Why the UN decision matters beyond the mercator debate

Georg Gartner President, International Cartographic Association

In September 2026, the United Nations General Assembly brought an unusually cartographic question onto the global political stage. By 164 votes to one, with six abstentions, Member States adopted a resolution encouraging the use of map projections that more accurately represent the relative sizes of continents and countries, particularly equal-area projections such as Equal Earth. The initiative was led by Togo and supported by African states, reflecting a long-standing concern that the familiar Mercator world map visually exaggerates areas at higher latitudes while considerably reducing the apparent size of Africa and other regions closer to the Equator.

For cartographers, the attention is welcome. But the discussion also requires some clarification. The United Nations has not declared that there is now one new, “correct” map of the world. Nor has it banned the Mercator projection. In fact, the resolution explicitly encourages Equal Earth and other equal-area projections where the relative size of geographical areas matters. This distinction is important, because it takes us to the heart of what cartography actually does.

Every world map is a compromise!

The Earth is approximately spherical. A sheet of paper or a computer screen is flat. Transforming one into the other inevitably creates distortion. There is simply no way of representing the entire surface of the Earth in two dimensions while simultaneously preserving area, shape, distance and direction.

Every map projection therefore makes choices. The famous Mercator projection is an excellent illustration. Gerardus Mercator developed his projection in 1569 primarily to solve a navigational problem. Its great advantage is conformality: locally, angles are preserved, and lines of constant compass bearing can be represented as straight lines. This made it extraordinarily useful for navigation. The price is distortion of area. This becomes progressively greater towards the poles. Greenland consequently appears roughly comparable in size to Africa on a Mercator world map, although Africa is actually about fourteen times larger. This does not make Mercator a “bad” projection. It makes it an inappropriate projection for certain purposes. The problem arises when a projection developed for one purpose becomes the seemingly natural representation of the world for completely different purposes.

Why Equal Earth?

The Equal Earth projection, introduced in 2018, belongs to the family of equalarea projections. Its central advantage is contained in that description: areas are represented proportionally. Africa therefore occupies its appropriate relative area compared with Europe, Greenland or North America. For a general world map intended to communicate the relative extent of continents, this is a significant advantage. It is also particularly important for thematic maps dealing with phenomena related to area—for example land cover, environmental change or other geographically distributed quantities. But Equal Earth also involves compromises. Equal-area does not mean distortionfree. Shapes, angles and distances cannot all be preserved at the same time.

This is why the International Cartographic Association’s Fact Sheet on world map projections deliberately carries the subtitle “When Equal-Area Is Appropriate (and Why There Is No Single ‘Correct’ Projection)”. Its central message is that the projection should follow the purpose of the map. That may sound less spectacular than declaring one map right and another wrong, but it is the more important cartographic principle.

Maps are not neutral windows onto the world

There is, however, another dimension to the UN debate that should not be underestimated. Maps are powerful because we tend to accept them intuitively. A photograph is immediately recognised as a particular view of reality. A map often carries a stronger suggestion of objectivity: this is where things are; this is what the world looks like. But maps are designed representations. Projection is only one of many decisions involved. Cartographers select, classify, simplify, symbolise and emphasise. Every map is therefore a model of geographical reality rather than reality itself.

This makes the current discussion particularly valuable. The question is not simply whether Africa should appear larger on our classroom walls. It reminds us that the way in which we represent the world influences the way in which we perceive it. When generations repeatedly encounter the same world map, its geometry can become part of their mental image of the planet. Relative size can subtly become associated with relative importance. This is why the African-led initiative has connected the technical question of projection with a broader discussion about representation, historical perspectives and what the UN resolution describes in terms of cognitive justice.

Cartographers should take this concern seriously without reducing a complex cartographic question to a simple opposition between a “wrong” Mercator map and a “right” Equal Earth map.

The bigger opportunity: map literacy

For me, the most important consequence of the UN decision may therefore be educational. Instead of simply replacing one world map hanging in a classroom with another, we should use the opportunity to explain why they look different. Imagine students seeing Mercator, Equal Earth and perhaps one or two other projections side by side. Why does Greenland change size? Why does Africa change shape? Which map should we use for navigation? Which one for comparing areas? What exactly are we trying to communicate? Suddenly projection is no longer an obscure mathematical detail. It becomes an introduction to map literacy.

And map literacy is becoming more rather than less important. We live in a world in which maps are ubiquitous: on smartphones, in vehicles, in news media, on social platforms, in dashboards and increasingly in AI-generated information environments. Billions of people interact with maps without necessarily thinking about the choices embedded in them. Understanding that a map is a purposeful representation— and asking what has been preserved, distorted, selected or omitted—is therefore an essential competence.

A significant moment for cartography

The UN decision should consequently not be understood simply as the replacement of Mercator by Equal Earth. The resolution itself does not demand this, and cartographic science would not support such a simplistic interpretation. The ICA’s position is equally clear: there is no universally correct world map projection. What the decision does achieve is something perhaps more important. It makes visible that cartographic choices matter.

A map projection is a mathematical transformation, but choosing one is also a communication decision. We must ask what the map is for, who will use it, what geographical extent it covers and which properties matter most. For comparing the relative sizes of continents, an equalarea projection such as Equal Earth is clearly preferable to Mercator. For other purposes, another projection may be the better choice. Good cartography begins precisely with that question of fitness for purpose. So perhaps the most important outcome of the UN vote is not that the world has received a new map. It is that the world is talking about maps.

And for cartography, that is a very welcome development.

