During the interviews with the engaged audiences, the construction and the adoption of the term “traditional peoples” was described in detail by some people, especially by anthropologists and scientists, to highlight that it is something very recent in the country's history. The “environmentalization” of social struggles in Brazil since the 1980s, the 1988 constitution and the public policies established at the first term of Lula's government were the most cited landmarks related to the term.

Officially, Brazil's 2007 National Policy for the Sustainable Development of Traditional Peoples and Communities (PNPCT, in the Portuguese acronym) defines traditional peoples as 'culturally differentiated groups that recognise themselves as such, that have their own forms of social organisation, that occupy and use territories and natural resources as a condition for their cultural, social, religious, ancestral, and economic reproduction, using knowledge, innovation and practices generated and transmitted by tradition'.

Indigenous peoples were mentioned much more than other traditional peoples by the engaged and non-engaged audiences interviewed for the research and, therefore, they ended up being the focus of this research.

After indigenous peoples, quilombolas were the most cited by the engaged audiences, although by a much smaller number of people. “The issue of quilombolas is very interesting. Like the indigenous peoples, it was only from 1988 onwards that Brazil managed to formalize the existence of the quilombolas as communities who can earn specific rights.” Some respondents pointed out that they have had a bit more public visibility in recent years and that there is greater interest and financial support from national and international donors. Strengthening of the connection between the quilombolas and the urban black movement was widely suggested as very relevant and urgent.

A smaller number of people mentioned the riverine communities and other traditional peoples still largely invisible. “Traditional peoples, such as riverine people, rubber tappers and others have not been given as much deference, as many official programs, or projects by NGOs and even researchers from public research institutions, as the quilombolas and the Indigenous peoples. They are forgotten, do not have their territories demarcated and are in regions with many conflicts. I think this is a huge problem, yet to be fixed.”

The Indigenous peoples in the Amazon were much more cited than other Indigenous peoples. “The visibility and strengthening of indigenous peoples in the Amazon took place in a particular context. The deforestation of the Amazon and the Indigenous people living in the biome and experiencing livelihoods capable of balancing all their modes of action without damaging the environment has become a major global issue in the last decades”, highlighted one of the interviewees.

In the book 'Traditional Peoples and Biodiversity in Brazil - Contribution of Indigenous Peoples, Quilombolas, and Traditional Communities to Biodiversity, Policies and Threats', published by the Brazilian Society for the Advancement of Science (SBPC, in the Portuguese acronym) in 2021: 'The Amazon is the biome on which the most documentation has been gathered, as well as the greatest volume of information on Indigenous peoples. This bias is attributable to the difference in the volume of sources and research. For the time being, sources on quilombola and traditional communities are less abundant. Just remember that the quilombola classification would feature, for the first time, only in the population census that was scheduled for 2020'.

However, some interviewees pointed out the need to pay more attention to the Indigenous peoples in the Northeast, the Guarani-Kaiowá in Mato Grosso do Sul, and Indigenous peoples in large cities such as Manaus and São Paulo. According to the 2010 Brazilian Population Census, there are 305 ethnic groups in Brazil. The census recorded a total of 896,900 Indigenous people, 36.2 per cent of whom are living in urban areas, and 63.8 per cent in rural areas. São Paulo is among the 10 municipalities with the largest Iindigenous population in the country.

Some interviewees also highlighted a process that has been happening, especially in the Northeast — the 'emergence of Indigenous identities with populations that were caboclas [of mixed European and Indigenous heritage], and that today are claiming this ancestry, this identity'. In addition, the increase in people declaring themselves Indigenous was pointed out as a great narrative novelty, a 'deep movement of reconnection, of search, of cultural reorganisation'.

The current and agitated debate on cultural diversity and identity politics, the growing number of self-declared indigenous people, and the emergent criticism and questioning of the use of the term pardo were also issues and pointed out as not yet properly discussed and fundamental to the country.

A need to rethink terms, concepts, and usage was identified, and some scientists raised questions about how to categorise some of these communities. 'The extractive category — transposed from colonial times and the days of the rubber cycle — is still associated with passivity, and this has led small farmers and other Amazon groups to be framed as an economic category without social value - even though it is already known that these communities also practice extremely sophisticated agricultural systems'. In contrast, the agro-industrial category is a term used to define an extremely diverse category, even if it is anchored in extremely backward and damaging production systems, such as millions of hectares of low productivity pastures in the Amazon and around the country.

In the article “Traditional populations: introduction to the critique of the political ecology of a notion”, from 2006, the anthropologist Henyo Barretto pointed out: ‘traditional', 'archaic', 'backward', 'primitive' and other imprecise and mystifying terms - some of which contemporary anthropology has retained out of convenience and intellectual laziness to designate a certain type of society.

Old and new alliances between traditional peoples were celebrated and indicated as essential. The Forest Peoples Alliance was mentioned in several interviews; the March of Indigenous Women and the March of Margaridas [Daisies, how are also called the rural women workers] were cited as key moments. The Teia dos Povos, a movement that brings together extractive groups, riverine people, Indigenous peoples, quilombolas, peripheral communities, the landless, the homeless, and small farmers in defense of territory and food sovereignty, was described as an initiative that has been 'promoting very sophisticated actions and discussions on identity and land rights'.

Engaged audiences raised doubts about the understanding and use of traditional people by Brazilian society, claiming that 'few people in Brazil understand the importance of this cultural dimension of Brazilian society' and anticipating the results of the survey conducted by Ipsos with the non-engaged audiences.

For the general population, the term 'traditional peoples' is not self-explanatory. It spontaneously encompasses Indigenous peoples, and occasionally quilombolas and riverine people are also mentioned. However, there is some confusion with other aspects that can be seen as 'traditional' and linked to communities with ancient roots – including, for example, the Portuguese and other immigrants. There is a great lack of knowledge about the reality and diversity of traditional peoples, and the issues that involve them often tend to be simplified and misrepresented.

These audiences present generalisations of indigeneity and have a static view of cultures, tending to fix the social contribution of Indigenous peoples to the past. They correlate their ways of living outside the market with poverty, and their access to mobile phones, the internet, cars etc. as indicative of cultural assimilation. Brazilian society seems to find it difficult to understand civil rights. In fact, these rights tend to be seen as 'countering' the rights of other segments of the population in general – the perspective, therefore, is one of an arena for dispute. Among the general population, quilombolas are even less understood and known than Indigenous peoples.