natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The initial situation description is not related to the operational programme objectives 30. 
Beskrivningen av utgngslget r inte knuten till verksamhetsprogrammets ml 30.
All but two of the operational programmes examined included a section called Ôinitial situationŐ and more than half (60 %) formally complied with the regulation by mentioning production, marketing and equipment, even if very briefly. 
Alla utom tv av de granskade verksamhetsprogrammen innehll ett avsnitt kallat ÓutgngslgeÓ, och ver hlften (60 %) uppfyllde formellt kraven i frordningen genom att nmna produktion, salufring och utrustning, ven om det var mycket kortfattat.
Some Member States required producer organisations to list their equipment and facilities and give a table of their production in tonnes and by value, but without requiring this to be related to the programmeŐs objectives or actions in any way. 
Ngra medlemsstater krvde att producentorganisationerna redovisade sin utrustning och sina anlggningar, och i tabellform sin produktion uttryckt i bde vikt och vrde, men de krvde inte att detta p ngot stt skulle vara kopplat till programmlen eller tgrderna.
Other Member States issued no particular instructions, and accepted very general descriptions, in some cases of only one or two sentences. 
Andra medlemsstater utfrdade inga srskilda anvisningar och godknde mycket allmnna beskrivningar, i ngra fall bestende av endast en eller tv meningar.
Few producer organisations described their initial situation in respect of the environment, product quality and production costs, yet nearly all operational programmes had these objectives (see Text box 7). 
Endast ett ftal producentorganisationer beskrev sitt utgngslge nr det gllde miljn, produktkvaliteten och produktionskostnaderna trots att dessa ml ingick i nstan alla verksamhetsprogram (se textruta 7).
No producer organisation described the initial situation for each of the objectives in its operational programme. 
Ingen producentorganisation beskrev utgngslget fr varje ml i sitt verksamhetsprogram.
Text box 7 Regional authorities in Spain approved an operational programme containing ten actions with a total cost of 770 000 euros. 
Textruta 7 Regionala myndigheter i Spanien godknde ett verksamhetsprogram med tio tgrder till en sammanlagd kostnad av 770 000 euro.
Six of these actions had the objective of improving product quality, eight had the objective of reducing production costs, and two had the objective of improving environmental practices. 
Sex tgrder syftade till att frbttra produktkvaliteten, tta till att minska produktionskostnaderna och tv till att frbttra miljmetoderna.
The producer organisation listed in the initial situation the types of fruit grown and the surface area, but gave no information on the initial quality of the fruit, the costs of production, or the environment. 
I beskrivningen av utgngslget redovisade producentorganisationen vilka typer av frukt som odlades och storleken p den odlade arealen, men den gav inga upplysningar om utgngslget betrffande fruktens kvalitet, produktionskostnader eller milj.
C 282/40 EN Official Journal of the European Union 20.11.2006 31. 
C 282/40 SV Europeiska unionens officiella tidning 20.11.2006 31.
In a few cases, producer organisations described the starting situation in relation to specific actions, which is a requirement in the Netherlands, for example. 
I ngra fall beskrev producentorganisationerna utgngslget nr det gllde specifika tgrder (ngot som r ett krav i till exempel Nederlnderna).
The contents of operational programmes do not always relate to the stated objectives 32. 
Innehllet i verksamhetsprogram r inte alltid knutet till de uppsatta mlen 32.
Several Member States required producer organisations to explicitly state in their operational programmes which EU objectives related to each action. 
Flera medlemsstater krvde att producentorganisationerna i sina verksamhetsprogram tydligt angav vilka EU-ml som var knutna till varje tgrd.
In these cases, the correspondence between the objective and the programme was automatic on paper, making the Member StatesŐ check of the compliance of objectives with those in the regulation a formality. 
I dessa fall verensstmde mlet och programmet automatiskt p pappret, vilket gjorde medlemsstaternas kontroll av att mlen var frenliga med frordningens ml till en formalitet.
However, many producer organisations listed any objective that seemed relevant in an attempt to justify the programme or particular action, regardless of whether that was their real objective or not (Text boxes 8 and 9). 
Mnga producentorganisationer angav dock vilket ml som helst som frefll relevant i ett frsk att motivera ett program eller en srskild tgrd, oavsett om det var deras faktiska ml eller inte (se textrutorna 8 och 9).
