What’s wrong with the world map? It shrinks Africa, and India has a stake too | Explained

Map of Middle East, including Israel is shown on a globe at a studio in London, Tuesday, Feb. 27, 2024. (Image used for representation purpose)

In June, Group Captain Shubhanshu Shukla, speaking from the International Space Station, made a striking observation. Looking down from space, he said India looked "much larger" than it does on standard world maps. His words touched on something people in the Global South have long noticed but often overlooked. On the most widely used maps, countries in tropical regions like India and Africa appear shrunken, while places such as Europe, North America and Greenland are blown out of proportion.

Now, this very distortion has become the focus of a new campaign in Africa. The African Union (AU) has officially endorsed the "Correct the Map" movement, which challenges the default use of the Mercator projection. The AU says the world must move toward maps that represent landmasses more fairly.

"It might seem to be just a map, but in reality, it is not," AU Commission Deputy Chairperson Selma Malika Haddadi told Reuters. She stressed that the way Africa has been represented for centuries on maps has influenced perceptions across education, policy, and media.

That concern is not limited to Africa. For India, too, the debate is deeply relevant.

The Mercator Map and its bias

The map at the centre of this controversy is the Mercator projection. Created by Flemish cartographer Gerardus Mercator in 1569, it was originally designed to help sailors chart courses. Its genius was that it preserved straight lines of constant compass bearing. This made navigation simpler during the great age of exploration.

But it came with a trade-off. To preserve navigational accuracy, the Mercator map distorts land sizes. The closer a place is to the poles, the larger it appears compared to reality. Greenland, for instance, looks about the size of Africa on most maps, even though Africa is 14 times bigger.

This distortion affects India too. Although India covers 3.16 million square kilometres, it appears smaller than Alaska on a Mercator map, even though Alaska is smaller in reality. Move India closer to the North Pole virtually and its size visually surpasses Greenland. Similarly, Africa, which dominates the southern hemisphere with 30 million square kilometres, often looks no bigger than North America, which is less than half that size.

The effect is striking and, some argue, not accidental. Writing in The Times of India in 2005, Vishal V Sharma noted, "White-dominated countries are portrayed as disproportionately large, while non-white nations appear much smaller. The Mercator map seems designed to artificially project the territorial superiority of colonial powers and psychologically influence the colonised into submission. Shockingly, many maps in India still reflect this outdated perspective."

Why the Mercator lingers

Given its distortions, why has the Mercator projection continued to dominate classrooms, atlases and even digital maps for centuries?

One reason is inertia. For generations, students and policymakers alike have grown up seeing the world through this map. It became the standard.

Another reason is technological. When Google Maps launched, it adopted the Mercator projection because it was familiar and worked well for zoomed-in navigation. Only in 2018 did it make alternative projections optional.

But there is also a deeper reason. By exaggerating the size of Europe and North America, the Mercator map reinforced a Eurocentric worldview. Europe appeared larger, more powerful, more central. Africa, South Asia and Latin America looked small, peripheral and marginal.

As AU’s Haddadi put it, "It might seem to be just a map, but in reality, it is not." For a child growing up in India, Africa, or Brazil, seeing their countries look small compared to Europe or the United States can subtly shape perceptions of global importance.

India’s stake in the debate

For India, the distortions of the Mercator map are not just about geography, but about perception. India is the world’s most populous country, a major economy, and a growing power on the global stage. Yet, on standard world maps, it is squeezed between an oversized China and an inflated Europe.

Shukla’s observation from space captured this imbalance vividly. From orbit, India looks expansive and prominent. On maps, however, it is often diminished.

This matters because visuals shape narratives. A country that appears smaller is subconsciously seen as less significant. For a nation like India, which is trying to assert itself as a voice of the Global South, correct representation is not a trivial concern.

Alternatives to the Mercator

If the Mercator is flawed, what could replace it?

Several options exist. One is the Gall-Peters projection, introduced in 1974. It preserves the relative sizes of countries and continents, showing Africa and India at their true scale. But its drawback is that shapes appear stretched vertically, making continents look awkward.

A newer alternative gaining ground is the Equal Earth projection, created in 2017 by cartographer Tom Patterson and colleagues. Patterson told NPR, "If you're using the Mercator map as a world map, say, in the classroom, students would just have a completely warped view of the size of countries in the world."

The Equal Earth projection preserves relative sizes while producing a map that looks familiar and readable. It has already been adopted by NASA, National Geographic, and even the World Bank, which announced it is phasing out the Mercator for “accurate representation of all people, on all platforms.”

Campaigners say the goal is not just technical accuracy but psychological fairness. As one African statement put it, "By making this change, we empower future generations to view Africa not through a lens of distortion or disrespect, but through one of clarity, respect, and African opportunity."

Why India should join the push

India has often aligned itself with the Global South in challenging global inequalities, whether in trade, climate negotiations or international governance. Joining Africa’s campaign for fairer maps would be consistent with this stance.

The distortions of the Mercator projection affect India directly, making it appear smaller and less significant than it really is. Correcting this would not just be about fairness to Africa, but also about fairness to India itself.

The debate also matters at a time when India is seeking to project itself as a global power. Symbolism matters in international politics. Just as India has sought a bigger role in institutions like the UN Security Council, it should also care about how it is literally portrayed on the world map.

A world beyond distortion

No flat map can ever be perfect. The Earth is round, and any projection onto a two-dimensional surface will involve distortion. The question is which distortion we choose to live with. The Mercator was suited for a world of sailing ships. Today’s world, shaped by questions of equity and representation, needs something different.

For India, the shift is not just about cartography but about reclaiming space, both literal and symbolic, in the world order. As Shukla’s view from space reminds us, India is larger than it looks on maps. Perhaps it is time for the world to see it that way too.