There is a striking  resemblance between Melanesian cargo cult rituals, especially where people built replicas of aircraft, hoping for airdrops that never arrived, and the common pattern seen in many governments' digital twin programmes. Governments often craft visually impressive digital twin prototypes, complete with dashboards, maps, and 3D models; however, beneath the surface, these initiatives often lack the essential features of live, bidirectional data integration, actionable insights, and real-world influence. The result is a form without real substance.

Cargo Cults

This phenomenon mirrors cargo‑cult science, where superficial adherence to appearance eclipses real understanding. Governments launch digital twin efforts guided by procurement-driven aesthetics rather than systems thinking, embracing the externally visible tools but sidestepping the deep architectural purpose. The missing link is often the rich interchange between real-time data, predictive analytics and decision support, leaving these systems trapped as symbolic façades.

The consequences of this hollow implementation are material. According to McKinsey, digital twins offer the potential to improve infrastructure investment decisions and yield a 20–30 % lift in ROI. However, this is only when deployed with genuine integration and analytical maturity. Without that foundation, these programmes devolve into window‑dressing, eroding trust in technology among stakeholders rather than delivering value.

Why does cargo cult thinking persist so widely in public sector digital twins? One reason is the appeal of glossy visual tools provided by vendors eager to deliver impressive prototypes rather than ensuring system-wide interoperability and governance. Another factor is the presence of entrenched silos, where government agencies often operate in isolation, resulting in standalone models instead of interconnected ecosystems. This is evident in commentary on digital twin adoption, highlighting that governments often fail to think beyond individual departments, preventing cohesive, scalable strategies and hindering transformational opportunities.

Another issue is the lack of methodological depth. As academic critiques highlight, many digital twin projects proceed without rigorous validation, ignoring digital threads, uncertainty quantification, or alignment with objectives required for genuinely useful results. Without clear planning around fidelity, cost, and predictive utility, expectations drift from reality, and the tools become symbolic gestures rather than practical foundations.

Digital Transformation

True transformation requires moving beyond ritualistic gestures. Clarity of purpose should guide every programme with decision support, resilience planning, climate adaptation, and optimisation. These factors must be grounded in real policy or operational needs rather than vanity projects. Interoperable architectures and live data integration are essential, as shown in successful digital twin efforts that connect across sectors and agencies. Similarly, rigorous validation and verification must ensure systems work as intended. Pilots should start small—with specific use cases like flood modelling or asset maintenance—and only expand through iterative feedback and concrete results.

Embedding ethics, inclusivity, transparency, and stakeholder engagement is equally vital. Public trust is delicate, and early engagement—especially when data quality, bias, or privacy are involved—must be actively managed rather than overlooked. This approach helps governments avoid the trap of cargo-cult digital twins that offer spectacle without substance.

Mimicry Run Amok

Ultimately, what gravity-driven infrastructure, climate strategy, transport planning and urban resilience need is not more façades, but fully operational, mature digital twins built with interconnection through evolving digital threads, with a clear purpose and based on evidence. When governments keep mimicking the appearance of digital transformation without embracing its substance, they inadvertently sustain cargo-cult thinking. However, shifting from ritual to results is not only essential but also possible. It requires recognising the limits of superficial models and committing to living, evolving platforms that genuinely inform policy and generate public value. Only then will digital twins cease to be mere decorative illusions and become catalysts of transformation.