Creep or Plague?

The Global Problem  of Development Creep in Other Cultural Landscapes

(By Kora* / Direction and editing: Glenn Armstrong)

Kokoda is not unique. Across the world, heritage sites are slowly bending toward donor agendas that were never meant to be there.

And if you wonder why multi-million dollar aid programs disappear into the ether, here’s why.

1. Cambodia — Angkor Wat

Angkor Wat’s conservation programs have expanded to include:

  • community livelihoods,
  • gender empowerment,
  • climate resilience,
  • migration research,
  • waste-management studies.

Result: important programs, but heritage is no longer the centre of gravity.

2. Nepal — Everest Region

Originally focused on mountaineering safety and cultural preservation, the Everest region is now home to:

  • carbon-offset initiatives,
  • climate modeling hubs,
  • global tourism governance,
  • resilience programming.

The Sherpa cultural narrative is now an annex, not the headline.

3. Peru — Machu Picchu

Machu Picchu’s protection has expanded into:

  • relocation of communities,
  • economic policy research,
  • international conservation politics.

Local Andean interpretations of sacred space have been displaced by external definitions of “world heritage value.” 

4. ULURU: a “close to home” example of meaning realignment

Uluru is one of the clearest examples in Australia of a sacred heritage space being reshaped by shifting policy, public behaviour, and development agendas.

For decades, Uluru was marketed primarily as a tourism asset — a place to climb, photograph, and consume. Its cultural significance to the Anangu people was secondary. It was not “development creep” in the donor sense, but it was interpretation creep: the meaning of Uluru became increasingly defined by commercial tourism rather than cultural truth.

Only in recent years — particularly with the 2019 climbing ban — has Australia re-anchored Uluru in its proper narrative:

  • a sacred site,
  • a living cultural landscape,
  • and a place where Indigenous custodianship must lead.

Yet even now, Uluru is used as a platform for broader national stories: reconciliation, climate policy, Indigenous economic development, national identity debates. Good causes — but still examples of how heritage sites are constantly repurposed to suit contemporary priorities.

This parallel helps explain the stakes for Kokoda:

When the meaning of a sacred space becomes fluid, contested, or driven by external frameworks, the story does not simply evolve — it risks eroding.

 5. The Pacific — World War II Sites

Many scattered Pacific WWII sites (Solomon Islands, Palau, Micronesia) are increasingly used as platforms for:

  • marine conservation,
  • anti-trafficking programs,
  • climate displacement planning.

Important issues — but again, heritage becomes a carrier, not the cargo.

Here are some that have become “Development Platforms”


Solomon Islands — “Guadalcanal Battlefield Region”

Once the site of some of the most intense fighting of the Pacific War, Guadalcanal now hosts numerous development initiatives attached to WWII heritage spaces.

Examples of development creep:

- Coral Triangle Initiative (CTI) projects using WWII shipwreck zones as “marine conservation demonstration sites.”

- UNDP resilience programs tied to battlefield communities, leveraging the “historic significance” to attract funding.

- Waste management and plastic pollution programs anchored around WWII memorial beaches (e.g., Red Beach, Tenaru).

- Gender and youth programs held at or branded around major memorial areas to improve turnout and donor visibility.

Result: Guadalcanal’s WWII heritage narrative competes with modern development branding, creating a hybrid space where memorialisation is no longer the primary frame.


Palau — “Peleliu Battlefield & Bloody Nose Ridge”

Peleliu was one of the bloodiest battles of the Pacific. Today it is simultaneously:

- a heritage site,

- a protected area,

and a development hub for climate and marine policy.

Examples of development creep:

- USAID climate resilience programs using Peleliu’s WWII airfields and caves as field classrooms.

- UNESCO’s “Sustainable Island Livelihoods” pilot programs framed around battlefield tourism.

- Marine Protected Area creation overlapping with WWII amphibious landing zones.

Result: Peleliu’s wartime story is now routinely bundled with climate adaptation messaging, even in official tourism materials.


Federated States of Micronesia — Chuuk Lagoon (Truk Lagoon)

Chuuk Lagoon contains the world’s largest underwater WWII shipwreck graveyard. Its story has been significantly reframed.

Examples:

- Japanese-funded fisheries management projects branded as “preserving historic waters.”

- Marine archaeology projects repurposed into economic development and reef-restoration platforms.

- UNESCO-led cultural preservation tied to sustainable tourism capacity-building (hospitality training, business training, financial literacy workshops).

Result: The site’s primary function is no longer historical remembrance but economic development via eco-tourism and marine conservation.


Papua New Guinea — Rabaul & Kokopo (New Britain)

Former Japanese stronghold with extensive tunnels, airfields, and wartime relics.

Examples:

- Climate resilience and disaster preparedness programs (because of volcanic activity) that use WWII sites as community hubs.

- Heritage tourism“incubators’” run by NGOs using Rabaul’s wartime sites to justify funding for SME training and women’s cooperatives.

- Marine ecology projects tied to the wrecks in Simpson Harbour.

This is softer creep than Kokoda — but it's there.


Kiribati — Betio, Tarawa Atoll

One of the bloodiest amphibious landings in the Pacific.

Examples:

- Coastal erosion and climate change projects using WWII seawalls and bunkers as evidence-based teaching sites.

- Hygiene and sanitation programs held at WWII memorial grounds for community visibility.

- Marine debris removal projects funded under the justification of “protecting war heritage.”


PATTERN SUMMARY

Across the Pacific:

WWII sites have been reinterpreted as:

  • climate labs,
  • conservation hubs,
  • SME training grounds,
  • gender-equity spaces,
  • tourism capacity-development zones,
  • disaster-preparedness centres.

All valuable.

But not what the sites were meant for.

Further Reading:

https://smartshopper-png.blogspot.com/2025/11/who-owns-kokoda.html



 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Closer than you think

Ovu ga'hoe! Back cover reveal!

Ben Drums Up a New Website

Who Owns Kokoda?

Ricky Mitio's book for the ages