utbetalningarna kopplas till resultatet.
However, linking ERDF payments for e‐commerce with results would be challenging. 
Det skulle dock vara svrt att koppla Eruf-utbetalningarna fr e-handel till resultatet.
Reply of the Commission 29 Introduction 05 The Commission points out that the share of SMEs purchasing online is generally much higher, and the EU average of 26 % is much closer to the target. 
Kommissionens svar 29 Inledning 05 Kommissionen ppekar att andelen sm och medelstora fretag som gr inkp online allmnt r mycket hgre och att EU-genomsnittet p 26 procent ligger mycket nrmare mlet.
This relative success is partly due to a higher starting point. 
Denna relativa framgng beror delvis p en hgre utgngspunkt.
Also, it is easy to purchase online, but diffi‐ cult to sell since a platform needs to be set up, with payment and delivery mechanism. 
Det r ocks enkelt att gra inkp online, men svrt att slja ngot eftersom en plattform med betalnings- och leveransfunktioner mste skapas.
09 The Commission shares the Court’s concern about the low absorption rates of the funds for ICT take‐up. 
09 Kommissionen delar revisionsrttens oro ver den lga utnyttjandegraden av medel fr infrande/ anvndning av IKT.
The Commission therefore drafted and disseminates1 guidance in order to promote the use of policy tools for ICT take‐up by SMEs, includ‐ ing e‐commerce. 
Kommissionen har drfr tagit fram vgledningar1 som sprids i syfte att frmja anvndningen av politiska verktyg fr sm och medelstora fretags anvndning av IKT, inbegripet fr e-handel.
For instance, as part of the ‘smart guide to service innovation’, the guide to ‘Smart growth of SMEs’, the guide to ‘SME internationalisa‐ tion’, the guide to different digital growth enhanc‐ ing support methods ‘Digital Agenda Toolbox’ and the Blueprint for ICT innovation vouchers mentioned below. 
Till exempel finns, som en del i vgledningen om tjnsteinnovation, vgledning till smart tillvxt hos sm och medelstora fretag, vgledning till internationalisering av sm och medelstora fretag, vgledning om verktyg fr den digitala agendan fr olika typer av stdmetoder som frbttrar den digitala tillvxten samt den nedan nmnda planen fr IKT-innovationscheckar.
The Commission also provides access to digital growth experts via its technical assistance.2 The Commission also launched in 2003 the Euro‐ pean e‐Business Support Network for SMEs (eBSN) as policy coordination platform designed for national and regional decision‐makers and pub‐ lic policy experts in the field of e‐Business. 
Kommissionen tillhandahller ven experter inom omrdet fr digital tillvxt via det tekniska stdet.2 Kommissionen lanserade dessutom 2003 European e-Business Support Network for SMEs (det europeiska ntverket fr e-handelsstd till sm och medelstora fretag) som plattform fr policysamordning, utformat fr nationella och regionala beslutsfattare och politiska experter p e-handel.
This includes an initiative to promote the smart use of IT and the integration of SMEs in global industrial value chains.3 1 See: http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/guides 2 As done in 2013‐14 in the case of Hungary, Greece and Italy 3 See: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/ict/ebsn/what/ index_en.htm Observations 18 The Commission welcomes the Court’s assessment concerning the strategic framework put in place in all audited Member States. 
Detta omfattar ett initiativ att frmja smart anvndning av IT samt integration av sm och medelstora fretag i globala industriella vrdekedjor.3 1 Se http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/guides 2 Detta gjordes 2013Đ2014 i Ungern, Grekland och Italien. 3 Se http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/ict/ebsn/what/ index_en.htm Iakttagelser 18 Kommissionen vlkomnar revisionsrttens bedmning av de strategiska ramar som skapats i alla medlemsstater som granskats.
Moreover, the Commis‐ sion stresses that the new ESIF regulation provides a better performance and result‐orientation frame‐ work for the 2014–20 period. 
Kommissionen betonar ven att den nya frordningen fr EU:s struktur-och investeringsfonder ger bttre prestanda-och resultatorienterade ramar fr perioden 2014Đ2020.
