There is no doubt that the exit of Uber from Nigeria will have consequences for urban mobility, but its impact could be particularly significant for air travellers who depend on reliable ground transportation to connect airports with their homes, offices, hotels and other destinations.
For many air passengers, the journey does not end when the aircraft touches down. In reality, the air journey is only one component of a broader door-to-door mobility chain.
A passenger may fly from Abuja to Lagos, for instance, but the trip is not complete until the passenger leaves the airport and reaches the final destination. This makes airport ground transportation an integral component of the aviation value chain.
Uber’s decision to discontinue its operations in Nigeria from September 2, 2026, after 12 years in the market, therefore deserves to be examined not merely as the departure of another commercial enterprise, but as a development with implications for the country’s urban transportation and airport mobility ecosystem.
The company said its decision followed a review of its evolving business priorities and investment focus. It did not identify one specific reason for its departure. The announcement also came only weeks after the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) directed Uber and Bolt to suspend commercial operations at FAAN-managed airports, pending the finalisation of licencing arrangements.
Although the timing naturally generated speculation about a connection between the two developments, it would be premature to conclude that the airport policy forced Uber out of Nigeria.
FAAN’s Managing Director, Mrs. Olubunmi Kuku, had since clarified that the authority’s actions concerning e-hailing services were driven primarily by passenger safety, security and seamless airport experience, rather than an attempt to force Uber out of Nigeria.
She said FAAN had received complaints about intimidation, fare exploitation and other negative experiences involving some e-hailing and car-hire operators at airports.
This, she explained, prompted the authority to introduce greater regulatory oversight, including a system designed to provide visibility on authorised car-hire companies, vehicles and drivers, as well as indicative fares.
Kuku also identified liability and driver accountability as a major point.
She said while Uber and other operators sought dedicated airport pick-up zones, they regarded their drivers as independent contractors and were reluctant to assume direct responsibility for their conduct and passenger safety.
While acknowledging that Uber had been considering leaving Nigeria for some time, Kuku maintained that FAAN was not responsible for the company’s exit, noting that airports represented only a small part of Uber’s overall Nigerian operations.
Despite FAAN’s clarification, experts have insisted that regulation should not inadvertently produce a mobility monopoly.
They argue that the objective should be to regulate the market, rather than restrict the choices available to passengers.
This is more so, as many stakeholders see FAAN’s Airport Car Hire Rank Management System (ACHRAMS) platform as an e-hailing application intended to compete with Uber, Bolt or other platforms.
Although, FAAN had defined the system as a platform designed to provide operational visibility, tracking and management of applicable airport-related charges.
But these stakeholders insist that a properly designed airport mobility framework should allow multiple licensed operators to participate while imposing common standards for safety, vehicle identification, driver verification, pickup locations, pricing transparency, insurance, complaint resolution and airport access.
They have strong view that Nigeria can have a regulated airport taxi system and still maintain competition among conventional taxis, e-hailing platforms, corporate transport operators, hotel shuttles, car-hire companies and other authorised mobility providers.
This is particularly important because when passengers have the freedom to choose among several licensed providers, operators are incentivised to improve service quality, maintain their vehicles to high standards, train their drivers adequately and keep fares competitive.
Meanwhile, the way forward is for FAAN to take the bulls by the horns. To start with, the Authority should maintain a multi-operator airport mobility framework under which all approved transportation providers operate under clearly defined conditions.
Also, FAAN should ensure airport taxi fares should be transparent, while all authorised airport taxis should be properly identified, with visible vehicle and driver identification.
Most importantly, FAAN should establish or strengthen a passenger complaint and redress mechanism specifically for airport transportation.
In addition, the framework should be competition-neutral. No single operator or category of operator should receive regulatory protection that unnecessarily limits passenger choice.
It is only when these structures are put in place that the Authority will be able to convince Nigerians of its good intentions towards air passengers and other commuters.