What is considered traveled around the world”?

What is considered traveled around the world”?

Many people say they want to have “traveled the world,” but how do we quantify that? Countries visited? Passport stamp? Boundaries crossed?

How many times have you heard someone say it? Or read a blog post about it? Seen in an Instagram status or on a bucket list? Many people (including me) say they want to “travel the world,” but how do we quantify that? By the number of countries visited? Stamps in our passports? Boundaries crossed? Experienced cultures?

Kia asked this question on Quora a while back and received an answer from Jay Wacker, a former Stanford professor, who offered Hasbro's Risk Map as a measure and suggested that you can say you've traveled the world once you've visited half of the areas on the map - that's 21 out of 42 total.

Since April 2014, Kia and I have each traveled to 15 or 16 risk map regions, but neither of us has seen the Pacific Ocean or been to South America. Our first big trip is without a doubt our boldest trip yet and will surely earn us the honor of having traveled the world?

Apart from Antarctica, we will have seen every continent with a total of 60 or 70 countries in the 21 areas required to qualify as “world travelers”.

Everyone will have their own criteria for answering this question. Whether the risk map is countries, continents, cultures, languages ​​or territories, below are some interesting points to consider.

The European problem

Europe is one of the smallest continents in terms of landmass (only Oceania is smaller); It is the third largest in population, but has the second highest number of countries - 47 in total - making it one of the densest and most compact continents in terms of population and borders.

I have traveled to over 30 European countries, which is disproportionate to the other continents I have visited.

alt=“traveled the world”>Traversing Europe will cross many countries, but does it offer a range of cultures and people?

If I were to visit them all, it would make up about a quarter of all the world's states, but only make up 6.8% of the world's landmass. If I then visited all the countries in Africa (54), I would have visited over half of the countries in the world, but only two continents and less than a quarter of the Earth's landmass - less than Asia alone.

Traveling Europe alone will cover many countries, but would it really offer a range of cultures and people?

The Russia problem

I visited two cities in Russia - St. Petersburg and Moscow - and got half of Asia on the world map thanks to Russia's ridiculous size. From the United States, I only visited a handful of states, but gained a country that spanned a continent stretching from the Pacific to the Atlantic. I've seen a relatively small percentage of China, but gain a country almost the size of Europe.

alt="">I visited the countries marked in red - 75 in December 2019

In Jay's answer on Quora, he highlights the difference between visiting a city and traveling through the countryside of a country: "If you visit Moscow, that's fine, you've been to Russia. If you travel slowly through all the oblasts, you've certainly traveled more of the world."

I don't want to be the type of traveler who is only interested in checking countries off a list (although I do have a list). I love traveling through landscapes and climbing mountains. At the same time, I’m not a travel snob. I was in Russia. I hope one day I can take the Trans-Siberian Railway across Russia and see more of it, but for now, in case anyone asks, I've been to Russia.

The stopover

When I changed trains in South Korea on the way back from Cambodia, I had six hours to kill. I didn't really like Incheon International Airport, as modern and charming as it is, so I got my passport stamped, hopped on a shuttle train and headed into the city.

To say I've seen Seoul would be a lie, but I've seen a bit of Seoul - enough to give me a funny stomach from some rope noodles from a street food stall.

Using the Risk Map criteria, I somehow won the territory of Mongolia, which I think is a little unfair to say the least. Kia had made the same trip a few weeks earlier and spent her time wandering around the airport lounges so she wouldn't (rather sourly) take over the territory.

I had layovers at a few airports in countries I didn't visit properly and I don't include them in the list of countries I visited (Doha in Qatar and Colombo in Sri Lanka).

I believe that if you don't cross the border and get a stamp (or something similar) then it doesn't count. I will be taking South Korea (and Mongolia) with me as I have taken the time to enter and see some (albeit a very small part) of the country. But Qatar and Sri Lanka can't make it.

Which list?

There are officially only 191 countries that are not contested. Nevertheless, there are probably up to 257 countries or states in the world - that's a pretty big discrepancy. There are all sorts of problems: certain states are recognized by some countries and not by others; some are protectorates of former empires; members of the Commonwealth; unclear autonomous regions and some are claimed by other states.

Deciding what actually defines a country can be a political quagmire. Is Taiwan an independent country? Not according to the UN or China. The Palestinian Territories? Kosovo? Depends on who you ask.

On a recent trip to the Caribbean we had the opportunity to take a day trip to Montserrat. I initially thought it was a separate country, but it is actually a British Overseas Territory. I didn't even know these things still existed - isn't the Empire dead?

I downloaded a fairly comprehensive list of the world's states. There are 245 on my list, including the 192 member states of the UN. I check the ones I visited and add a date. So far the only one that isn't a UN member state is Vatican City... God knows what I'll do if I ever visit the Falklands/Malvinas...

It is the risk map

alt="">"Reaching half of the 42 different regions on the risk map is a better sample of the world"

After much consideration, I decided on the risk map. This is by no means ideal, as there are still problems - the South Korea/Mongolia dilemma mentioned above, to say the least.

However, it addresses the problems of Russia and Europe. My trip to Moscow and St. Petersburg means I only win Ukraine. Likewise, New York only gives me the eastern United States, as opposed to two countries that span entire continents. And if I tick the 47 odd countries in Europe, I will only ever gain seven territories.

Finally, the political and potentially controversial quagmire of the country lists is navigated. The risk map is divided into regions broadly covering geopolitical areas and does not attempt to include all countries or their true borders. The names on the risk map are quite confusing, even though they are actually irrelevant. It's the areas they cover that are important.

With that in mind, I'm going to assess whether or not I've traveled the world using Jay's thought process: "Getting to half of the 42 different regions on Risk's map is a better sample of the world."

I think he's right and it's a good game to play...although it's probably fruitless. Once I get the 21, I'll start thinking about visiting the other 21.

No matter how I measure my travels, I have the bug.

If you enjoyed this article then we recommend Simon Garfield's excellent On The Map: Why the world sees the way it does.

Mission statement: Dreamstime

      .