natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Nevertheless, for the sake of agreement between the different Member States, the various ESDP priorities (1) were retained and supplemented with others. Given that the geographical area of the programme is greater than that of the largest EU Member States, none of the measures has much significance. (1) The ESDP priorities concern Ôpolycentric spatial development and a new urban-rural relationshipŐ, Ôparity of access to infrastructure and knowledgeŐ and Ôwise management of the natural and cultural heri-tageŐ. 
Nr det gller del B r tgrderna mer specifika eftersom de i de tv fall som granskats har anknytning till ESDP. nd behll man ESDP:s olika prioriteringar (1) och lade till andra fr att man skulle n en verenskommelse mellan de olika medlemsstaterna, trots att det omrde som berrs av programmet till ytan r strre n unionens strsta medlemsstater. I detta sammanhang har varje tgrd endast en begrnsad betydelse. (1) Prioriteringarna fr Regional utvecklingsplanering i europeiskt perspektiv gller regional decentraliserad utvecklingsplanering och nytt frhllande mellan stad/landsbygd, Ólikvrdig tillgng till infrastruktur och kunskapÓ och varsam frvaltning av natur och kulturarv.
The Strand C programmes, which contain no needs analysis and no breakdown of the general objective assigned to the Strand by the guidelines, are not broken down by priority and measure. 
Programmen inom del C, som inte innehller ngon behovsanalys eller ngon uppdelning av det vergripande ml som denna del tilldelas i riktlinjerna, r inte uppdelade i prioriteringar och tgrder.
In all the Strand A and B programmes examined, therefore, there is a discrepancy between the analysis of the region eligible for Interreg and the definition of a strategy and priorities for the programme. 
I alla program som granskats inom delarna A och B finns det sledes en klyfta mellan analysen av det omrde som r berttigat till std frn Interreg och definitionen av programmets strategi och prioriteringar.
The key programme measures were drawn up on the basis of other concerns which the programmes do not make explicit, and there is a very broad content base. By combining the Ôtop-downŐ and Ôbottom-upŐ approaches, it should be possible to take account both of the needs emerging from the preliminary analyses and of those expressed by local partners. 
Kombinationen av tillvgagngsstten Óuppifrn och nedÓ och Ónedifrn och uppÓ br gra det mjligt att ta hnsyn bde till de behov som framkommer i frhandsanalyserna och de behov som uttrycks av de lokala aktrerna. ven om det faktum att programmens genomfrandeorgan och finansieringsdelar r gemensamma frmjar samarbetet (se punkt 50) har detta inte utmynnat i ngon riktad strategi som kan lsa de problem som beror p grnserna.
Is there complementarity between the Interreg III CIPs and traditional ERDF interventions? 64. 
Kompletterar traditionella stdinsatser varandra? och ERUF:s Interreg III-programmen 64.
The Strand A CIPs examined sometimes include arguments that seek to demonstrate complementarity with traditional intervention programmes. 
De program inom del A som granskats innehller ibland vervganden som syftar till att visa att de kompletterar de traditionella stdprogrammen.
The audit did not perform the same comparison in respect of Strands B and C, since the regions concerned are generally eligible under scores of different Objective 1 and 2 programmes. 
Det gjordes ingen jmfrelse mellan delarna B och C i samband med granskningen, eftersom de berrda omrdena i allmnhet var stdberttigade till tiotals olika program enligt ml 1 och ml 2.
Do the first projects adopted qualify as trans-European and do they offer added value? 
Har de frsta projekt som antagits en transeuropeisk karaktr och ett mervrde?
In every one of the programmes examined, the definition of a trans-European project given in the Commission guidelines (see paragraphs 13 and 14) is put into practice by means of eligibility and selection criteria to which a rating scale is applied (save in the case of the Ems-Dollart Region CIP). 
I alla program som granskats genomfrs det transeuropeiska projekt som anges i kommissionens riktlinjer (se punkterna 13 och 14) med hjlp av kriterier fr stdberttigande och urval p vilka ett pongsystem tillmpas (frutom region Ems-Dollart).
Other criteria are added for (2) For a given eligible region, it is difficult to compare the financial resources made available under Interreg III with those made available under Objective 1 and Objective 2 Intervention programmes, given that the eligible regions are not exactly the same, since regions eligible under Interreg do not necessarily have to be regions eligible under Objectives 1 and 2. 