(See reply under point IV b)) 22 The regulation governing the 2007–13 programmes does not include any requirement for standardised indicators being used for monitoring purposes. 
(Se svaret under punkt IV b). 22 Frordningen som reglerar programmen 2007Đ2013 omfattar inga krav p att standardiserade indikatorer anvnds i vervakningssyfte.
In addition, there is no core indicator specifically for e‐commerce. 
Det finns heller ingen krnindikator srskilt fr e-handel.
A ‘result indicator’ captures the results expected by the implementation of a given activity. 
En ÓresultatindikatorÓ mter det frvntade resultatet av genomfrandet av en given aktivitet.
Conse‐ quently, the Member States opt for a result indicator that best measures the performance of the activ‐ ity undertaken. Although standardisation is pos‐ sible with output indicators, results indicators are tailor‐made and mirror the objective pursued. 
Drmed vljer medlemsstaterna den resultatindikator som bst mter resultatet av den utfrda aktiviteten. ven om standardisering r mjlig genom outputindikatorer r resultatindikatorer skrddarsydda och speglar det aktuella mlet.
Common reply to paragraphs 23 and 25 Results indicators are modified by the managing authorities during the entire programming period. 
23 och 25 Đ gemensamt svar Resultatindikatorerna ndras av frvaltningsmyndigheterna under hela programperioden.
The Commission points out that if a Member State requests a programme amendment, it is necessary to revisit also the corresponding indicators in the programme. 
Kommissionen ppekar att om en medlemsstat begr en programndring r det ndvndigt att ocks omarbeta motsvarande indikatorer inom programmet.
If there is a serious deviation, there is a need to investigate what is the reason for such a deviation case by case. 
Om avvikelsen r stor r det ndvndigt att utreda orsaken till avvikelsen frn fall till fall.
The European Commission negotiates amendments and requests a solid justi‐ fication to be provided by the Managing Authority. 
Europeiska kommissionen frhandlar om ndringar och krver att frvaltningsmyndigheten ger en vlgrundad motivering.
The result indicators are updated both upwards (if the level of ambition can still be higher) and down‐ wards (if the economic reality and the progress made on the ground was not dependent on a man‐ aging authority). 
Resultatindikatorerna kan justeras bde uppt (om ambitionsnivn kan vara hgre) och nedt (om den ekonomiska verkligheten och de framsteg som gjorts ute p fltet inte berott frvaltningsmyndighetens insatser).
As regards Greece, the recent OP Digital Conver‐ gence modification of December 2012 principally concerned a considerable (about 300 M€) budget reduction to reinforce the OP Competitiveness. 
Vad gller Grekland rrde ndringen i december 2012 av det operativa programmet Digital konvergens frmst en betydande budgetminskning (cirka 300 miljoner euro) i syfte att strka det operativa programmet Konkurrenskraft.
This reduction affected inevitably the value of indicators which had to be fine‐tuned and adjusted accordingly. 
Denna minskning pverkade ofrnkomligen vrdet p indikatorerna, som mste anpassas och justeras i enlighet med detta.
24 The changes of the indicators in the OP Innovative Economy in Poland were made at the beginning of 2011. 
Kommissionens svar 30 24 Indikatorfrndringarna i det operativa programmet Innovativ ekonomi i Polen gjordes i brjan av 2011.
Taking into account that the OP was approved at the end of 2007, and first calls for proposals were launched in 2008 and 2009, the modifications were made at the earliest possible moment after first experiences gained in implementation of this measure in the middle of the programming period with relevant justification provided by the manag‐ ing authority. 
Med tanke p att det operativa programmet godkndes i slutet av 2007 och att de frsta inbjudningarna att lmna frslag publicerades 2008 och 2009 gjordes ndringarna vid tidigaste mjliga tidpunkt nr de frsta erfarenheterna av tgrdens genomfrande inhmtats, i mitten av programperioden och med relevanta motiveringar frn frvaltningsmyndigheten.
26 Although guidance was provided (see Footnote 6) to the responsible authorities by the Commission on the principles of the categorisation information system, the classification of expenditure remains the responsibility of the managing authority. 