In Italy and Greece, the authorities developed detailed lists of possible actions, from which the producer organisation could choose, and gave a predetermined objective to each action. The French authorities also issued a list of possible actions, but classified according to their nature, not their objective. 
I Italien och Grekland tog myndigheterna fram detaljerade listor med tnkbara tgrder som producentorganisationerna kunde vlja frn, och fr varje tgrd angavs ett frutbestmt ml. ven de franska myndigheterna publicerade en lista ver tnkbara tgrder, men tgrderna klassificerades efter typ och inte efter ml.
For the environmental and quality categories of actions the relevant objective was usually evident, but for the category Ômeasures linked to production facilitiesŐ sometimes it was not. 
Fr tgrderna i milj-och kvalitetskategorierna var det aktuella mlet oftast uppenbart, men i kategorin Ótgrder knutna till produktionsanlggningarÓ var det inte alltid fallet.
As a result it was not possible to identify the objective of some of the actions on the basis of the operational programme documentation (Text box 10). 
Detta resulterade i att det inte alltid var mjligt att identifiera mlet fr ngra av tgrderna utifrn dokumentationen fr verksamhetsprogrammet (se textruta 10).
The Italian, Greek and French authorities did not attempt to check the objectives of individual programmes as they considered that the compliance of the actions with the EU objectives had been established when drafting the national lists of actions. 
Myndigheterna i Italien, Grekland och Frankrike frskte inte kontrollera att mlen fr enskilda program verensstmde med EU-mlen eftersom de ansg att detta hade faststllts nr den nationella listan ver tgrder upprttades.
However, changes over time to the classification had the effect of ÔchangingŐ the operational programmesŐ objectives for a given action (Text box 11). 
Frndringar ver tiden av klassificeringen ledde dock till att verksamhetsprogrammens ml fr en viss tgrd ÓndradesÓ (se textruta 11).
Operational programme objectives are not given in measurable terms and targets are not set 34. 
Verksamhetsprogrammens ml anges inte i mtbara enheter och mlsttningar faststlls inte 34.
Only the United Kingdom authorities formally required producer organisations to set measurable objectives for operational programmes, although in practice it did not ensure that this was done. 
Endast myndigheterna i Frenade kungariket krvde formellt att producentorganisationerna skulle stta upp mtbara ml fr verksamhetsprogrammen, ven om de i praktiken inte sg till att detta gjordes.
In Spain, Italy and the Netherlands, the authorities required the expected results to be shown for each measure or action, but this was focused on the outputs Ń how the implementation of the actions could be demonstrated Ń rather than on the achievement of the objective. 
I Spanien, Italien och Nederlnderna krvde myndigheterna att de frvntade resultaten skulle anges fr varje tgrd eller verksamhet, men detta var fokuserat p output Đ hur genomfrandet av verksamheten kunde visas Đ snarare n p frverkligandet av mlen.
In 10 % of the operational programmes examined, producer organisations gave quantified objectives for at least one action where this was straightforward, such as for the expected reduction in costs, or the number of hectares to be converted to organic production. 
Fr 10 % av de granskade verksamhetsprogrammen hade producentorganisationerna angett kvantifierade ml fr minst en tgrd nr detta var enkelt att gra, ssom den frvntade kostnadsminskningen eller antalet hektar som skulle stllas om till ekologisk produktion.
These cases were mostly in Spain and Italy. 
Dessa fall gllde oftast Spanien och Italien.
Otherwise, producer organisations did not set targets or indicators by which achievement of the objectives could be monitored. 
I vrigt satte inte producentorganisationerna upp mlsttningar eller indikatorer genom vilka frverkligandet av mlen kunde vervakas.
Producer organisationsŐ evaluation reports do not show the achievement of objectives 35. 
Det framgr inte av producentorganisationernas utvrderingsrapporter om mlen frverkligats 35.
Except for some cases in France and Ireland, the Member States ensured that producer organisationsŐ final evaluation reports described the implementation of the programme and outputs (what had been done), but none in practice required the reports to also show the extent to which the operational programme objectives had been achieved. 
Med undantag fr ngra fall i Frankrike och Irland sg medlemsstaterna till att producentorganisationernas slutrapporter beskrev genomfrandet av programmet och vilken output det hade resulterat i (vad som hade stadkommits), men inget land krvde i praktiken att det av rapporterna ven skulle framg i vilken utstrckning verksamhetsprogrammens mlsttningar hade frverkligats.
As such the reports were of little use for assessing the effectiveness of the aid. 
