**1. Introduction**

The Bolonchén Regional Archaeological Project (BRAP) completed its first field season in the eastern Puuc region of the northern Yucatán in the summer of 2000 and has overseen research in the region ever since. Founded and co-directed by Drs. George J. Bey III (Millsaps College), Tomás Gallareta Negrón (INAH), and William M. Ringle (Davidson College), BRAP's mission has included emphases on local community engagement, preservation of cultural heritage, and ecological conservation. The project's educational efforts have gone beyond fostering numerous PhD and Masters dissertations at US and Mexican institutions, to promoting local K-12 continuing studies opportunities in the towns of Yaxhachén, Kancab, and Oxkutzcab, and field research opportunities for Mexican and Yucatecan *Licenciatura* (Bachelor's Degree) and Masters-level students. BRAP and Millsaps College created the Kaxil Kiuic Helen Moyers Biocultural Reserve centered on the archaeological site of Kiuic and the non-profit organization Kaxil Kiuic, A.C. that oversees it. Based out of the Millsaps Puuc Archaeological Research Compound (MPARC) in the town of Oxkutzcab, the Bolonchén Regional Archaeological Project now enters its third decade of archaeological research while overseeing a multi-faceted, community-oriented operation. The upcoming research phase includes plans to engage with a broader spectrum of local stakeholders in cultural heritage knowledge production.

Although the main project headquarters are in the town of Oxkutzcab (pop. 23,096 according to the 2010 census), which is located along the northeastern edge of the elevated Puuc region, most of the local crewmembers hail from three smaller Puuc villages (Figure 1). Yaxhachén (pop. 1633) and Emiliano Zapata (pop. 1350) are located within the municipality of Oxkutzcab, 30 km and 8 km southwest of the principal town, respectively, and Kancab (pop. 2819) is located 12 km southeast of the town of Oxkutzcab in the neighboring municipality of Tekax [1,2]. The majority of village households, including those with members who work as collaborators on the archaeological project, rely primarily on subsistence farming for their livelihood. *Milpas* (agricultural fields) radiate outward from the villages with broad stretches of secondary growth forest separating cultivated areas. Many of the archaeological sites investigated by BRAP sub-projects, such as Kiuic, Huntichmul, and Labná, lie within these forested tracts. *Heritage* **2020**, *3* FOR PEER REVIEW 2 Although the main project headquarters are in the town of Oxkutzcab (pop. 23,096 according to the 2010 census), which is located along the northeastern edge of the elevated Puuc region, most of the local crewmembers hail from three smaller Puuc villages (Figure 1). Yaxhachén (pop. 1633) and Emiliano Zapata (pop. 1350) are located within the municipality of Oxkutzcab, 30 km and 8 km southwest of the principal town, respectively, and Kancab (pop. 2819) is located 12 km southeast of the town of Oxkutzcab in the neighboring municipality of Tekax [1,2]. The majority of village households, including those with members who work as collaborators on the archaeological project, rely primarily on subsistence farming for their livelihood. *Milpas* (agricultural fields) radiate outward from the villages with broad stretches of secondary growth forest separating cultivated areas. Many of the archaeological sites investigated by BRAP sub-projects, such as Kiuic, Huntichmul, and Labná, lie within these forested tracts.

**Figure 1.** Satellite map of southwestern Yucatán State, Mexico highlighting modern towns (in white) and archaeological sites (in yellow) mentioned in the text. **Figure 1.** Satellite map of southwestern Yucatán State, Mexico highlighting modern towns (in white) and archaeological sites (in yellow) mentioned in the text.

Since the 1980s, archaeologists have reflected more explicitly on the social processes of knowledge production and the broad spectrum of living people who are involved with, and impacted by, the study of the past [3−7]. Projects across Latin America have demonstrated the potential benefits of multivocal approaches to knowledge production by engaging with a diverse array of communities in cultural heritage research. These collaborative frameworks have led to a productive elaboration of the many roles that the past can play in the present [8–11]. Several projects in the Maya area have also taken significant steps to promote broader local community involvement with archaeology and cultural heritage research [5,12−15]. However, the overall number of archaeological projects in the Maya area that explicitly outline what is actually at stake for local community members remains relatively low [5,16]. We fully acknowledge that the collaborative nature of our own archaeological project as it currently exists is very different from community or public archaeology [6,15,17−20]. As we look ahead to the next phase of the project, it is important that we incorporate a range of Since the 1980s, archaeologists have reflected more explicitly on the social processes of knowledge production and the broad spectrum of living people who are involved with, and impacted by, the study of the past [3–7]. Projects across Latin America have demonstrated the potential benefits of multivocal approaches to knowledge production by engaging with a diverse array of communities in cultural heritage research. These collaborative frameworks have led to a productive elaboration of the many roles that the past can play in the present [8–11]. Several projects in the Maya area have also taken significant steps to promote broader local community involvement with archaeology and cultural heritage research [5,12–15]. However, the overall number of archaeological projects in the Maya area that explicitly outline what is actually at stake for local community members remains relatively low [5,16]. We fully acknowledge that the collaborative nature of our own archaeological project as it currently exists is very different from community or public archaeology [6,15,17–20]. As we look