26 ven om kommissionen gav vgledning (se fotnot 6) till ansvariga myndigheter om informationssystemets kategoriseringsprinciper frblir klassificeringen av utgifter frvaltningsmyndighetens ansvar.
Box 2 In the European Regional Development Fund con‐ text, ‘ICT innovation voucher’ is a delivery mecha‐ nism that enables reaching out to microenterprises and SMEs in a way that it reduces the administrative burden to the latter. 
Ruta 2 I samband med Europeiska regionala utvecklingsfonden r ÓIKT-innovationscheckarÓ en mekanism som gr det mjligt att n ut till mikrofretag och sm och medelstora fretag p ett obyrkratiskt stt.
There is no ‘one‐size‐fit‐all’. 
Det finns inget standardupplgg.
Each scheme will be developed and implemented by regional and local authorities in the form of grants or financial instruments according to rele‐ vant specific factors such as the ICT potential and intensity of each region, its integration with other innovation management measures, the capacity to manage the scheme, previous experience in supporting such measures or the need for improve‐ ment in ICT‐uptake of SMEs. 
Varje system utvecklas och genomfrs av regionala och lokala myndigheter med hjlp av bidrag eller finansiella instrument enligt relevanta specifika faktorer ssom varje regions IKT-potential och IKT-intensitet, dess integration med andra tgrder fr innovationshan-tering, kapaciteten att hantera systemet, tidigare erfarenhet av std till sdana tgrder eller behovet av frbttringar i sm och medelstora fretags IKT-anvndning.
Reply of the Commission 31 29 Under shared management, the setting out of detailed selection criteria and the selection of projects is the responsibility of the Member States. 
Kommissionens svar 31 29 Under delad frvaltning ligger utformandet av detaljerade urvalskriterier och urvalet av projekt p medlemsstaternas ansvar.
This means that when selecting the e‐commerce projects, the managing authority decides whether a business plan has to be presented as part of the application (or other information in line with the objectives of the OP) and what it needs to contain. 
Det innebr att frvaltningsmyndigheten vid urvalet av e-handelsprojekt beslutar huruvida en affrsplan mste lggas fram som en del i anskan (eller annan information i enlighet med det operativa programmets ml) och vad den ska innehlla.
The Managing Authority also verifies the quality of the project application and supporting documents (e.g. quality of business plans). 
Frvaltningsmyndigheten verifierar ven kvaliteten hos projektanskan och stddokument (t.ex. affrsplanernas kvalitet).
31 Under shared management, the setting out of detailed selection criteria and the selection of projects is the responsibility of the Member States. 
31 Under delad frvaltning r utformandet av detaljerade urvalskriterier och urvalet av projekt medlemsstaternas ansvar.
This means that when selecting the e‐commerce projects, the Managing Authority decides whether a business plan has to be presented as part of the application (or other information in line with the objectives of the OP) and what it needs to contain. 
Det innebr att frvaltningsmyndigheten vid urvalet av e-handelsprojekt beslutar huruvida en affrsplan mste lggas fram som en del i anskan (eller annan information i enlighet med det operativa programmets ml) och vad den ska innehlla.
Common reply to paragraph 32 and box 4 The Commission underlines that it is aware of the case described in paragraph 32 and box 4. 
Punkt 32 och ruta 4 Đ gemensamt svar Kommissionen understryker att man knner till fallet som beskrivs i punkt 32 och ruta 4.
Appro‐ priate corrective measures have been initiated by the Commission and the Member State. 
Lmpliga korrigeringstgrder har vidtagits av kommissionen och medlemsstaten.
33 The Commission stresses that ‘guiding principles for selection’ of operation, as part of OPs, are carefully scrutinised by the Commission in the negotiation of the ESIF programmes for the 2014–20 period to ensure that they fit the specific objectives and types of operations.4 35 The Commission considers that sufficient evidence should be retained by the Managing Authority (or the delegated Intermediate Body) to witness that the selection procedure is transparent and meets the criteria decided by the Programme Monitoring Committee. 
