New legislation in Sweden has put further requirements on contract archaeology that the production of knowledge should be relevant for society and accessible to the public. What happens when heritage goals and laws are implemented in real contract archaeology projects? What is the relationship between different actors and stakeholders and the archaeological heritage landscape, and what are the reasons and factors for this? Who is included and excluded? In a case study on a large excavation from 2016 in Hjulsta, Stockholm, this paper will investigate the cultural heritage goals set by the authorities and how well these were implemented. Studying the outreach programme, I look at the relationship between Swedish contract archaeology and the rest of society. I analyse and discuss the success and problems concerning these established links, utilizing the concept of capital, and suggest strategies for improvement. I also discuss the public potential of archaeology in a more general way. In my conclusion I argue that wider inclusion of the public could help to avoid friction and conflict in a contested landscape. The case study is specifically Swedish in context, but the analysis is applicable in many national systems for undertaking archaeological investigations.