Although often intended to address injustices in food access, farmers markets tend to cater to affluent communities, and to exclude on the basis of race and class.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper uses the repatriation and ceremonial reburial of Indigenous remains to La Perouse, an Indigenous community in Sydney, as a lens through which to examine the cultural politics of representation and recognition that are central to contemporary Aboriginal identity construction. The return of the skeletal remains of 21 individuals highlights the role that representative bodies — past and present, individual and organizational — play in engagements between the State and Aboriginal people. Heralded by some as a sincere sign of reconciliation and treated as suspect and misguided by others, the reburial produced diverse responses from both Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal people alike. Speakers at the repatriation focused on righting the wrongs of the past, reconciliation, and moving forward in cooperation, suggesting the redemptive significance of these events. Among Kooris at La Perouse, debates about community, representation, and belonging expose the ways that Aboriginal people and communities operate through, against, and beyond ‘whitefella’ structures of recognition to define who they are and what their culture is.

This article examines the role and methodologies of the anthropologist as practitioner working in faith‐based development initiatives. In particular, the author discusses attempts to use a participatory action research (PAR) model to examine the current programs, congregational participation, and future community development activities of Saint Andrew African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church. The article examines how the FBO's traditional model of community development interfaced with the university research team's participatory approach and shaped the way that research was carried out. Additionally, the author discusses the varying ways that she, as an anthropologist, and her methods were positioned and the process of negotiating a mutually acceptable methodology. This FBO‐university partnership revealed several key issues that have relevance for anthropologists engaged in work with FBOs and beyond. First, the model of faith‐based community development shapes the possibilities of the work. Second, it shows how the anthropologist, and university partners more generally, are positioned by the organization, informs how and by whom the data is collected, what data is collected, and how it is used. Finally, there is no longer room for anthropologists to work alone; community issues and agency demands are complex and require interdisciplinary collaborative responses.