33 Kommissionen framhller att de Óvgledande urvalsprincipernaÓ fr insatser, som en del av de operativa programmen, noggrant granskas av kommissionen vid programfrhandlingarna om EU:s struktur-och investeringsfonder fr perioden 2014Đ2020 fr att skerstlla att de lmpar sig fr de specifika mlen och typerna av insatser.4 35 Kommissionen anser att frvaltningsmyndigheten (eller det utsedda frmedlande organet) ska behlla tillrckliga bevis fr att visa att urvalsprocessen r transparent och uppfyller kriterierna som faststllts av programmets vervakningskommitt.
36 (a) The Commission underlines that it is aware of the case described. 
36 a) Kommissionen understryker att man knner till fallet som beskrivs.
Appropriate corrective measures have been initiated by the Commission and the Member State. 
Lmpliga korrigeringstgrder har vidtagits av kommissionen och medlemsstaten.
36 (b) Concerning the Italian projects and as it was explained by the Member States’ authorities the call was drawn up in accordance with Regulation (EC) 1998/2006 (‘de minimis’). 
36 b) Vad gller de italienska projekten, och s som frklarats av medlemsstaternas myndigheter, var inbjudan utformad i enlighet med frordning (EG) nr 1998/2006 (std av mindre betydelse).
This regulation did not provide for an incentive‐effect requirement, unlike other aid schemes. 
Den frordningen innehller, till skillnad frn andra stdsystem, inget krav p stimulanseffekt.
Nevertheless, the call limited retroactive expenditure to 01/01/2008 and did not extend it to 01/01/2007 as would have been possible. 
Inbjudan begrnsade dock retroaktiva utgifter till den 1 januari 2008 och utvidgade dem inte till den 1 januari 2007, vilket hade varit mjligt.
4 Art 96(2)b Common Provision Regulation: ‘(iii) a description of the type and examples of actions to be supported under each investment priority and their expected contribution to the specific objectives referred to in point (i) including the guiding principles for the selection of operations and where appropriate, the identification of main target groups, specific territories targeted, types of beneficiaries, the planned use of financial instruments and major projects;’ 
4 Artikel 96.2 b i frordningen om gemensamma bestmmelser: Óiii) en beskrivning av den typ av tgrder, med exempel, som ska stdjas inom ramen fr varje investeringsprioritering och deras frvntade bidrag till de specifika ml som anges i led i, inbegripet principerna fr valet av insatser och, i lmpliga fall, angivande av huvudsakliga mlgrupper, srskilda geografiska mlomrden, typ av stdmottagare, hur man planerar att anvnda finansieringsinstrumenten och strre projekt ...Ó.
Reply of the Commission 32 37 The Commission agrees with the Court and will, in relevant cases, raise the issue of the duration of project selection in the Programme Monitoring Committees with a view to ensure approved and faster procedures. 
Kommissionens svar 32 37 Kommissionen instmmer med revisionsrtten och kommer i relevanta fall att ta upp frgan om pro-jekturvalets lngd i programmens vervakningskommitter med avsikt att skerstlla godknda och snabbare frfaranden.
40 The Commission underlines the difference of inten‐ sity of intervention between the Greek OP and the pilots project ‘ICT innovation vouchers’ going in the case of the Greek OP from 40 000 to 200 000€ and in the case of the pilots from 5 000€ to 7 500€. 
40 Kommissionen understryker skillnaden i insatsin-tensitet mellan det grekiska operativa programmet och pilotprojekten ÓIKT-innovationscheckarÓ i och med att det grekiska operativa programmet gick frn 40 000 till 200 000 euro och pilotprojekten frn 5 000 till 7 500 euro.
This also could explain the difference in the duration of the selection procedure. 
Detta kan ven frklara skillnaden i urvalsprocessens lngd.
Furthermore, Murcia based its ICT innovation voucher pilot on its extensive experience in the design, implementation and management of inno‐ vation vouchers. 
Dessutom baserade Murcia sitt pilotprojekt med IKT-innovationscheckar p sin omfattande erfarenhet av utformning, genomfrande och frvaltning av innovationscheckar.
41 The cross‐border dimension depends upon the nature of the business. 
41 Den grnsverskridande dimensionen beror p verksamhetens karaktr.
The business can be local and therefore rules out cross‐border activities. 
Verksamheten kan vara lokal, vilket drmed utesluter grnsverskridande aktiviteter.
