Africa’s True Size Gets Global Recognition As UN Endorses Equal Earth Map
By DAVID JOHN-FLUKE
UN Backs New World Map to Correct Africa’s Centuries-Old Cartographic Distortion
THE United Nations General Assembly has backed a new approach to mapping the world that could change how Africa and other regions are visually represented in classrooms, technology and public institutions.
The resolution, introduced by Togo, calls for greater use of the Equal Earth projection, a map designed to represent continents and countries according to their actual surface areas.
The move followed years of criticism of the traditional Mercator projection, which critics say significantly distorts the apparent size of Africa and other regions.
The campaign has gained the backing of all 55 African Union member states under the banner #CorrectTheMap.
A Cartographic Correction for Africa
The Mercator projection has dominated global mapping for centuries.
Created in 1659, it remains one of the most recognisable ways of displaying the world. Its usefulness for navigation helped establish its influence, but its representation of land areas has long attracted criticism.
One of the most striking examples concerns Africa and Greenland.
On a conventional Mercator map, Greenland can appear comparable in size to Africa.
In reality, Africa is approximately 14 times larger than Greenland.
The discrepancy illustrates the central argument behind the campaign: the visual representation of the world can influence people’s understanding of the relative importance and scale of different regions.
The Equal Earth Alternative
The Equal Earth projection was developed in 2018.
Unlike the Mercator projection, it is designed to preserve relative surface areas more accurately.
Africa consequently appears much closer to its actual continental scale.
The objective is not to claim that one map can perfectly represent a three-dimensional globe on a flat surface.
Every world map involves some degree of distortion because the Earth is spherical while a map is generally presented on a flat surface.
The difference lies in what the map prioritises.
The Equal Earth projection places greater emphasis on preserving the relative size of land masses.
Africa’s Campaign Gains UN Support
Togo presented the resolution to the UN General Assembly about a year after the African Union endorsed the campaign.
The resolution calls for an “equitable” representation of the world’s regions, with particular emphasis on Africa.
Its supporters argue that cartographic distortions can have consequences beyond geography.
They say repeated exposure to maps that visually shrink Africa can influence perceptions of the continent’s scale, significance and place in the global imagination.
Togo’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Robert Dussey, described the issue as scientific rather than political.
He argued that scientific evidence demonstrates the distortions associated with the Mercator projection and that the international community should recognise the geographical reality.
An Overwhelming Vote
The General Assembly adopted the resolution with 164 votes in favour.
Nigeria, Togo, Ghana, Morocco and 50 other African countries supported it.
Several major European countries, including Germany, France and the United Kingdom, also voted in favour.
Estonia, Georgia, Lithuania, Moldova, Serbia and Ukraine abstained.
The United States voted against the resolution, with its representative describing it as “superfluous.”
The voting pattern demonstrates that the campaign attracted support well beyond Africa.
What the Resolution Can — & Cannot — Do
The UN decision carries political and symbolic weight, but it does not legally compel countries to abandon the Mercator projection.
UN General Assembly resolutions of this nature are non-enforceable.
Countries, schools, technology companies and institutions can therefore continue to use existing mapping systems.
However, the resolution could influence future choices.
Educational authorities could reconsider the maps used in classrooms. Publishers could adopt alternative projections. Technology companies and public institutions could also reassess how they visually represent the world.
The potential effect is therefore less about banning one map and more about encouraging a broader approach to cartographic representation.
The Geopolitics of a Map
The debate has generated a broader argument about the relationship between geography and power.
Historians and geographers have long debated the cultural and political implications of different map projections.
Critics of the Mercator projection argue that its widespread use reinforced a visual hierarchy in which Europe and other northern regions appeared disproportionately large while much of the Global South appeared smaller.
Some activists have described this phenomenon as “cartographic colonialism.”
Supporters of the new approach argue that maps do not simply show the world.
They also help people imagine it.
A child who repeatedly sees one continent represented as enormous and another as comparatively small may absorb an impression of global scale that does not correspond to physical reality.
France Joins the Push
France also backed the resolution.
Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said France would move away from reliance on the Mercator projection and favour representations better suited to particular purposes and more faithful to actual surface areas.
His position gives the campaign additional weight because the Mercator projection is deeply embedded in the historical European cartographic tradition.
The French position also illustrates an important point: abandoning a single projection does not mean eliminating all maps.
Different projections serve different purposes.
Navigation, climate modelling, aviation, education and statistical presentation may require different approaches.
Beyond Geography
The campaign has become part of a wider conversation about how Africa is represented internationally.
Its supporters argue that representation affects education, culture and geopolitics.
The issue is particularly significant for Africa because the continent has historically confronted narratives that minimise its economic, geographical and political significance.
Correcting the visual representation of its size cannot solve those problems.
But campaigners see it as one way of challenging inherited assumptions.
The UN resolution therefore represents both a cartographic and symbolic development.
Another UN Debate Over Africa’s Historical Experience
The map resolution comes against the background of another recent African-led initiative at the United Nations.
Months earlier, the General Assembly voted to recognise the transatlantic slave trade as the gravest crime against humanity.
Ghana introduced that resolution and called for consideration of apologies and a reparations fund.
The proposal received 123 votes in favour.
The United States, Argentina and Israel voted against it, while 52 countries, including Britain, Portugal and Spain, abstained.
Ghanaian Foreign Minister Samuel Ablakwa said any reparations mechanism should support victims and communities through initiatives such as education, endowment and skills-training programmes.
Reparations & Representation
The two developments are not identical.
One concerns historical responsibility for slavery and its continuing consequences.
The other concerns how the physical world is represented on maps.
Yet both have emerged from a broader effort by African countries to challenge inherited global narratives.
The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has also argued that countries have continuing obligations to address structural inequalities associated with the historical harms of the transatlantic slave trade.
The committee said historical legality does not remove present obligations to address continuing inequalities.
Together, these developments demonstrate that questions about Africa’s place in the global system are increasingly being framed around representation, historical justice and institutional reform.
Changing the Map, Changing the Perspective
The new UN-backed cartographic approach will not by itself change Africa’s economic fortunes, political influence or development challenges.
It will not build roads, create jobs or eliminate poverty.
But maps occupy an unusual position in public consciousness.
They are among the first tools through which many people learn about the world.
What those maps emphasise can influence how people understand geography and, indirectly, how they understand global relationships.
The significance of the UN vote therefore lies partly in its symbolism.
Africa is not becoming larger because a different projection displays it more accurately.
It has always been that size.
What is changing is the way the world is being encouraged to see it.