I det avseendet var rapporterna av ringa nytta fr bedmningen av stdets ndamlsenlighet.
Text box 9 In an operational programme approved by the regional authorities in Spain, a producer organisation purchased a fork-lift truck at a cost of 25 000 euro. 
Textruta 9 I ett verksamhetsprogram som hade godknts av de regionala myndigheterna i Spanien kpte en producentorganisation en gaffeltruck till en kostnad av 25 000 euro.
The producer organisation could not demonstrate a relation between the action and the stated objective of Ôreducing with-drawalsŐ. 
Producentorganisationen kunde inte pvisa ett samband mellan verksamheten och det angivna mlet att Óminska tertagandenaÓ.
Text box 10 In an operational programme in France, a producer organisation included an action described as Ôprovision of servicesŐ a cost of 50 400 euro. 
Textruta 10 I ett verksamhetsprogram i Frankrike tog en producentorganisation fr ett initiativ som beskrevs som ÓTillhandahllande av tjnsterÓ upp en kostnad p 50 400 euro.
25 % of this cost was allocated to the objective of Ôimproving qualityŐ and 25 % to Ôimproving environmental practicesŐ. 
25 % av kostnaden hnfrdes till mlet ÓFrbttra kvalitetenÓ och 25 % till ÓFrbttra miljmetodernaÓ.
We were unable to identify the EU objective related to the remaining 50 % of the costs. 
Vi lyckades inte identifiera det EU-ml som var knutet till de terstende 50 % av kostnaderna.
Text box 11 An irrigation project in Italy was allocated to the objective of Ôimproving qualityŐ in accordance with the 1997 national guidelines. 
Textruta 11 Ett bevattningsprojekt i Italien hnfrdes till mlet ÓFrbttra kvalitetenÓ i enlighet med 1997 rs nationella riktlinjer.
Following a revision of the guidelines it was given the objective of Ôconcen-tration of supplyŐ in 1999. 
Efter en versyn av riktlinjerna hnfrdes det till mlet ÓKoncentrera utbudetÓ 1999.
Text box 8 An operational programme in the Netherlands included an electronic delivery note system at a cost of 135 000 euro with the objective Ôplanning and adjusting production to the demandŐ. The producer organisation could not demonstrate a relation between the action and this objective. 
Textruta 8 I ett verksamhetsprogram i Nederlnderna ingick ett system fr elektroniska fljesedlar till en kostnad av 135 000 euro inom mlet ÓPla-nera och anpassa produktionen till efterfrganÓ Producentorganisa-tion kunde inte pvisa ett samband mellan verksamheten och detta ml.
The real objective, the reduction in costs, was not mentioned in the operational programme. 
Det verkliga mlet, att minska kostnaderna, nmndes inte i verksamhetsprogrammet.
20.11.2006 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/41 36. 
20.11.2006 SV Europeiska unionens officiella tidning C 282/41 36.
The evaluations in the final reports were little used by the Member States (1), and were treated as another formality required for compliance with the regulation. 
Utvrderingarna i slutrapporterna anvndes knappast av medlemsstaterna (1) och sgs som ytterligare en formalitet som krvdes fr att flja frordningen.
In Greece, Spain (2) and Portugal, final reports were simply filed by the paying agency and not examined by the authorities responsible for approving operational programmes. 
I Grekland, Spanien (2) och Portugal arkiverades helt enkelt slutrapporterna av utbetalningsstllet och granskades inte av de myndigheter som ansvarar fr godknnandet av verksamhetsprogram.
The content of the reports varied widely, from less than one page of general unsubstantiated statements such as that Ôquality has been improvedŐ, to over 100 pages of detailed facts and figures on the implementation of the programme, action by action. 
Rapporternas innehll varierade kraftigt, frn mindre n en sida med allmnna, ostyrkta pstenden av typen Ókvaliteten har frbttratsÓ till ver 100 sidor med detaljerade fakta och siffror om programmets genomfrande fr varje tgrd.
Member States did not require final reports to contain a (1) Member States commented that, according to the deadlines set in the implementing regulation, final reports are received after they have already approved the next operational programme for the producer organisation concerned. 
Medlemsstaterna krvde inte att slutrapporterna skulle innehlla gemensam information fr att mjliggra vervakning av programmens (1) Medlemsstaterna kommenterade att enligt de tidsfrister som anges i tillmpningsfrordningen fr de slutrapporterna nr de redan har godknt nsta verksamhetsprogram fr den berrda producentorganisationen.
