World maps are representations that typically reflect geopolitical priorities. Among the numerous projections available, the one devised by Gerardus Mercator in 1569 has been dominant: it facilitated maritime navigation by allowing routes to be plotted as straight lines, thereby depicting meridians and parallels as straight lines. This map causes territories closer to the poles—such as Europe and North America—to appear larger than those near the equator—such as Africa and South America—which are shown as smaller in size.
The Mercator projection, widely used from its inception to the present day, has sparked controversy due to inaccuracies regarding the dimensions of the countries it depicts. Consequently, other cartographic proposals emerged—such as the map by Charles Sanders Peirce, who in 1879 created a world map viewed from the North Pole: this fascinating map illustrates the proportions of landmasses relative to the planet's water coverage. Oswald Winkel developed his projection in 1921 with the aim of addressing three types of distortion: area, direction, and distance. This led to the creation of the Tripel projection (from the German word for "triple"). This projection is neither equal-area (preserving area) nor conformal (preserving angles); its defining characteristic is that all parallels are curved, with the exception of the equator and the poles, which appear as straight lines. This lends a pleasing sense of sphericity to the two-dimensional map. Paul John Goode’s 1925 map depicts countries with their actual dimensions, employing interruptions across the oceans to achieve this accuracy. Allen K. Philbrick’s 1953 map combines the 16th-century sinusoidal projection with Karl Brandan Mollweide’s 1805 map, presenting a flat view of the world that maintains correct proportions for countries and continents.
Buckminster Fuller’s 1954 map depicts Earth as a “single island” on an icosahedron; Fuller’s aim was to present a projection lacking a fixed “correct orientation” and to break away from the convention of other world maps that place north at the top and south at the bottom. Arthur Robinson’s 1963 map presents the world with curved meridians.
One cannot overlook the James Gall and Arno Peters map projection, created in 1970 as a prominent alternative to the Mercator projection: it preserves the actual size of landmasses, allowing for a more balanced comparison of national surface areas. However, by prioritizing the areas, it vertically stretches and elongates the continents—particularly near the poles—resulting in distorted shapes. This distortion does not occur at 45° north and 45° south latitudes. While the projection is useful for teaching geography without colonial or imperial size biases—by accurately representing the true size of Africa or South America—many cartographers have rejected it due to the resulting alterations in the shapes and sizes of countries.
For a long time, various countries—particularly in Africa—have advocated for the adoption of a world map projection that accurately reflects reality. This push helped propel the Equal Earth projection to prominence. Designed in 2018 by cartographers Bojan Šavrič, Tom Patterson, and Bernhard Jenny, the Equal Earth projection was created to address the major flaw of the Gall-Peters projection: while it maintains area fidelity, it employs curved meridians that allow continents to retain a proper shape rather than appearing stretched. On September 4, 2026, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly—acting on a proposal from Togo—approved its official use by a vote of 164 to 1, effectively calling for an end to maps that, for 450 years, had made Africa appear roughly the same size as Greenland. It is worth noting that the goal is not for the UN to alter its own cartographic style—its cartographers have used the Robinson and Winkel Tripel projections for decades—but rather to combat the widespread habit of using the Mercator projection in other contexts. In the General Assembly vote, as explained, 164 countries were in favor, one—the United States—was opposed, and six countries abstained: Estonia, Georgia, Lithuania, Moldova, Serbia, and Ukraine. In Ukraine's case, the objection was raised that the Equal Earth map included territories disputed with Russia. The cartographers explained that they had not considered the political context, focusing instead on the accurate representation of the world's dimensions. However, it must be acknowledged that the Equal Earth map has other issues too. For instance, it cannot be used to measure the actual distance between different locations.
Beyond the projections already described, there are some very clever cartographic representations of the world—such as Mafalda’s take on why Argentina is in the Southern Hemisphere. The adorable cartoon by Argentina’s Quino, "corrected" this "anomaly" by hanging a globe upside down on her wall. In a similar spirit, Australia has promoted a map featuring the enormous island nation not only at the top of the world map but also right in the center. The tendency for world maps to omit New Zealand prompted then-Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, together with award-winning filmmaker Peter Jackson, to launch the smart and entertaining #getnzonthemap campaign.
Besides that, interest in cartography has surely been catapulted by the neo-imperial forays of U.S. President Donald Trump, who seeks not only to acquire Greenland—whether through purchase or annexation by force—but has also, since the start of his second administration, “renamed” various geographical landmarks: for instance, he dubbed the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America” and, more recently, proposed renaming Lake Ontario as “Lake of America,” sparking the fury of Canadians.
There are places around the globe recognized under multiple names—whether due to sovereignty claims by various nations (such as the Malvinas for Argentina versus the Falklands for the United Kingdom, or the Spratly Islands, known as *Nánshā Qúndǎo* to the PR China and Taiwan and *Kapuluan ng Kalayaan* in the Philippines) or driven by expansionist ambitions. While such disputes were common during the 16th-17th centuries, it is striking that the United States seeks to alter global geography as if it were conquering territory in the manner of the 16th century. Ironically, for instance, in January 1991, the U.S. and its allies spearheaded hostilities against Iraq after its annexation of Kuwait and presented it to the world as just another Iraqi province on the country's new map.
The fact that the United States was the only country to vote against the Equal Earth map projection at the UN General Assembly is highly telling: it demonstrates a rejection of a world representation that more closely reflects reality, favoring instead a version where proportions and sizes are distorted. In the Mercator projection, the United States appears larger and more elongated than it actually is, owing to its location at mid-to-high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere. In contrast, Mexico appears relatively close to its actual size on the same projection when compared to northern countries, though it still looks somewhat smaller than it is in proportion to the polar regions. Suffice it to say that Greenland appears similar in size to—or even larger than—all of South America or even Mexico, whereas in reality, Mexico and Greenland have very similar surface areas: 1.97 million km² and 2.1 million km², respectively. On a Mercator map, Greenland appears much larger than it actually is due to its proximity to the North Pole.
The same applies to Europe, which appears much larger than it actually is on the Mercator projection. On that map, Europe looks bigger than South America. In reality, the reverse is true: South America is twice the size of Europe. And looking at Greenland again, it appears far more vast than the African continent, even though Africa is 14 times larger than the enormous island.
The Mercator projection cannot be divorced from the exercise of power: world maps produced in the United Kingdom place the British Islands at the center, ensuring that the first thing viewers see is the country that once dominated one-sixth of the globe. The People's Republic of China does the same: many of the maps it produces place the Asian giant at the center. In the case of maps made in the United States, the situation reaches an extreme where—to ensure the U.S. appears at the center—Asia is effectively "amputated," with one part appearing on the right and the other on the left as strange as it looks.
In any case, every country views the world differently and for a wide variety of reasons. Having that in mind: could Mexico propose a world map that places it at the center? After all, etymologically speaking, Mexico is the "belly button of the Moon"—which is no small thing.
Editor’s Note: The above guest column was penned by María Cristina Rosas, a professor and researcher in the faculty of political and social sciences at the National Autonomous University of Mexico in Mexico City. The column appears in The Rio Grande Guardian International News Service with the permission of the author. Rosas can be reached via email at: mcrosas@prodigy.net.mx
