ABSTRACT:
This research aims to analyze the semantic disputes inherent in constructing intercultural policies within Brazil's indigenous health field. It investigates how differing interpretations of key concepts shape and often challenge the implementation of effective, culturally sensitive healthcare for indigenous peoples. The methodology employs a dual approach. First, a document analysis will scrutinize the operational definitions found in key national policies, namely the National Program for Indigenous Medicine and the National Program for Indigenous Sanitation. This will identify the official semantic frameworks and the underlying assumptions about health, disease, and care. Second, the research will conduct interviews with key actors in the field, such as indigenous leaders, healthcare practitioners, policymakers, and researchers. This qualitative component is designed to uncover the lived experiences, contrasting perspectives, and practical interpretations of these concepts that may conflict with or enrich the official definitions. The analysis is grounded in a broad concept of health, encompassing not just the biological dimension but also socio-cultural, spiritual, and environmental well-being. By juxtaposing official policy texts with grassroots narratives, the study seeks to map the contested semantic terrain—where terms like "interculturality," "tradition," and "sanitation" become sites of negotiation and power. We expect to identify specific points of operational failure where semantic disagreements translate into tangible problems, such as the underutilization of health services, conflicts between biomedical staff and traditional healers, and the failure of sanitation projects that disregard local cosmologies. The ultimate goal is to illuminate how these disputes impact the design and effectiveness of health interventions, contributing to a more critical and equitable dialogue in indigenous health policy.