Andra kriterier har tillkommit fr att man skall kunna bedma projektets vergripande kvalitet, till exempel projektets bidrag till att tgrdsmlen (2) Fr ett givet stdberttigat omrde r det svrt att jmfra de finansiella resurser som frigjorts enligt Interreg III med dem som frigjorts enligt stdprogrammen fr ml 1 och ml 2 eftersom de stdberttigade omrdena inte r exakt desamma. Omrden som r berttigade till stdtgrder enligt Interreg r inte ndvndigtvis stdberttigade omrden enligt ml 1 och ml 2.
It may, however, be estimated that, for Strand A Interreg programmes, the ratio of financial resources varies between 1:20 and 1:50. 
Uppskattningsvis varierar frhllandet mellan dessa finansiella resurser fr Interreg-programmen inom del A mellan 1/20 och 1/50.
7.12.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 303/15 the assessment of overall project quality and might include a measureŐs contribution towards the objectives, whether or not it is innovative, the sustainability of its results and the partnersŐ capacity to see it through to its conclusion. 
7.12.2004 SV Europeiska unionens officiella tidning C 303/15 uppfylls, projektets nyskapande karaktr, effekternas varaktighet och parternas frmga att slutfra projektet.
A total score for each project would enable it to be compared with other projects but is not always calculated (Alps, Spain-Portugal, Alpenrhein-Bodensee-Hochrhein and Northern Zone). 
Det r inte alltid varje projekt fr ett sammanlagt pongresultat som gr att man kan jmfra olika projekt med varandra (Alperna, SpanienĐPortugal, AlpenrheinĐBodenseeĐHochrhein, Norra zonen).
Most of the projects examined (1) can be termed trans-European, having been prepared by a number of Member States which were to implement them jointly. 
Merparten av de projekt som granskats (1) har en transeuropeisk karaktr d de har utarbetats av partner frn olika medlemsstater och genomfrts gemensamt.
Cooperation is a salient feature. However, some projects essentially consist of bringing parallel subprojects on both sides of the border under a single roof and have relatively little trans-European interest (Strand A: work on both sides of a border to develop river tourism infrastructure and museums and renovate two historic buildings, even if there are plans to follow up by imparting a cross-border identity to these projects; the resurfacing of two roads on one side of the border while a new road is built on the other; construction of part of a technology park on one side and a business park on the other. 
I vissa fall bestr dock projekten huvudsakligen i att delprojekt genomfrs parallellt p bda sidor om grnserna och drmed r deras transeuropeiska vrde frhllandevis begrnsat (del A: bygga upp infrastrukturen p bda sidor om grnsen i frga om flodturism, museer, restaurera tv historiska byggnader, ven om det finns planer p att sedan vidta tgrder fr att gra projekten grnsverskridande, rusta upp tv vgar p ena sidan av grnsen och bygga en ny vg p den andra, uppfra en del av en teknikpark p ena sidan och uppfra ett affrscentrum p den andra.
Strand B: a network formed by eight partners from four Member States with the aim of setting up an Internet portal for each region around the same basic design). 
Del B: upprtta ett ntverk med tta samarbetspartner frn fyra medlemsstater i syfte att skapa en Internetportal fr varje omrde utifrn samma modell).
Projects do not always make a significant contribution to the resolution of border-related problems because some of them are limited almost exclusively to the exchange of experience and are not sufficiently focused on practical action (Strand A: the transfer of medical expertise, the exchange of experience between growers and the establishment of a network of organisations offering business support by means of joint seminars. 
Projekten bidrar inte alltid i s stor utstrckning till att lsa de problem som beror p grnserna eftersom somliga av dem nstan enbart r begrnsade till ett utbyte av erfarenheter och inte r tillrckligt tgrdsinriktade (del A: verfring av praktisk medicinsk kunskap, utbyte av erfarenheter mellan odlare, bildande av ett ntverk fr stdorganisationer till fretag genom gemensamma seminarier.
Strand B: the exchange of experience on the prevention of coastal erosion). 
Del B: utbyte av erfarenheter i frga om bekmpning av kusterosion).
It appears from the first projects to have been adopted that the definition of trans-European projects has been respected and that many projects entail the cooperation of all the partners. 
P grundval av de frsta projekt som antagits tycks det som om man har fljt definitionen av det transeuropeiska projektet och att mnga av dem leder till samarbete mellan olika partner.
Nonetheless, some offer limited added value because they do not focus on practical action or could have been implemented in other regions. Although the systems of selection criteria could be improved, this weakness is largely due to the imprecise nature of the stated objectives and the broad scope of the measures within each CIP (see paragraphs 59 to 63). 