perspectives as broad as the stakeholder pool in the planning and execution of the research.

#### *Heritage* **2020**, *3* cultural resources. Our main objective is to identify the ways in which project goals and practices can best serve the interests of local community members while facilitating broader engagement with

ahead to the next phase of the project, it is important that we incorporate a range of perspectives as broad as the stakeholder pool in the planning and execution of the research. [21], it is important to clarify that we will be using the term to apply to residents of Kancab, Emiliano Zapata, and Yaxhachén, unless otherwise specified.

cultural heritage. Recognizing that community identity is a fluid and context-dependent construct

*Heritage* **2020**, *3* FOR PEER REVIEW 3

The authors each joined BRAP several years after its inauguration. Seligson joined after his first year of graduate school at the University of Wisconsin–Madison for the 2010 summer field season. Chi Nah, a life-long resident of Kancab (Figure 2), joined as a crewmember on the Labná-Kiuic Inter-Site Survey sub-project in 2007. We have had the pleasure of working together both directly and indirectly for many BRAP field seasons. This paper is the result of our ongoing conversations about prominent issues that affect engagement between local community members, archaeologists, and

The authors each joined BRAP several years after its inauguration. Seligson joined after his first year of graduate school at the University of Wisconsin–Madison for the 2010 summer field season. Chi Nah, a life-long resident of Kancab (Figure 2), joined as a crewmember on the Labná-Kiuic Inter-Site Survey sub-project in 2007. We have had the pleasure of working together both directly and indirectly for many BRAP field seasons. This paper is the result of our ongoing conversations about prominent issues that affect engagement between local community members, archaeologists, and cultural resources. Our main objective is to identify the ways in which project goals and practices can best serve the interests of local community members while facilitating broader engagement with cultural heritage. Recognizing that community identity is a fluid and context-dependent construct [21], it is important to clarify that we will be using the term to apply to residents of Kancab, Emiliano Zapata, and Yaxhachén, unless otherwise specified. We present two personal perspectives on the ways that archaeological projects like BRAP have already influenced the lives of local community members and discuss how cultural heritage-oriented projects can best incorporate aspects of community archaeology in the Puuc region moving forward. In the following sections, we interweave our dialogue with narrative vignettes and analysis. The paper highlights three principal areas concerning collaborative efforts: 1) the importance of social interactions outside of the fieldwork setting; 2) potential avenues for community members to engage more directly with cultural heritage management and archaeology; and 3) the significance of employment opportunities. We explain how each of these issues relate to the underlying socioeconomic circumstances of the local communities and explore the limits of local participation in archaeological research. We argue that the most significant way to promote local involvement in cultural heritage projects is for archaeologists and community members to work together to try to

secure funding for more sustainable employment opportunities.

**Figure 2.** A street corner in Chi Nah's hometown of Kancab, Yucatán. **Figure 2.** A street corner in Chi Nah's hometown of Kancab, Yucatán.

**2. Engaging Beyond Archaeology** We present two personal perspectives on the ways that archaeological projects like BRAP have already influenced the lives of local community members and discuss how cultural heritage-oriented projects can best incorporate aspects of community archaeology in the Puuc region moving forward. In the following sections, we interweave our dialogue with narrative vignettes and analysis. The paper highlights three principal areas concerning collaborative efforts: (1) the importance of social interactions outside of the fieldwork setting; (2) potential avenues for community members to engage more directly with cultural heritage management and archaeology; and (3) the significance of employment opportunities. We explain how each of these issues relate to the underlying socioeconomic circumstances of the local communities and explore the limits of local participation in archaeological research. We argue that the most significant way to promote local involvement in cultural heritage projects is for

#### *Heritage* **2020**, *3*

archaeologists and community members to work together to try to secure funding for more sustainable employment opportunities.
