natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
27 RECOmmEndATIOn 3 member States should: — set adequate requirements to ensure that forestry support within the rural development policy is consistent, in line with state aid provisions and maximises its effectiveness, — put in place adequate procedures to ensure that support is effective so as to actually increase the economic value of the forest areas where the investments take place. Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 
27 rekOmmendatiOn 3 medlemsstaterna bör — fastställa lämpliga krav för att se till att skogsbruksstödet inom landsbygdsutvecklingspolitiken är konsekvent, förenligt med be‐ stämmelserna för statligt stöd och så ändamålsenligt som möjligt, — införa lämpliga förfaranden för att se till att stödet är ändamåls‐ enligt och faktiskt ökar det ekonomiska värdet i de skogsområden där investeringarna görs. Särskild rapport nr 8/2013 – Stöd till åtgärden högre ekonomiskt värde i skog från europeiska jordbruksfonden för landsbygdsutveckling
64. the cMEf is inadequate to appraise the impact of the financial support under measure 122 because the performance indicators and evaluation questions included in the cMEf do not allow determining whether the funded investments resulted in an improvement of the economic value of the forests where they were carried out (paragraphs 42 to 46). 
64. Den gemensamma övervaknings-och utvärderingsramen är olämplig när det gäller att bedöma effekten av det ekonomiska stödet inom åtgärd 122 eftersom resultatindikatorerna och utvärderingsfrågorna i den gemensamma ramen inte gör att man kan avgöra om de finansierade investeringarna ledde till ett högre ekonomiskt värde i de skogar där de gjordes (punkterna 42–46).
Member states did not determine or require beneficiaries to determine the value of the forest areas prior to and after the investments. the lack of assessments at Member state or regional level on the effective increase of the value of the forests where actions were supported hinders the assessment regarding the achievement of the main objective of the measure, and therefore also the assessment of the effectiveness of the support (paragraph 47). 
Medlemsstaterna varken fastställde själva eller krävde att stödmottagarna skulle fastställa värdet på skogsområdena före och efter investeringarna. Bristen på bedömningar i medlemsstaterna eller regionerna om den faktiska ökningen av värdet i de skogar där insatser fick stöd gör att det inte går att bedöma uppfyllelsen av åtgärdens främsta mål och därmed går det inte heller att bedöma stödets ändamålsenlighet (punkt 47).
66. the court found that only a few of the audited projects improved the economic value of the forests, either by improving the value of the land (building of forest tracks and roads) or the value of the stands (silvicultural operations like pruning or thinning). 
66. Revisionsrätten konstaterade att endast ett fåtal av de granskade projekten ökade det ekonomiska värdet i skogarna, antingen genom att de ökade värdet på marken (anläggning av skogsstigar och skogsvägar) eller värdet på bestånden (skogsbruksåtgärder som beskärning eller gallring).
28 RECOmmEndATIOn 4 the Commission should improve its monitoring of the measure to ensure that the member States implement it in line with the specific objectives set. In concrete terms, member States should require beneficiaries to provide details of the value of their forest areas both prior to and after the aided investments and managing bodies should be required to validate these values. Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 
28 rekOmmendatiOn 4 kommissionen bör förbättra övervakningen av åtgärden och se till att medlemsstaterna genomför den i överensstämmelse med de särskilda mål som satts upp. rent konkret bör medlemsstaterna kräva att stöd‐ mottagarna lämnar uppgifter om värdet på skogsområdena både före och efter de investeringar som får stöd och också att förvaltningsmyn‐ digheterna validerar dessa värderingar. Särskild rapport nr 8/2013 – Stöd till åtgärden högre ekonomiskt värde i skog från europeiska jordbruksfonden för landsbygdsutveckling
this report was adopted by chamber i, headed by Mr ioannis sarMas, Member of the court of auditors, in Luxembourg at its meeting of 12 June 2013. 
Denna rapport antogs av revisionsrättens avdelning I, med ledamoten Ioannis SARMAS som ordförande, vid dess sammanträde i Luxemburg den 12 juni 2013.