Future expansion of the business might in turn require the adaptation of the website with multi‐lin‐ gual facilities. 
Fr att utvidga verksamheten ytterligare kan det i sin tur krvas att webbplatsen anpassas till flera sprk.
The Commission insists for the 2014–20 ERDF pro‐ grammes on the importance of internationalisation of SMEs, as analysis show that SMEs that are active beyond their national boundaries tend to be more competitive.5 5 See for instance: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/ sme/files/support_measures/internationalisation/ report_internat_en.pdf 43 Translating the website could be envisaged when business opportunities arise abroad at the target market. 
Kommissionen insisterar p vikten av sm och medelstora fretags internationalisering under Eruf-programmen 2014Đ2020 eftersom analyser visar att sm och medelstora fretag som r verksamma utanfr sina nationsgrnser tenderar att ha hgre konkurrenskraft.5 5 Se exempelvis http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/files/ support_measures/internationalisation/report_internat_en.pdf 43 versttning av webbplatsen kan vara relevant nr affrsmjligheter uppstr utomlands p ml-marknaden.
However, the costs incurred might exceed the additional benefits depending upon the nature of the business. 
Kostnaderna kan dock, beroende p verksamhetens karaktr, verskrida de ytterligare vinsterna.
Common reply to paragraphs 44 and 45 The regulation governing the 2007–13 programmes does not include any requirement for standardised indicators being used for monitoring purposes. 
Punkterna 44 och 45 Đ gemensamt svar Frordningen som reglerar programmen 2007Đ2013 omfattar inga krav p att standardiserade indikatorer anvnds i vervakningssyfte.
The analysis of the reports submitted on the pro‐ gress of the project’s implementation is done at Member State level. 
Analysen av rapporterna som lmnats in om framsteg i projektgenomfrandet grs av medlemsstaterna.
A ‘result indicator’ captures the results expected by the implementation of a given activity. 
En ÓresultatindikatorÓ mter de frvntade resultaten av genomfrandet av en given aktivitet.
Conse‐ quently, the Member States opt for a result indicator that best measures the performance of the activ‐ ity undertaken. Although standardisation is pos‐ sible with output indicators, results indicators are tailor‐made and mirror the objective pursued. 
Drmed vljer medlemsstaterna den resultatindikator som bst mter resultatet av den utfrda aktiviteten. ven om standardisering r mjlig genom outputindikatorer, r resultatindikatorer skrddarsydda och speglar det aktuella mlet.
47 Systematic monitoring of fully implemented pro‐ jects can be regarded as a good practice but is not an obligation under the regulations. 
47 Systematisk vervakning av fullstndigt genomfrda projekt kan ses som god praxis, men r inte ett krav enligt frordningarna.
Managing Authorities should carry out evaluations to assess the effectiveness, efficiency and impact of a programme. 
Frvaltningsmyndigheterna ska gra utvrderingar dr programmens ndamlsenlighet, effektivitet och genomslagskraft bedms.
An evaluation shall assess how sup‐ port from the Funds has contributed to the objec‐ tives for each priority. 
I utvrderingen ska en bedmning gras av hur std frn fonderna har bidragit till mlen fr respektive prioritet.
Reply of the Commission 33 49 (a) The Commission acknowledges the problem, but draws the attention to the effects of the economic/ financial crisis that led to a high business mortal‐ ity rate, and to withdrawals from funded projects, as well as a generalised lengthening of the imple‐ mentation times for interventions. 
Kommissionens svar 33 49 a) Kommissionen medger problemet, men pongterar effekterna av den ekonomiska/finansiella krisen som ledde till en hg andel nedlagda verksamheter, avhopp frn finansierade projekt samt en allmn frlngning av genomfrandetiderna fr insatser.
The Managing Authority is implementing a num‐ ber of initiatives aimed at ending this ‘emergency’ situation and reinstating the regular, constant and orderly performance of computerised management activities for all information relating to the state of progress of the funded projects. 
Frvaltningsmyndigheten genomfr en rad initiativ avsedda att komma ur denna ÓndsituationÓ och terinfra regelbunden, konstant och metodisk datoriserad frvaltning fr all information som rr de finansierade projektens utveckling.