Vissa projekts mervrde r dock lgt eftersom de inte r tgrdsinriktade eller drfr att de hade kunnat genomfras i andra omrden. ven om det gr att frbttra urvalskriteriesy-stemen beror denna svaghet frmst p att de ml som efterstrvas r otydliga och p att tgrderna inom varje program har en stor spridning (se punkterna 59Đ63).
(1) The audit focused on a sample of projects selected among the first to have been adopted by the authorities responsible for each CIP chosen for inspection. 
(1) Kontrollen gllde ett stickprov av projekt som valts ut bland de frsta projekt som antagits av ansvariga myndigheter fr varje program som valts ut till granskningen.
No statements of expenditure had yet been made for these projects. 
Dessa projekt hade nnu inte gett upphov till ngra utgiftsredogrelser.
THE FEASIBILITY OF MEASURING PROGRESS EX POST 70. 
M JLIGHET ATT I EFTERHAND MTA DE FRAMSTEG SOM GJORTS 70.
The basic instrument establishing the Structural Funds provides that interventions shall be evaluated, especially ex post, in order to assess their impact. The results of evaluation should be used to improve the quality of interventions in subsequent periods. 
Enligt grundfrordningen fr strukturfonderna skall insatserna utvrderas, srskilt i efterhand, s att man kan mta effekten av dem. Resultaten av utvrderingen br bidra till att kvaliteten p insatserna frbttras fr de kommande perioderna. r programmlen vlstrukturerade?
As is shown by the process of defining priorities and measures for the CIPs of Strands A and B previously examined (see paragraphs 55 to 63), it was not possible to set objectives on the basis of the regional situational analysis or any strategic choices made. 
Som frfarandet fr att faststlla prioriteringar och ml visar nr det gller de program som granskats inom del A och del B (se punkterna 55Đ63) gick det inte att utg frn analysen av situationen i det berrda omrdet nr man faststllde mlen och de strategiska val som gjorts.
Most programmes have one or two very general objectives and a few sub-objectives, although a greater number of sub-objectives were set in some cases (15 for Spain-Portugal, 21 for Europe and 10 for the Western Mediterranean Ń see Table 5). 
Programmen har i allmnhet ett eller tv mycket allmnna ml som fljs av ngra delml, med undantag av vissa program fr vilka mnga delml har faststllts (15 fr SpanienĐPortugal, 21 fr Nordvstra Europa och 10 fr Vstra Medelhavsomrdet) (se tabell 5).
The absence of one main, clear and concrete objective broken down into its most important sub-objectives betokens difficulties in evaluating impact. 
Avsaknaden av ett tydligt och konkret ml som r indelat i olika delml lter ana svrigheter nr det gller utvrderingen av programmets effekt.
The Strand C CIPs were designed in response to a single Commission objective, namely, to improve the effectiveness of policies and instruments for regional development and cohesion. No sub-objectives were set. 
Programmen fr gemenskapsinitiativet inom del C har utformats p grundval av ett enda ml som faststllts av kommissionen, nmligen att gra politik och instrument fr regional utveckling och sammanhllning mer effektiva.
Are the objectives measurable and quantified? 
Inget delml har faststllts. r mlen mtbara och kvantifierade?
The Commission insisted that all programmes should include indicators. The only exception concerns Strand C programmes: here it was decided not to establish indicators until such time as a sufficient number of projects had been adopted, so as to give a clearer understanding of the content of the actions carried out. 
Kommissionen understrk att indikatorer skulle lggas fram i varje program utom nr det gller programmen inom del C, fr vilka detta arbete skts upp till den tidpunkt d ett tillrckligt stort antal projekt hade antagits fr att man bttre skulle kunna bedma innehllet i de tgrder som vidtagits.
Indicators were therefore identified. 
Allts faststlldes indikatorer.
However, every one of the programmes examined suffers from an unclear or very incomplete assessment of impact, that is, the indicators measure just one aspect of the stated objectives or, where they address a priority, deal with only a few of the measures under that priority (see Table 5). 
Men i samtliga program som granskats r bedmningen av effekten antingen obefintlig eller ofullstndig, det vill sga indikatorerna mter endast en aspekt av de uppsatta mlen och nr det gller prioriteringar speglar de endast en del av de tgrder som prioriteringen bestr av (se tabell 5).
