{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020080321285140562, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.875862068965517, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Building a Common Table

Tensions and conflicts are rampant in the U.S. food system, occurring at epistemological, political and institutional, socioeconomic, spatial, community, and organizational levels. Some tensions are based on differences in scale, fundamental values, power, or conflicting stakeholder frames, while others are a function of stakeholders with compatible interests failing to develop a common language and agenda. This article investigates the nature of these and other emerging food systems conflicts by exploring the major stakeholder groups and their values, interests, and positions. Applying environmental and public policy dispute resolution theory and techniques, the article explores opportunities for planners to bridge food systems tensions. The article recommends specific actions that planning practitioners and planning academics can take to foster food systems discourse and to build a more economically and environmentally sound and socially just food system.