For the Court of Auditors Vítor Manuel da siLVa caLdEira President 29 Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 
För revisionsrätten Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA Ordförande 29 Särskild rapport nr 8/2013 – Stöd till åtgärden högre ekonomiskt värde i skog från europeiska jordbruksfonden för landsbygdsutveckling
125 100 75 50 25 0 30 AnnEX I ALLOCATIOn OF FInAnCIAL RESOURCES FOR mEASURE 122 VS EXTEnSIOn OF FOREST AREAS In pRIVATE OwnERSHIp bY mEmbER STATE Programmed EAFRD contribution under measure 122 vs forests in private ownership per Member State EAFRD contribution under measure 122 (million euro) Forests in private ownership (million ha) Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development Romania Italy Portugal Spain France Slovakia Latvia Austria Slovenia Hungary Bulgaria Czech Republic United Kingdom Estonia Lithuania Germany Luxembourg 
125 100 75 50 25 0 30 bilaga i fördelning av ekOnOmiSka reSurSer till Åtgärd 122 jämfört med ökningen av SkOgSOmrÅden i privat ägO per medlemSStat Planerat EJFLU-bidrag inom åtgärd 122 jämfört med skog i privat ägo per medlemsstat EJFLU-bidrag inom åtgärd 122 (miljoner euro) Skog i privat ägo (miljoner ha) Särskild rapport nr 8/2013 – Stöd till åtgärden högre ekonomiskt värde i skog från europeiska jordbruksfonden för landsbygdsutveckling Rumänien Italien Portugal Spanien Frankrike Slovakien Lettland Österrike Slovenien Ungern Bulgarien Tjeckien Storbritannien Estland Litauen Tyskland Luxemburg
Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 3,54 58 184,32 34 910,59 15 360,66 Yes AnnEX II 1 2 Pruning and grafting of chestnut trees for the production of chestnuts 20,57 1,36 159 785,99 5 066,64 95 871,59 3 039,98 42 183,5 1 337,59 Yes Yes 3 4 5 Cutting of brush, pruning and grafting of chestnuts for fruit production, acquisition of a brush cutter and a chainsaw 1,42 15 980,14 9 580,14 44 685,74 79 270,23 4 218,76 19 661,73 34 878,9 Yes Yes Yes 7 Acquisition of machinery for forestry work and first processing of wood (trailer, crane, tractor, excavator, shredder), as well as personal protection equipment (overalls, helmets, footwear, gloves, first-aid kits) 243,06 224 108,29 134 465,04 59 164,62 Yes 8 9 Acquisition of a forestry tractor, pruning of pine trees (pinus pinea) 32,88 286 439,11 389 568,91 171 862,75 230 103,57 75 619,361 101 246,27 Yes Yes 10 Restoring of cork oak groves (clearing of brush and trees, pruning), acquisition of machinery for forestry work (excavator, tractor, brush cutter, crane, chainsaws) 5,00 restored cork oaks, 931,00 other wooded land 331 348,17 198 808,90 43 737,96 Yes Cutting of brush, pruning and grafting of chestnuts for fruit production Pruning and grafting of chestnuts for fruit production, acquisition of machines for forestry work and first processing of logs 5,81 fruit chestnut, 59,63 other trees 74 476,24 132 117,05 Pruning and grafting of chestnuts for fruit production, acquisition of machines for forestry work 7,05 fruit chestnut, 59,63 other trees Restoring of cork oak groves (clearing of brush and trees, pruning) 94,00 
Särskild rapport nr 8/2013 – Stöd till åtgärden högre ekonomiskt värde i skog från europeiska jordbruksfonden för landsbygdsutveckling
Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 38 Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development Country Number of project Nature of project Forest area declared/ managed (ha) Total investment (euro) Total public expenditure (euro) Total EAFRD contribution (euro) On-the-spot visit SI Machinery — Trailer AnnEX II 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Forest Track 38,15 23,70 19,82 15 641,00 69 510,00 66 170,00 40 564,00 7 965,00 34 550,00 31 521,00 20 282,00 5 973,00 25 913,00 23 641,00 15 211,00 Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No 8 Machinery — Harvester, Tractor, Forwarder, Truck with Crane/Cable-boom 3,30 1 157 730,00 500 000,00 375 000,00 Yes 9 10 Forest Track Machinery — Tractor 15 350,00 1,70 21 752,00 79 099,00 10 876,00 39 550,00 8 157,00 -29 662,00 No No Machinery — Tractor Forest Road Forest Road 261,15 3,49 45,63 24,00 Machinery — Tractor, Harvester 230 890,00 45 449,00 50 654,00 138 534,00 5 500,00 21 106,00 103 901,00 4 125,00 15 829,00 Forest Road 
Särskild rapport nr 8/2013 – Stöd till åtgärden högre ekonomiskt värde i skog från europeiska jordbruksfonden för landsbygdsutveckling
39 rEply of thE CommISSIoN eXecutive suMMary vi. although some aspects of the measure could have been explained more clearly, implementation could have been improved and challenges needed to be overcome in monitoring and evaluation, implementation and results were stronger in some cases. 