What is more, in some programmes each project partner also has the option of determining its own indicators (Ems-Dollart Region, Alps and Alpenrhein-Bodensee-Hochrhein). 
Inom vissa program har dessutom varje projektledare mjlighet att sjlv bestmma sina egna indikatorer (region Ems-Dollart, Alperna, AlpenrheinĐBodenseeĐHochrhein).
Some of the Strand A programmes have indicators which are independent of the stated objectives and known as Ôcross-border contextŐ (2) and Ôcooperation intensityŐ (3) indicators (Alps, Alpenrhein-Bodensee-Hochrhein and Ems-Dollart Region; the Spain-Portugal CIP provides for such indicators but has not developed them). Although these vary from one programme to the next, they are very general in nature and of limited relevance to (2) For example, the number of cross-border workers, the number of firms engaged in cross-border activity and the percentage of the population that can speak the language of the neighbouring country. 
Vissa program inom del A har indikatorer som r oberoende av de uppsatta mlen, s kallade indikatorer fr grnsverskridande sammanhang (2) och indikatorer fr intensiteten i samarbetet (3) (Alperna, AlpenrheinĐBodenseeĐHochrhein, region Ems-Dollart; i programmet SpanienĐPortugal planerar man att lta dem ing, men har nnu inte tagit fram dem). ven om indikatorerna vxlar beroende p program har de en mycket allmn (2) Till exempel: antal grnsarbetare, antal fretag som har en grnsverskridande verksamhet och procentsats av befolkningen som talar grannlandets sprk.
(3) For example, the number of shared information systems and cross-border networks. C 303/16 EN Official Journal of the European Union 7.12.2004 the programme concerned. 
(3) Till exempel: antal gemensamma informationssystem, antal grnsverskridande ntverk. C 303/16 SV Europeiska unionens officiella tidning 7.12.2004 karaktr och r av begrnsat intresse fr det berrda programmet.
They could, however, have had some relevance for Strand A as a whole if they had been developed and applied as standard to all the CIPs in this strand. 
P en mer allmn niv av initiativets del A skulle de dock ha kunnat ha en viss betydelse om de hade utvecklats och tillmpats p samma stt p alla program inom denna del.
Another weakness is the absence of a definition of the information sources or the procedure that will be used when calculating the indicators. 
En annan svaghet r att det saknas en definition av de informationskllor som indikatorerna skall berknas utifrn och hur de skall erhllas.
It is often impossible to establish the relationship between indicators from the lowest to the highest levels, i.e., from project level to that of global CIP objectives. 
Det r ofta omjligt att hitta ett samband mellan indikatorer som gr frn lgsta till hgsta niv, det vill sga frn sjlva projekten till programmens vergripande ml.
Lastly, despite these shortcomings, there were attempts to quantify the objectives for a number of programmes, either globally or by reference to priorities or measures. 
Slutligen gjordes det frsk till kvantifiering inom flera program, trots de luckor som konstaterats, ibland p en vergripande niv, ibland p prioriterings-och tgrdsniv.
However, the working documents that were necessary to establish how quantification was carried out were unavailable. 
Det har dock inte gtt att f tag i ngra arbetsdokument som gr det mjligt att kontrollera hur denna kvantifiering utfrdes.
Yet if these quantified objectives are to have any relevance, it must be possible to compare them ex post with what has been achieved so that conclusions can be drawn. If the context in which targets were set cannot be recreated, there will be little basis on which to draw conclusions from this comparison. 
Fr att dessa kvantifierade ml skall ha ngon betydelse mste de kunna jmfras med resultaten i efterhand s att slutsatser kan dras. Om det inte gr att terskapa de villkor under vilka mlen faststlldes blir inte de slutsatser som skulle kunna dras frn denna jmfrelse srskilt vlgrundade.
There is a tendency to put off the business of measuring the degree to which objectives have been achieved. 
Frgan om hur man skall mta i vilken mn mlen har genomfrts har en bengenhet att frhalas.
However, it is important that the situation be clarified and a selection made with the aim of retaining only those indicators that are essential for monitoring the progress of the CIP, making decisions or measuring programme impact. 
Det r dock viktigt att klargra situationen nr det gller indikatorer och gra ett urval s att man enbart behller de indikatorer som krvs fr att vervaka hur programmet fortskrider, fr att fatta beslut och fr att mta effekten av programmet.
Just two of the eight programmes examined (Alpenrhein-Bodensee-Hochrhein and Ems-Dollart Region) employed a computerised project management system and a database for compiling information to be used when setting indicators. 