Although the regulation has been revised several times since 1997, this inconsistency has not been amended. 
Trots att frordningen har ndrats flera gnger sedan 1997 har denna inkonsekvens inte tgrdats.
Evaluation reports could be required earlier in the final year of the programme, simultaneous with the request for the following programme, for example. 
Man skulle kunna krva att slutrapporterna lmnades tidigare under programmets sista r, till exempel samtidigt med anskan om nsta program.
(2) This concerns the national paying agency in particular. common set of information to allow monitoring of the effectiveness of the programmes at regional or national level, and the diversity of the reports made any such analysis impractical. 
(2) Detta gller srskilt det nationella utbetalningsstllet. ndamlsenlighet p regional eller nationell niv, och variationerna mellan rapporterna gjorde alla sdana analyser ogenomfrbara.
Member States do not apply effectiveness criteria when approving operational programmes 38. 
Medlemsstaterna tillmpar inte kriterier fr ndamlsenlighet vid godknnandet av verksamhetsprogram 38.
In practice, Member States approved the programmes according to the nature of the proposed expenditure, not in terms of what the programme was expected to achieve. 
I praktiken godknde medlemsstaterna programmen efter vilken typ av utgift som freslogs och inte efter vad programmet frvntades frverkliga.
Effectiveness criteria, such as additionality, were not applied in deciding whether or not to approve the financing of an action with EU aid. 
Kriterier fr ndamlsenlighet, ssom additionalitet, tillmpades inte vid beslutet att godknna eller avsl finansiering av en tgrd med EU-std.
Consideration of factors specifically required by the regulation, such as the initial situation and objectives, the technical quality and economic consistency of the programme, has become redundant and has only been done to the extent necessary to demonstrate compliance with the letter of the regulation. 
Beaktande av faktorer som uttryckligen krvs enligt frordningen, till exempel utgngslge och ml och att programmen r av tekniskt tillfredsstllande kvalitet och ur ekonomisk synvinkel vlgrundade, har blivit verfldigt och endast utfrts i den utstrckning som krvs fr att visa att man fljer frordningens ordalydelse.
Instead, Member States followed a different approach, with the focus placed on compliance with the eligibility criteria and the payment of subsidy as illustrated in Diagram 6. 
Medlemsstaterna fljde i stllet ett annat tillvgagngsstt, med fokus p efterlevnad av kriterierna fr stdberttigande och betalning av bidrag, ssom illustreras i diagram 6.
Diagram 6 Subsidy approach 
Diagram 6 Fokus p bidrag
C 282/42 EN Official Journal of the European Union 20.11.2006 40. 
C 282/42 SV Europeiska unionens officiella tidning 20.11.2006 40.
This is largely a result of the amendment of the Commission implementing regulation to introduce Ôeligibility listsŐ with which operational programmes since 1999 have had to comply. 
Detta beror i stor utstrckning p den ndring av kommissionens tillmpningsfrordning som innebar att det infrdes en ÓstdberttigandelistaÓ som verksamhetsprogrammen har varit tvungna att verensstmma med sedan 1999.
These list the types of expenditure that can and cannot be included in operational programmes (Text box 12). have to be able to justify their decision to the producer organisation and also may face legal challenges. 
Hr listas de typer av utgifter som kan eller inte kan ing i verksamhetsprogram (se textruta 12). mste dock kunna motivera sitt beslut fr producentorganisationen och kan ven behva rkna med rttsliga klagoml.
Member States can avoid these difficult decisions by approving the same action for all producer organisations that request it, regardless of the objectives or situation of each particular producer organisation (Text box 13). 
Medlemsstaterna kan undvika dessa svra beslut genom att godknna samma tgrd fr alla producentorganisationer som begr den, oavsett varje enskild producentorganisations ml och situation (se textruta 13).
Text box 12 Example of eligibility criteria: transport costs Eligible: Ń investments in transport equipped with cold storage. 
Textruta 12 Exempel p kriterier fr stdberttigande: Transportkostnader Stdberttigande: Ń Investeringar i transportmedel utrustade med anlggningar fr kyllagring.
Ineligible: Ń costs of collection or transport (internal or external), Ń investments in transport for marketing or distribution. 
Icke stdberttigande: Ń Kostnader fr insamling och transport (intern eller extern). Ń Investeringar i transportmedel fr salufring eller distribution.
