Suchergebnisse

This book examines key themes for the management of historic urban centres within a representative sample of centres in different European countries. The twelve historic centres that have been chosen are spread throughout Europe. They are diverse in character and the range includes small towns, cities and urban centres within cities. Some have been designated by UNESCO as World Heritage Sites or Cities, whilst others have recognition, or have been proposed as European Cities of Culture. The centres have all faced different problems and a variety of approaches have been utilised which are also

This paper examines the legislative and administrative background for designating historic property for protection in the United States (US) and their rehabilitation against a whole series of financial inducements and mechanisms. The preservation of heritage buildings in the US forms an integral part of the property market. Market forces and government regulations in the form of preservation law, standards for rehabilitation and the revenue code dictate the success or failure of renovating historic buildings. At all levels of governments (federal, state and local) there has been a growing reluctance in recent years to increase regulatory burdens and fiscal constraints on private citizens. A number of incentives including tax credits, abatements and freezes, direct grant aid, debt financing support, revolving funds, revenue raising bond schemes and various other programmes are examined. The economic benefits associated with such incentives have been scrutinised from the evidence of a number of studies.

PUrE is a UK Collaborative Trial funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) Programme (project no. 13/152/02). The Health Services Research Unit is funded by the Chief Scientists Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates. The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Health Technology Assessment Programme, the National Institute of Health Research, the National Health Service or the Department of Health. The funder (through their peer-review and funding board review process) approved the study proposal but had no role in the collection, analysis or interpretation of data or writing of the report. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF

Acknowledgments Special thanks must go to all of the SUSPEND trial participants and staff at each of our recruiting centres for taking part in this trial. We thank our collaborators at the SUSPEND sites, and participating National Health Service (NHS) trusts and boards (NHS Grampian, Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, NHS Highland, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, North Bristol NHS Trust, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Trust, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, The Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, NHS Lothian, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, St George's Healthcare NHS Trust, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board, Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, South Devon Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, and The University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust). We thank the staff at the SUSPEND trial office based in the Centre for Healthcare Randomised Trials (CHaRT) within the Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen. This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme, Project Number 08/71/01. The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the HTA Programme, the NIHR, the NHS, or the Department of Health. The Health Services Research Unit is core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates; however, the opinions expressed in this publication are those of ...

Funder: UK National Institute for Health Research. Open Access funded by Department of Health UK Acknowledgments We thank all the participants for their commitment to the study, Sheila Wallace for updating the systematic review, members of the Trial Steering Committee and members of the Data Monitoring Committee for their valuable guidance. We thank the National Health Service organisations, principal investigators and local research staff who hosted and ran the study at site. We thank the Health Technology Assessment Programme of the UK NIHR for funding the study (no. 11/72/01). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the UK Government Department of Health. A full report of the study30 has been published by the NIHR Library. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF