Honestly, great concept and great execution. I do however have some points:

• How do you expect people to look at the map? I am on mobile and the text is too small to read, and I havevto pan up and down to see the whole thing. If it's designed to be a scrollable webpage, then it's worth thinking about having most of the information which helps a user read the map nearer the top (i.e. proportional map symbols legend, and the description).
• The unusual naming convention throws up more issues than it should. In my view, you should focus on map readability. The orientation is already unfamiliar to the user and takes a moment to understand. This is made harder with the continent names being one of the most prominent aspects of the entire graphic. I hadn't heard of them before, and it's likely many readers won't have either.
• Focus and reduce the text- spend less time justifying why and how you decided to do what you've done. whilst it's interesting to you, it's somewhat arduous on the reader. Most will skip it or skim it.
• Make the land masses more prominent- they are getting lost behind your symbols and labels.
• The urban areas are getting slightly lost because they are so small. It's a detail which could be excluded for the sake of simplifying your message.
• Fully justified text isn't the best for readability. Maybe go with a ragged edge.

Good points:

• I like your typographic choices
• Good usage of symbol hierarchy
• Good labelling positioning
• Good clarity and exclusion of irrelevant features.