Endast tv av de tta program som granskades (Alpen-rheinĐBodenseeĐHochrhein och region Ems-Dollart) hade tillgng till ett datoriserat frvaltningssystem fr projekten och till en databas fr att samla in uppgifter i frga om indikatorer.
Systems had been developed separately in different regions of the Member States, but this can only mean higher costs and delays in the implementation of programme monitoring. 
System utvecklades separat i olika regioner i medlemsstaterna, vilket bara kar kostnaderna fr och frsenar genomfrandet av vervakning av programmen fr gemenskapsinitiativet.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusion 79. 
SLUTSATS OCH REKOMMENDATIONER Slutsats 79.
Compared with the shortcomings noted during the CourtŐs audit of Interreg I, there have been improvements to the trans-European nature of projects and cooperation in the implementation of CIPs (see paragraph 7). 
Jmfrt med de brister som konstaterades vid revisionsrttens granskning av Interreg I har den transeuropeiska karaktren i projekten och samarbetet vid genomfrandet av programmen fr gemenskapsinitiativet frstrkts (se punkt 7).
However, there are still serious delays and, despite some efforts, a satisfactory solution is still to be found for evaluating the CIŐs impact, owing in part to the imprecision and very broad scope of the objectives set in the guidelines and at CIP level. 
Men det frekommer fortfarande stora frseningar, och trots vissa anstrngningar har frgan om utvrderingen av gemenskapsinitiativets effekt inte besvarats p ett tillfredsstllande stt, delvis p grund av att de ml som faststllts i riktlinjerna och p programniv r oklara och mycket omfattande.
The guidelines focus on operational procedures but were made available too late and contain over-generalised objectives 80. 
Riktlinjerna r inriktade p arbetsrutinerna, men blev tillgngliga alltfr sent och innehller ml som r alltfr allmnna 80.
With a view to enhancing cooperation, the Commission guidelines contain a definition of the trans-European projects that are to be implemented in every CIP (see paragraphs 13 and 14) and establish stricter requirements concerning implementation. 
Kommissionens riktlinjer innehller en definition av det transeuropeiska projekt som skall genomfras inom varje program fr gemenskapsinitiativet (se punkterna 13 och 14) och strkta krav i frga om genomfrande fr att frmja samarbetet.
Bodies of this sort are able to represent the various regions concerned and take on the task of implementation (see paragraphs 15 and 16). 
Dessa organ kan fretrda olika berrda regioner och ansvara fr genomfrandet (se punkterna 15 och 16).
No analysis was available to the Commission of the specific situation of eligible areas or the progress that had been made towards achieving the CI objectives or the more specific objectives of CIPs. 
Kommissionen hade inte tillgng till ngon analys av de stdberttigade omrdenas srskilda situation och av de framsteg som gjorts nr det gller att uppn gemenskapsinitiativets ml eller programmens srskilda ml.
The new guidelines do not contain objectives that are targeted and measurable. 
De nya riktlinjerna innehller inte ngra riktade och mtbara ml.
Instead, they outline a possible field of action in which the regions of the Member States are encouraged to work together on issues which it is up to them to define jointly. 
De utgr snarare ett flt fr mjliga tgrder dr olika regioner i medlemsstaterna uppmanas att arbeta tillsammans med teman som de gemensamt fr faststlla.
If no choices setting concrete objectives at CIP level are made, implementation of the CI will lead to the dilution of resources. 
I brist p val p programniv dr konkreta ml faststlls kommer genomfrandet av gemenskapsinitiativet att leda till att resurserna urvattnas.
The Commission has not established common indicators which would allow the progress achieved through implementation of the Initiative to be measured globally at Community level (see paragraphs 17 to 25). 
Kommissionen faststllde inte gemensamma indikatorer som hade gjort det mjligt att mta de framsteg som gjorts genom genomfrandet av initiativet p en vergripande niv i gemenskapen (se punkterna 17Đ25).
As regards Strand A, no solution has been found, using the present characteristics of the NUTS nomenclature, to the problem of the existence, in a number of Member States, of areas which are too large to allow effective cooperation (see paragraph 26). 
Nr det gller del A har problemet att det i vissa medlemsstater finns omrden som r alltfr vidstrckta fr att mjliggra ett effektivt samarbete inte ftt ngon lsning p grund av den nuvarande indelningen enligt NUTS-nomenklaturen (se punkt 26).