Worldwide vehicle safety standards have a concerning disparity that places millions of lives at greater risk
Image: Freepik
As vehicle manufacturing and safety standards continue to improve across various regions, a glaring disparity persists between the European Union and Africa, placing millions of lives on the continent at risk.
While the EU mandates stringent safety protocols through its Euro NCAP testing, vehicles marketed in Africa often adhere to significantly more lenient requirements. This troubling inconsistency has drawn attention from experts and safety advocates alike.
Global NCAP has brought this issue to light through its real-world testing, revealing the potential consequences of these regulatory disparities. Eugene Herbert, CEO of MasterDrive, highlights a stark example: “A 2019 Nissan NP300 Hardbody sold in Africa was crashed into a second-hand 2015 Nissan Navara NP300 manufactured in Europe.
The driver in a new African Nissan would likely have died from their injuries, but the driver in a second-hand European Nissan would be unharmed.” This critical difference underscores the absence of essential safety features in vehicles intended for African markets, such as Electronic Stability Control (ESC), which is standard in the European counterpart.
The current state of vehicle safety reflects a dangerous double standard. The EU’s stringent requirements ensure that vehicles meet high safety benchmarks, such as multiple airbag systems and cutting-edge driver assistance technologies, making the region a global leader in low road fatality rates.
Specifically, Europe boasts an impressive statistic of just nine road fatalities per 100,000 people, in stark contrast to Africa’s alarming rate of 27 per 100,000.
Despite this, many African vehicles struggle to meet even minimum standards set by European NCAP protocols. In an analysis conducted by Global NCAP, vehicles sold on the continent would undoubtedly fail to achieve even a single star in Europe’s rigorous safety assessments.
The focus of testing in Africa seems to revolve more around basic crashworthiness, thereby allowing vehicles to pass while lack fundamental safety systems deemed standard elsewhere.
This disparity is often justified by economic constraints; manufacturers contend that affordability dictates the types of vehicles offered in the African market. However, as Herbert points out, this raises a pertinent question: “Does this mean that lives in certain markets are deemed less valuable because consumers cannot afford safety features that are essential in other markets?”
While premium safety features indeed come with a higher price, basic safety features should be accessible to all consumers. This neglect can have lethal consequences, especially when considering recent findings from a 2025 report by the Automobile Association (AA) in South Africa.
Out of 27 tested entry-level vehicles, only four met acceptable safety standards, indicating a disturbing trend that prioritises cost over safety.
In response to this grim outlook, Chery has taken innovative strides by conducting Africa’s first real-world dual-vehicle collision test in 2025.
Two identical Tiggo 9 SUVs were tested in a 50% offset impact at 50 km/h to demonstrate how increased focus on safety can lead to better outcomes.
As Herbert notes, “Perhaps this will be the first step in urging the industry to challenge geographical safety disparities and show that consistent global safety standards is both possible and necessary.”
IOL