Text box 13 Example: pallet-boxes In 10 of the 30 randomly selected operational programmes, Member States had approved the purchase of pallet-boxes, crates or similar containers for collecting, transporting and storing fruit and vegetables at a combined cost of 1,7 million euro. 
Textruta 13 Exempel: Pallboxar I tio av de 30 slumpmssigt utvalda verksamhetsprogrammen hade medlemsstaterna godknt inkp av pallboxar, ldor eller liknande behllare fr att samla in, transportera och lagra frukt och grnsaker till en sammanlagd kostnad av 1,7 miljoner euro.
The Commission considers this expenditure to be eligible. 
Kommissionen anser att detta r en stdberttigande utgift.
In some cases, the purchase represented an advance from the initial situation to achieve an objective: one producer organisation replaced wooden crates with more hygenic plastic in order to supply a baby-food manufacturer (objective given: improving quality). 
I ngra fall innebar inkpet en frbttring jmfrt med utgngslget fr att frverkliga ett ml: en producentorganisation ersatte sina tr-ldor med mer hygieniska i plast fr att kunna leverera till en barn-matstillverkare (angivna ml: frbttra kvaliteten).
In other cases these were simply replacements of old, lost or damaged crates, or additional purchases needed for increased production levels, without any clear relation to the given objectives. 
I andra fall var det helt enkelt frga om ersttning av gamla, frsvunna eller skadade ldor, eller nya inkp som behvdes fr strre produktionsvolymer, utan tydlig koppling till de angivna mlen.
The initial implementing regulation in 1997 did not set detailed criteria for eligibility, except to exclude producer organisationsŐ administrative and operating expenditure. 
I den frsta tillmpningsfrordningen frn 1997 faststlldes inga detaljerade kriterier fr stdberttigande, utom fr att undanta producentorganisationernas kostnader fr frvaltning och drift.
Member States were uncertain of what the Commission would accept as eligible expenditure in the Clearance of Accounts process and, in response to queries from the Member States, the Commission issued a series of ad hoc interpretive notes. 
Medlemsstaterna var oskra p vad kommissionen skulle godknna som stdberttigande utgifter vid frfarandet fr godknnande av rkenskaperna, och som svar p medlemsstaternas frfrgningar utfrdade kommissionen en rad srskilda tolkningsmeddelanden.
As these interpretive notes had no official status, the Commission amended the implementing legislation to introduce a list of ineligible operations and expenditure. 
Eftersom dessa tolkningsmeddelanden saknade officiell status ndrade kommissionen tillmpningslagstiftningen och infrde en lista ver icke stdberttigande verksamhet och utgifter.
At the same time, it required Member States to check the eligibility of proposed operational programme expenditure against this list before approving operational programmes. In 2001 the Commission added a list of what could be included in operational programmes and in 2003 the interpretive notes were withdrawn and both lists were revised again. 
Samtidigt infrdes krav p att medlemsstaterna anvnde listan fr att kontrollera att utgifterna i freslagna verksamhetsprogram var stdberttigande innan de godknde verksamhetsprogram. r 2001 lade kommissionen till en lista ver vad som skulle kunna ing i verksamhetsprogram, och 2003 drogs tolk-ningsmeddelandena tillbaka och bda listorna sgs ver igen.
The eligibility lists allowed some exceptions to the exclusion of producer organisationsŐ production and operating costs such as certain staff salaries, recyclable packaging and costs of natural pest and disease controls. 
Genom stdberttigandelistorna medgavs vissa undantag till producentorganisationernas produktions-och driftskostnader, ssom vissa lnekostnader fr personal, tervinningsbara frpackningar och kostnader fr naturliga metoder fr skadedjurs-och sjukdomsbekmpning.
The existence of these eligibility lists does not prevent Member States from also considering the producer organisationsŐ initial situation and objectives and the likely effectiveness of the proposed actions. 
Att dessa stdberttigandelistor finns hindrar inte medlemsstaterna frn att ocks beakta producentorganisations utgngslge och ml samt den sannolika effekten av de freslagna tgrderna.
However, Member States that refuse to approve proposed expenditure defined in the regulation as eligible would The coexistence of the programming model and subsidy approach has increased complexity and costs 44. 
Medlemsstater som vgrar att godknna freslagna utgifter som i frordningen definieras som stdberttigande Att programplaneringsmodellen och bidragsstrategin frekommer parallellt har kat komplexiteten och kostnaderna 44.