39 kommiSSionenS Svar sammanfattning vi. Även om vissa aspekter av åtgärden kunde ha förklarats tydligare, genomförandet kunde ha förbättrats och det fanns problem som behövde lösas i övervakning och utvärdering var resultaten trots allt bättre i vissa fall.
Moreover, lessons have been learned which will be applied for the coming period — especially through guidance and within the programming process. vii. the commission analysed the situation of the forest sector in the 2005 commission staff Working document, which formed an annex to the communication on the implementation of the Eu forestry strategy (document reference sEc(2005) 333). the term ‘economic value’ was indeed not defined in the legal provisions. 
Lärdomar har också dragits som kommer att utnyttjas för nästa period, särskilt genom vägledning och inom programplaneringen. vii. Kommissionen analyserade läget inom skogsbrukssektorn 2005 i ett arbetsdokument från kommissionens avdelningar, som utgjorde en bilaga till kommissionens meddelande Rapport om genomförandet av EU:s skogsbruksstrategi (SEK(2005) 333).
However, it was regarded as a reasonably clear term, and for the purposes of monitoring/evaluation was captured by the result indicator of ‘increase in gross value added’. the term ‘forestry holding’ was indeed not defined. additional guidance on this point may be needed in future. the commission will also investigate with the council and the European parliament to what extent certain issues could be solved through a definition of ‘forest’ in the relevant legal acts. particular conditions concerning the size, main activity and legal status of beneficiaries are considered an issue to be addressed in individual rural development programmes (rdps) on the basis of a sWot1 analysis. the commission will pay the necessary attention to the issue of forest management plans in the negotiation of future rdps and will provide guidance as necessary. 
Det stämmer att termen skogsbruksföretag inte definierats. Ytterligare riktlinjer om den saken kan behövas i framtiden. Kommissionen kommer också att tillsammans med rådet och Europaparlamentet undersöka i vilken utsträckning vissa problem skulle kunna lösas genom en definition av ”skog” i de berörda rättsakterna.
Every rdp must contain a sWot analysis as part of the basis for planning spending through the rdp. Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 
Varje landsbygdsutvecklingsplan måste innehålla en swot-analys som en del av grunden för planeringen av utgifterna inom landsbygdsutvecklingsplanen. Särskild rapport nr 8/2013 – Stöd till åtgärden högre ekonomiskt värde i skog från europeiska jordbruksfonden för landsbygdsutveckling
40 iX. the commission considers that measure 122 was used incorrectly in some but not all cases cited by the court. nevertheless, it will make the necessary efforts (including through initial guidance) to ensure that Member states/ regions use the correct measure to support a given operation in the next period. see also the replies to paragraphs 35, 36 and 37 for concrete examples with regard to correct implementation in general, and the replies to paragraphs 40 and 42 for examples with regard to use of the correct measure. the commission considers that where measure 122 was the correct measure to use, the economic value of forests was indeed increased — even if the exact nature of the link between the aid and the increase of value of the forest varied according to the type of investment. the commission will investigate with the council and the European parliament to what extent the desired relationship between investments in equipment and improvements to the economic value of forests could be clarified in the relevant legal acts. 
40 iX. Kommissionen anser att åtgärd 122 har använts felaktigt i vissa men inte samtliga fall som revisionsrätten nämner. Trots detta kommer kommissionen att göra allt vad som krävs (inklusive genom inledande vägledning) för att se till att medlemsstaterna och regionerna använder korrekt åtgärd för att stödja en viss insats under nästa period.
