Look at a familiar world map and find England. Now find Bangladesh. Something feels strange, right? England looks like a significant piece of Europe. Bangladesh, despite being one of the world's most densely populated countries, can look like a small patch squeezed between India and Myanmar.

But one fact may surprise many people. Bangladesh coveres about 147,570 square kilometres. England, by contrast, covers about 130,000 square kilometres. In other words, Bangladesh is around 13 to 14 per cent larger than England.

Yet most of us have grown up with a mental picture of England as a much bigger place. This is where maps become interesting.

The world map many people know is based on the Mercator projection. Gerardus Mercator introduced it in 1569. He designed it for navigation, because sailors could use straight lines on the map to plot courses of constant direction. It was not created to make Europe look bigger or to promote an empire.

But the projection has a side effect. The farther a place is from the Equator, the more its area is visually enlarged.

Bangladesh lies between about 20 and 27 degrees north. England stretches much farther north, reaching about 55 degrees north. So England receives more of this visual enlargement on a Mercator map.

The difference is not enough to turn England into a giant country. But repeated exposure to the same map can shape how we imagine the world. And that is where the story becomes political.

For centuries, European powers dominated global trade, navigation, colonial administration and mapmaking. Their maps became common in schools, books and public life. And the map became part of how power was represented, though it was not meant to be created for this purpose.

England is a good example.

A country smaller than Bangladesh became the centre of an empire that controlled territories across Asia, Africa, the Caribbean and elsewhere. The English language spread across continents. London became a centre of finance and trade. British institutions influenced the countries they ruled.

So when someone sees England on a map today, they are not only seeing 130,000 square kilometres but the weight of history. Bangladesh presents the opposite problem. It is larger than England, but its geographical position means it receives less distortion on the Mercator projection.

It also sits beside India, one of the world's largest countries. On many maps, Bangladesh can therefore appear like a narrow piece of South Asia rather than a country larger than England.

Then came the new debate over how the world should be drawn.

On 4 September 2026, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution encouraging wider use of equal-area map projections, particularly the Equal Earth projection.

The vote was 164 in favour, one against and six abstentions. The resolution does not make Equal Earth compulsory, and it does not mean the old maps have suddenly become illegal.

Equal Earth tries to solve one of Mercator's main problems: relative size.

On an equal-area map, Africa looks much closer to its real size compared with Greenland.

In reality, Africa is about 14 times larger than Greenland. On a familiar Mercator map, that difference can be hard to appreciate.

This does not mean Equal Earth is the only correct map.

No flat map can represent a round Earth without some distortion. Different projections serve different purposes. Mercator remains useful for navigation, while equal-area projections are useful when comparing the size of places.

But the UN's decision raises a bigger question. Who gets to decide what the world looks like?

A map seems neutral. It is not always neutral in its effect.

Put Bangladesh and England on a globe, and the difference in area becomes easier to understand. Put them on a traditional world map, add centuries of British political and cultural influence, and our perception changes. That is the power of a map.

[email protected]