An African-led campaign is challenging the widespread use of the Mercator projection, arguing that maps should more accurately reflect the relative size of countries and continents.
The world map familiar to generations of students is facing renewed scrutiny.
The United Nations General Assembly is considering an African-led resolution Friday calling for greater use of maps that more accurately represent the relative size of countries and continents.
Draft resolution A/80/L.104, submitted by Togo on behalf of the African Group, builds on a decision by the African Union earlier this year to formally adopt the Equal Earth projection and encourage its 55 member states to incorporate it into national curricula.
At the center of the debate is a simple question: which compromises should a world map make?
A longstanding cartographic tradeoff
The Mercator projection was created by Flemish cartographer Gerardus Mercator in 1569 primarily for navigation. By preserving angles and allowing sailors to follow constant compass bearings as straight lines, it became highly useful for maritime travel.
That advantage comes with substantial distortion in area.
Landmasses appear increasingly enlarged toward the poles. As a result, Europe, Russia, Canada and Greenland look considerably larger relative to regions closer to the equator than they actually are.
Africa provides a striking example. On a Mercator map, Greenland can appear comparable in size to the African continent. In reality, Africa is roughly 14 times larger than Greenland.
No two-dimensional map of a spherical planet can perfectly preserve size, shape, distance and direction simultaneously. Equal Earth makes a different tradeoff, preserving relative land area while accepting some distortion of shape.
Mercator is therefore not mathematically invalid, nor has it become obsolete. It remains useful for navigation and digital mapping. Supporters of the African initiative argue instead that equal-area projections are better suited to general representations of the world.
Why Africa is pushing for change
For African governments, the issue extends beyond cartographic technique.
At its February summit, the African Union formally adopted Equal Earth and called on member states to revise educational curricula accordingly.
The AU argues that distorted representations of geographic scale can contribute to perceptions of Africa as comparatively marginal. Campaigners similarly contend that the maps people encounter in classrooms, media and public institutions can influence how they understand the relative prominence of different regions.
How strongly map projections shape political or economic perceptions is difficult to establish. Mercator was developed for navigational purposes, not explicitly to establish a hierarchy among continents, and every map projection involves compromises.
But the initiative is arriving at a significant moment.
African governments are simultaneously pressing for greater representation within international institutions and a stronger role in debates over finance, trade, climate and development. That wider context has turned what could have remained a technical discussion about cartography into a broader debate about how Africa is represented within the international system.
Momentum beyond Africa
The campaign is beginning to influence governments and institutions outside the continent.
France announced Friday that it would move away from Mercator in its official representation of the world and adopt the Eckert IV projection, another equal-area approach that more accurately preserves the relative scale of continents.
The French decision also illustrates that the debate is not necessarily about replacing Mercator with a single alternative. Equal Earth, Eckert IV and other projections make different visual compromises while addressing the central concern over relative geographic area.
Digital mapping has already moved in a similar direction in some contexts. Google Maps introduced a three-dimensional globe view on desktop in 2018, although Mercator-based systems remain widely used online because of their technical and navigational advantages.
The practical implications of a UN resolution would likely be gradual. Governments, schools, publishers and institutions would still determine which projections they use, while Mercator would continue to serve legitimate purposes.
The Signal
The debate may appear largely symbolic compared with questions of trade, security or development finance. But maps are among the most basic tools through which people learn to understand the world.
The African-led initiative therefore sits at the intersection of geography and a much larger debate about global representation.
Changing the map will not itself alter Africa’s economic or political weight. But the campaign reflects a wider shift already underway, as African governments seek greater influence within international institutions and question conventions they believe no longer adequately reflect the continent’s scale or contemporary importance.
The UN debate is ultimately about more than which map hangs on a classroom wall. It is about how accurately the world chooses to represent itself.
Follow SDG News on LinkedIn
