Introduction

Privatization is notorious for not having a clear-cut definition (Bailey, 1987; Kawashima, 1999; Ponzini, 2010; Starr, 1989). Its common use rings a bell in many people's minds and provokes a spontaneous reaction. Born out of governments' desire 'to strengthen and expand the market at the expense of the state and to increase the exposure of the public sector to market forces' (Wilding, 1990: 19), privatization is a political choice. The spread of privatization to many countries and to various sectors has resulted in a multiplication of its meanings. It is seen as an umbrella concept for a range of initiatives undertaken by the government to increase the role of the private sector in public services (Ascher, 1987: 4–7).

This chapter examines the multiple uses of the privatization concept with a focus on its implementations in the field of culture, more specifically in the field of archaeology, which is not exempt from similar pressures in other sub-fields of culture. It does so by going through the literature that examines privatization and archaeology with a special emphasis on the role that tourism plays in this blend. Tourism is a game changer in decisions related to the future of archaeology as a discipline and the archaeological heritage itself. In this regard, searching for the raison d'être of private interventions to archaeological sites brings tourism forth as the usual suspect. The relationship between archaeology and tourism, focusing on recent concepts, as well as the ways in which the literature on privatization and archaeology portrays tourism, constitute an important part of this chapter.

Examining the ways in which privatization is conceptualized in the academic literature, in the media, and in political discourse does not guarantee a fuller understanding of its functioning on the ground.