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN common reply to paragraphs X and Xi. the indicators and the evaluation questions of the current cMEf are related to the rationale and the objectives of the measure and the axis in which it is included, and make a useful contribution to overall assessment of the measure. the commission considers that appropriate analysis of relevant data within the framework provided can illustrate the economic improvements generated through investments supported under this measure. it is recognised however, that Member states have experienced some difficulties in undertaking this economic analysis, and as a result the commission has 1. issued additional guidance in relation to the current period, and 2. reviewed the situation in order to improve the effectiveness of monitoring and evaluation for the future period. for the next programming period, together with the Member states the commission is developing a cMEf which will allow the assessment, for each rdp, of progress in implementation against commonly defined target indicators for the priorities and focus areas selected for the programme. at the basis is an indicator plan which for each focus area sets the target and the planned outputs and expenditure for the measures that will be used to achieve the targets and objectives of the programme. the indicator plan represents more accurately the quantified intervention logic for each individual programme than does the current rigid axis structure. the qualitative assessment of measure 122 plays an important role alongside quantitative assessment, as it sometimes takes more time for policy intervention to lead to a clearly measurable effect in the case of forestry than in the case of farming. 
Kommissionen kommer att tillsammans med rådet och Europaparlamentet undersöka i vilken utsträckning den önskade kopplingen mellan investeringar i utrustning och högre ekonomiskt värde i skog kan klargöras i de berörda rättsakterna. Kommissionens svar gemensamt svar på punkterna X och Xi. Indikatorerna och utvärderingsfrågorna i den nuvarande övervaknings-och utvärderingsramen avser motiveringen och målen för åtgärden samt den axel där denna ingår och är till nytta vid den övergripande bedömningen av åtgärden.
41 Xii. the commission considers that where measure 122 was the correct measure to use, the economic value of forests was indeed increased. 
41 Xii. Kommissionen anser att det ekonomiska värdet i skog faktiskt höjdes i de fall då åtgärd 122 var korrekt åtgärd att använda.
When assessing the contribution to improving the economic value of forests different factors such as multifunctionality and sustainability must also be taken into account. 
I bedömningen av bidraget till det höjda ekonomiska värdet i skog måste olika faktorer såsom användbarhet för flera ändamål och hållbarhet också beaktas.
Xiii. as for the recommendation that the commission should define and assess the Eu needs for improving the economic value of the forests, as well as clearly define the key features, the commission agrees that it should continue to define and assess the need to improve the economic value of forests in the Eu, in such a way as to justify in general terms the inclusion of relevant support in rural development policy. it considers that studies already available indicate needs in general terms at Eu level.2 2 these studies include (among others): ‘prospects for the market supply of wood and other forest products from areas with fragmented forest-ownership structures’; http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/external/supply-wood/index_ en.htm; ‘Good practice guidance on the sustainable mobilisation of wood in Europe’; http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/fore/publi/forest_brochure_en.pdf and ‘study of the Effects of Globalization on the Economic Viability of Eu forestry’; http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/external/viability_forestry/index_ en.htm Reply of the CoMMISSIoN the commission considers that more specific needs should continue to be assessed and defined at national and programme level by the competent national and regional authorities. the commission believes it should continue to define basic eligibility conditions at Eu level, but that more precise eligibility conditions and selection criteria should be set within individual rdps. it believes that its proposals for a rural development policy for after 2013 follow this approach. 
När det gäller rekommendationen att kommissionen bör definiera och bedöma EU:s behov av att höja det ekonomiska värdet i skog samt definiera centrala delar av åtgärden håller kommissionen med om att den bör fortsätta att definiera och bedöma behovet av att höja det ekonomiska värdet i skog inom EU på ett sådant sätt att det i allmänna termer rättfärdigar att det berörda stödet ingår i landsbygdsutvecklingspolitiken.
However, the commission should provide additional guidance in this matter. the commission will also investigate with the council and the European parliament to what extent the desired relationship between investments in equipment and improvements to the economic value of forests could be clarified in the relevant legal acts. as for the recommendation that the Member states should describe in their rdps the specific economic needs and opportunities of the different types of forest areas and beneficiaries, as well as enhance forest management, the commission notes that the principle of subsidiarity hands considerable discretion to Member states and regions in respect of the points raised — in line, for example, with the European parliament’s ‘report on the implementation of a European union forestry strategy’ (a6-0015/2006). the commission agrees that adequate descriptions are needed. the level of detail required with regard to types of area and beneficiary may vary from one rdp territory to another. the commission considers that a reasonable proportion of forests supported through the measure should be subject to forest management plans. that ‘reasonable proportion’ should be set within the programming process. 
