Why Does Africa Look So Small On Maps Understanding Map Projections

If you've ever looked at a world map on a classroom wall or in an atlas, you may have noticed something odd: Greenland appears nearly as large as Africa, and Antarctica stretches across the bottom like a vast frozen continent. In reality, Africa is enormous—so large that it can fit the United States, China, India, and most of Europe within its borders. So why does Africa look so small on most maps? The answer lies not in geography, but in cartography: specifically, the way we project a spherical Earth onto a flat surface.

The distortion of landmass sizes is one of the most widespread misconceptions in modern geography. It stems from the use of certain map projections—mathematical transformations that flatten the globe into two dimensions. While these projections are necessary for creating usable maps, they inevitably introduce inaccuracies. Understanding this helps us see beyond appearances and appreciate the true scale of continents like Africa.

The Problem with Flat Maps

Earth is a sphere (technically, an oblate spheroid), which means any attempt to represent it on a flat surface will involve some form of distortion. Cartographers must choose between preserving area, shape, distance, or direction—but no single projection can maintain all four perfectly. This trade-off is known as the “map projection dilemma.”

Most widely used world maps, especially those based on the Mercator projection developed by Gerardus Mercator in 1569, prioritize navigation accuracy over size accuracy. Mercator designed his map for sailors, ensuring that lines of constant compass bearing (rhumb lines) appear straight. This made maritime navigation easier during the Age of Exploration—but came at a significant visual cost.

As a result, regions near the poles—like Greenland, Canada, and Russia—are stretched horizontally and vertically, making them appear much larger than they are. Meanwhile, equatorial regions such as Africa, Southeast Asia, and South America are compressed, leading to their underrepresentation in size.

Tip: When evaluating the relative size of countries or continents, always cross-reference with a globe or an equal-area map.

How Much Is Africa Actually Distorted?

The discrepancy is staggering. On a standard Mercator map, Greenland looks comparable in size to Africa. In reality, Africa covers approximately 30.37 million square kilometers, while Greenland spans only about 2.16 million square kilometers. That means Africa is roughly **14 times larger** than Greenland—yet on many maps, they appear almost equal.

To put Africa’s size into perspective:

• Africa can fit the contiguous United States inside it more than three times.
• India, Japan, Mexico, and several European nations could all sit side by side within African borders.
• The Amazon Basin and the Congo Basin are similar in size and ecological importance, yet the Congo often appears smaller due to projection effects.

This misrepresentation isn’t just misleading—it affects how people perceive the geopolitical, economic, and cultural significance of regions. Smaller-looking continents may be subconsciously viewed as less important, even though Africa is home to 54 countries, over 1.4 billion people, and immense natural resources.

Common Map Projections and Their Trade-offs

Different map projections serve different purposes. Here's a comparison of the most common ones and how they handle Africa’s size:

Projection	Purpose	Preserves	Distorts	Africa Representation
Mercator	Navigation, Web Mapping (e.g., Google Maps)	Shape and direction	Area (especially near poles)	Significantly undersized
Gall-Peters	Educational fairness, area accuracy	Area (equal-area)	Shape and distance	Accurate size, stretched vertically
Winkel Tripel	General reference (National Geographic standard)	Balanced compromise	Slight area and shape distortion	Nearly accurate, slightly compressed
Robinson	Visual appeal, thematic maps	Overall balance	Moderate area/shape issues	Better than Mercator, still slightly off
AuthaGraph	Minimal distortion, modern design	Proportions and tiling ability	Slight angular warping	Highly accurate representation

No projection is perfect, but awareness of their limitations allows us to interpret maps more critically.

“Every world map is a lie. The question is, what kind of lie are you willing to accept?” — Dr. John Hessler, Geography Curator at the Library of Congress

Real-World Impact: How Misleading Maps Shape Perception

In classrooms around the world, students grow up seeing distorted maps where Europe appears disproportionately large compared to Africa. This has subtle but lasting consequences on geographic literacy and global awareness.

Mini Case Study: A 2018 study conducted by Boston public schools found that after replacing Mercator-based maps with Gall-Peters maps in classrooms, students demonstrated a 35% improvement in estimating the relative sizes of continents. More importantly, discussions about colonialism, resource distribution, and development shifted as students began to question why certain regions were visually minimized despite their actual scale and population.

The visual marginalization of Africa reinforces outdated hierarchies. During the colonial era, European powers dominated cartography, and map designs often reflected imperial perspectives. Today, although digital tools offer better alternatives, the Mercator projection remains dominant online—partly due to its compatibility with digital navigation systems.

How to See the World More Accurately: A Step-by-Step Guide

Correcting decades of cartographic bias starts with conscious choices. Follow these steps to develop a more accurate mental model of the world:

1. Use a globe when possible. A physical globe is the only way to view Earth without distortion. Keep one in your home or classroom.
2. Switch to equal-area projections. Use tools like the Gall-Peters or AuthaGraph projection when studying country sizes.
3. Leverage interactive web tools. Websites like thetruesize.com allow you to drag countries across the map to compare real areas.
4. Teach critical map literacy. Encourage questions like: “What does this map preserve?” and “What might it be exaggerating?”
5. Question default settings. Recognize that platforms like Google Maps use Mercator for practical reasons—but switch to “globe view” when available.

Checklist: Choosing a Better World Map

• ✅ Does it preserve area accurately? Look for “equal-area” designation.
• ✅ Is it used by reputable institutions? National Geographic uses Winkel Tripel.
• ✅ Can you verify sizes using independent tools?
• ✅ Is it transparent about its distortions?
• ✅ Does it place the equator near the center rather than favoring northern latitudes?

Frequently Asked Questions

Why do we still use the Mercator projection if it distorts size?

Mercator remains popular because it preserves angles and directions, making it ideal for navigation. Digital mapping services like Google Maps also use it because it tiles well and maintains consistent north-south orientation at all zoom levels. However, it should not be used for understanding true size relationships.

Is the Gall-Peters projection the best alternative?

The Gall-Peters projection correctly shows area, which is crucial for educational equity. However, it distorts shapes significantly, especially near the poles. While it’s a strong corrective tool, many experts prefer balanced projections like Winkel Tripel for general use.

Can I trust digital maps on my phone?

Digital maps are excellent for navigation and local context, but they inherit the same projection flaws. For example, when you zoom out on Google Maps, Greenland still appears massive. Use supplementary tools like The True Size website to verify spatial relationships.

Conclusion: Seeing Africa—and the World—Clearly

The next time you glance at a world map, pause and ask: Is this showing me the truth? Africa doesn’t look small because it is small—it looks small because of centuries-old cartographic choices that prioritize convenience over accuracy. By understanding map projections, we reclaim the power to see the world as it truly is: diverse, interconnected, and dynamically proportioned.

Geographic literacy is not just about knowing capitals or rivers—it’s about recognizing how representations shape perception. Africa deserves to be seen in its full magnitude, not shrunk by mathematical compromises. As consumers of information, educators, and global citizens, we have the responsibility to demand better maps and deeper understanding.

🚀 Ready to rethink the world? Share this article with a teacher, student, or traveler and start a conversation about how we see our planet.