 

UN General Assembly adopts text to ‘Correct the Map’

The General Assembly took an important step on September 4, 2026 towards correcting distortions in commonly used world maps, particularly the Mercator projection, which are seen misrepresenting the relative size of continents and contribute to a diminished perception of Africa and other equatorial regions.

Completing its substantive work for the eightieth session ending on 8 September, the Assembly adopted several draft resolutions and decisions.

Chief among them was the draft resolution titled “Correct the map: rebalancing global cartographic representation and promoting equitable representation of the world’s regions, particularly Africa”, which was adopted by a recorded vote of 164 in favour to 1 against (United States), with 6 abstentions (Estonia, Georgia, Lithuania, Republic of Moldova, Serbia, Ukraine).

It calls for wider use of equal-area map projections, particularly the Equal Earth projection, in contexts where the comparative size of continents matters, framing the issue as more than a technical cartographic problem.

Cognitive Justice, Historical Recognition, Equitable Representation

The sponsors argued that distorted maps affect education, public understanding, culture, geopolitics, development narratives and perceptions of Africa’s scale and potential. The resolution therefore links more accurate mapping to cognitive justice, historical recognition and equitable representation.

Introducing the text on behalf of the Group of African States, the representative of Togo said that the United Nations has progressively addressed imbalances inherited from the past.

“Today, the issue of mapping as a cognitive tool deserves our collective attention,” he said, asking: “How do we represent the world? How do we teach it? How do generations learn to see our planet?”

For centuries, map projections used in textbooks, the media, digital platforms and official documents have distorted the relative size of continents, symbolically diminishing Africa and other regions and perpetuating an unbalanced view of world geography. “Correcting the map means recognizing that every region of the world deserves to be represented accurately and with dignity,” he argued.

“Our approach is not directed against any nation, any civilization or any cartographic tradition,” he stressed. Rather, it seeks “to promote projections that better preserve the true proportions of continents,” including equal-area projections such as the Equal Earth projection preferred by the African Union.

“A fair map does not change the geography of the world; it changes how we see the world,” he said. “And when our perspective becomes more just, it paves the way for greater understanding, respect and peace among nations.”

Expressing support for the text, the Russian Federation’s representative said that Moscow has been consistent in its advocacy for overcoming the legacy of colonialism, and for combating the practice of neo-colonialism. Her country therefore supports African States’ independent efforts to restore historic justice and strengthen Africa’s role as one of the unique and influential centres of the contemporary multipolar world.

United States Rejects Text as ‘Barnacle’, Ukraine Says Map Depicts Occupied Territories in Wholly Unacceptable Manner

However, her counterpart from the United States rejected the text. Speaking before the vote, she said that while the draft is presented as an “anodyne” effort to update cartography, “it cannot be separated from the much larger and more radical ideological project it belongs to”. The Assembly is debating “map projects from the sixteenth century” and their role in promoting reparations and cognitive justice. Such resolutions are like “barnacles on our work here and the reason this institution is losing its credibility”.

While Ukraine does not oppose the core principles addressed in the draft resolution, that country’s representative took issue with the Equal Earth cartographic projection mentioned in the text, as this map depicts parts of Ukraine’s territory that have been temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation “in a manner that is wholly unacceptable”. Further, it is inconsistent with all relevant Assembly resolutions concerning “the non-recognition of the attempted illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in 2014”.

The representative of Ireland, speaking for the European Union, said that the bloc supports the text’s objective of promoting a more equitable and accurate cartographic representation of the world’s regions, particularly Africa. However, she added, its scope is strictly limited to the purposes of education, awarenessraising and geographical literacy, and it “neither addresses nor affects questions relating to sovereignty, territorial status, delimitation or internationally recognized borders of States”. https://press.un.org

India votes in favour of UN resolution on equalarea world map

The Ministry of External Affairs responded to the UN General Assembly resolution on equal-area world map. Spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs Randhir Jaiswal said that India has voted in favour of the United Nations General Assembly resolution on equalarea cartographic representation.

Mr Jaiswal further added that India’s sovereign territory, including the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, must be depicted in accordance with India’s official map. He also clarified that any inaccurate or misleading depiction is unacceptable. He said the government’s position on India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is clear, consistent and non-negotiable.

Mr Jaiswal said that the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution titled “Correct the Map Rebalancing Global Cartographic Representation and Promoting Equitable Representation of the World’s Regions, Particularly Africa” on 4th of this month. He said, the purpose of this is to encourage the use of equalarea map projections that preserve the relative sizes of continental landmasses. newsonair.gov.in

Japan seeks change to new UN world map over Russia ‘misconception’

Japan said on September 10 it had asked for the revision of a new world map adopted by the United Nations because it made the disputed Kuril islands appear to belong to Russia. The UN General Assembly voted to adopt the new map, which makes the African continent larger while also shrinking North America and Europe, drawing condemnation from the United States.

Japan was among the 164 UN members that supported the resolution but has now taken issue with it because it shows the Kurils, known in Japan as the Northern Territories, in the same colour as Russia. Top Japanese government spokesman Minoru Kihara said the new map — known as the Equal Earth cartographic projection — “contained a depiction contradicting the Japanese government’s position”.

“We lodged a protest with the map site’s operator through our diplomatic channel to demand the correction of this depiction,” Kihara told reporters. He declined to say when the issue was brought to government’s attention but said Japan “needs to prevent misconceptions of our territories and geographical names from spreading”. The disputed islands were seized in 1945 by the former Soviet Union, which then expelled the Japanese population. www.bssnews.net