CONCLUSION

For several decades the world has experienced intense neo-liberalism. Certainly, neo-liberalism intrudes into Third World countries, including Brazil, a country that has continental dimensions as well as huge socioeconomic differences—from terrible poverty to provocative prosperity. It is important to examine public archeology in Brazil within these realities. Today Brazil seeks to promote heritage and heritage management in a way that inclines its people towards a cultural citizenship that emphasizes the possibility of social change. It has been a challenge to introduce this issue for it requires an understanding of archaeological cultural heritage at the level of public institutions.

As elsewhere worldwide in general, improvement is needed in public policy to protect and preserve the archaeological cultural heritage. Protection of Brazil’s archaeological and historical heritage (including its underwater cultural patrimony) must continue and expand. We call for an alliance of the more liberal Brazilian archaeological strengths to produce a more effective, more inclusive, more socially and politically engaged archaeological praxis. Gradual and systematic advance of legal regulations has little value if there is no engagement of the agents, i. e., the professionals who exercise the practice of archaeology in Brazil. In this regard it is vital to break with pragmatic and conservative thinking that has dominated national archaeology since the creation of scientific development agencies, university departments, and research institutions for archaeological, historical and anthropological resources. Moreover, we must not forget the hegemonic institutions that profited from, and have so strongly shaped the thinking of young professionals, especially during the dictatorship, retarding new thinking. Hopefully, Brazil’s immense and fascinating archaeological heritage will increasingly be deployed for the benefit of the citizenry as a whole.