Kommissionen bör dock ge ytterligare riktlinjer om saken. Kommissionen kommer också att tillsammans med rådet och Europaparlamentet undersöka i vilken utsträckning den önskade kopplingen mellan investeringar i utrustning och det höjda ekonomiska värdet i skog kan klargöras i de berörda rättsakterna.
However, these data may be of a very basic nature and require significant processing to allow conclusions about increases in value. to compile result indicators such as ‘increase of gross value added (GVa)’, Ms have been invited3 to capture relevant information on GVa from the supported holdings when the application is approved and 2 years after the investment completion in order to integrate as much as possible the long-term effect of the investments. 
Dessa uppgifter kan dock vara av mycket elementär beskaffenhet. Det kan därför krävas betydande bearbetning om det ska vara möjligt att dra slutsatser om värdehöjningar. För att sammanställa resultatindikatorer så som ökning av bruttoförädlingsvärdet (GVA) har medlemsstaterna upp-manats3 att samla in relevant information om GVA från de skogsbruksföretag som får stöd när ansökan har godkänts och två år efter det att investeringen slutförts för att så långt möjligt få med den långsiktiga effekten av investeringarna.
3 Working document providing guidance to Ms for the result indicator ‘increase of GVa’: http://enrd.ec.europa.eu/app_templates/filedownload. cfm?id=84053593-c697-ff89-Ed5c-51797d9754fd Reply of the CoMMISSIoN in practice, it has been difficult for managing authorities (Mas) to compile the necessary data and conduct the analysis required to establish values for these types of result indicators as part of their regular monitoring activities. therefore, for the next programming period, this task of the establishment of values for this indicator will rather be undertaken by the programme evaluators. the commission considers this a feasible and adequate approach. observations 20. during the formulation of the forestry-related measures, the commission used the analysis that was available. one of the main sources was the commission staff working document in annex to the communication on the implementation of the Eu forestry strategy of 10.3.2005 (sEc(2005) 333), which identified needs and strategic objectives. see paragraph 30 and the associated footnotes. 
3 Arbetsdokument som ger medlemsstaterna vägledning om resultatindikatorn ökning av bruttoförädlingsvärdet: http://enrd.ec.europa.eu/ app_templates/filedownload.cfm?id=84053593-C697-FF89-ED5C-51797D9754FD. Kommissionens svar I praktiken har det varit svårt för förvaltningsmyndigheterna att sammanställa de nödvändiga uppgifterna och genomföra den analys som krävs för att fastställa värden för resultatindikatorer av detta slag som ett led i deras ordinarie övervakningsverksamhet.
21. the opinions to which the court refers were indeed not available in 2004. 
21. De yttranden som revisionsrätten hänvisar till var inte tillgängliga 2004.
However, the main substance of the opinions in question was already contained in the Eu forestry strategy (coM (1998) 649) and the subsequent related council resolution 99c56, which were available in 2004. among other things, the strategy sets out the extent of private forest ownership in the Eu (accounting for 65 % of total forest), the number of private owners and the resultant level of fragmentation. the commission proposal for the post-2013 rural development regulation took account of an sfc opinion from 2009 and the European parliament’s ‘report on the implementation of a European union forestry strategy’ (a6-0015/2006) of 2006. 
Huvudinnehållet i dessa yttranden ingick dock redan i EU:s skogsbruksstrategi (KOM(98) 649) och i rådets därpå följande resolution 99C56, som var tillgängliga 2004.
43 22. the rdp of tuscany clearly states that support is available only in respect of forests owned by private owners or their associations, or by municipalities and their associations. 
43 22. I Toscanas landsbygdsutvecklingsprogram sägs det uttryckligen att stöd endast är tillgängligt för skogar som ägs av privata ägare eller deras sammanslutningar eller av kommuner och deras sammanslutningar.
Eligibility for support in the case of forests owned by national or regional governments but managed by other entities is a subject of debate in the ongoing formal discussions about the future cap. 
Frågan om skogar som ägs av staten eller regionen men förvaltas av andra enheter berättigar till stöd behandlas i de pågående formella diskussionerna om den framtida gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken. 23.