<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Planning Theory &amp; Practice &#8211; PHENND</title>
	<atom:link href="https://phennd.org/organization/planning-theory-practice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://phennd.org</link>
	<description>We are a network of over 25 colleges and universities that strengthens service learning in Philadelphia, connecting academics with community involvement.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2019 02:38:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Defining University Anchor Institution Strategies: Comparing Theory to Practice</title>
		<link>https://phennd.org/update/defining-university-anchor-institution-strategies-comparing-theory-to-practice-2/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hillarya]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2019 02:38:01 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[New Resources]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://phennd.org/?post_type=update&#038;p=60267</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Since the 1990s, some urban universities have served as neighborhood anchors with an interest in revitalization. Current theory suggests anchors adopt ‘shared value’ approaches, leveraging resources for mutually beneficial improvement in the community. This study explores assumptions in contemporary anchor frameworks and uses a survey to examine how 22 U.S. universities approach their roles as anchor institutions. The study finds that the universities tend to prioritize place-based initiatives, while contemporary frameworks are more normative and highlight socioeconomic practices. Based on reported strategies, the author proposes an alternate typology that accounts for the ways universities most commonly describe anchor approaches, complementing [&#8230;]]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since the 1990s, some urban universities have served as neighborhood anchors with an interest in revitalization. Current theory suggests anchors adopt ‘shared value’ approaches, leveraging resources for mutually beneficial improvement in the community. This study explores assumptions in contemporary anchor frameworks and uses a survey to examine how 22 U.S. universities approach their roles as anchor institutions. The study finds that the universities tend to prioritize place-based initiatives, while contemporary frameworks are more normative and highlight socioeconomic practices. Based on reported strategies, the author proposes an alternate typology that accounts for the ways universities most commonly describe anchor approaches, complementing contemporary theory.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14649357.2017.1406980">https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14649357.2017.1406980</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Defining University Anchor Institution Strategies: Comparing Theory to Practice</title>
		<link>https://phennd.org/update/defining-university-anchor-institution-strategies-comparing-theory-to-practice/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[hillarya]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2018 14:29:18 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[New Resources]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://phennd.org/?post_type=update&#038;p=57263</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Since the 1990s, some urban universities have served as neighborhood anchors with an interest in revitalization. Current theory suggests anchors adopt ‘shared value’ approaches, leveraging resources for mutually beneficial improvement in the community. This study explores assumptions in contemporary anchor frameworks and uses a survey to examine how 22 U.S. universities approach their roles as anchor institutions. The study finds that the universities tend to prioritize place-based initiatives, while contemporary frameworks are more normative and highlight socioeconomic practices. Based on reported strategies, the author proposes an alternate typology that accounts for the ways universities most commonly describe anchor approaches, complementing contemporary theory. https://www.margainc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Ehlenz_PTP2017_Defining-University-Anchor-Institution-Strategies-Comparing-Theory-to-Practice.pdf]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since the 1990s, some urban universities have served as neighborhood anchors with an interest in revitalization. Current theory suggests anchors adopt ‘shared<br />
value’ approaches, leveraging resources for mutually beneficial improvement in the community. This study explores assumptions in contemporary anchor<br />
frameworks and uses a survey to examine how 22 U.S. universities approach their roles as anchor institutions. The study finds that the universities tend to prioritize place-based initiatives, while contemporary frameworks are more normative and highlight socioeconomic practices. Based on reported strategies, the author proposes an alternate typology that accounts for the ways universities most commonly describe anchor approaches, complementing contemporary theory.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.margainc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Ehlenz_PTP2017_Defining-University-Anchor-Institution-Strategies-Comparing-Theory-to-Practice.pdf">https://www.margainc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Ehlenz_PTP2017_Defining-University-Anchor-Institution-Strategies-Comparing-Theory-to-Practice.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
