TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

African Union Malabo ConventionvsEU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)

See exactly how African Union Malabo Convention controls map to EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

31
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
40%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

African Union Malabo Convention maps to EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852) with 40% coverage across 12 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 30 African Union Malabo Convention controls identifies 18 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Implementation and Final Provisions.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 30 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 31 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Personal Data Protection — General Principles(9 mappings)

Art. 10Consent Requirements2 targets
→Art. 7Minimum Standards
→Art. 9Free Data Sharing
Art. 12Data Ownership2 targets
→Art. 19Consent Management Controls
→Art. 8Data Categories
Art. 8Data Categories3 targets
→Art. 12Data Ownership
→Art. 17Governance Structure
→Art. 19Consent Management Controls
Art. 9Free Data Sharing2 targets
→Art. 10Consent Requirements
→Art. 7Minimum Standards

Implementation and Final Provisions(5 mappings)

Art. 19Consent Management Controls2 targets
→Art. 12Data Ownership
→Art. 8Data Categories
Art. 34Notification of Personal Information Breach3 targets
→Art. 12Data Ownership
→Art. 19Consent Management Controls
→Art. 8Data Categories

Electronic Transactions(6 mappings)

Art. 2Consent Definition5 targets
→Art. 10Consent Requirements
→Art. 17Governance Structure
→Art. 7Minimum Standards
→Art. 8Data Categories
→Art. 9Free Data Sharing
Art. 4Participating Institutions
→Art. 17Governance Structure

+11 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

Related Comparisons

Other African Union Malabo Convention comparisons

African Union Malabo Convention vs BS 65000:2014 — Guidance on Organizational Resilience15 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs ILO Nursing Personnel Convention C149 (1977)14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD6, Directive (EU) 2018/1673)14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs ISO 8000 — Data Quality14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs Privacy by Design (PbD) — Seven Foundational Principles14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs Iceland Data Protection and Processing of Personal Data Act (Act No. 90/2018)14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs Serbia Law on Personal Data Protection (2018)14 mappings

Other EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852) comparisons

BS 65000:2014 — Guidance on Organizational Resilience vs EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)10 mappingsEU Digital Markets Act vs EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)9 mappingsAustralia Consumer Data Right — Banking (CDR) vs EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)9 mappingsILO Nursing Personnel Convention C149 (1977) vs EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)9 mappings6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD6, Directive (EU) 2018/1673) vs EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)9 mappingsISO 8000 — Data Quality vs EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)9 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)9 mappingsPrivacy by Design (PbD) — Seven Foundational Principles vs EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)9 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 693 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$49/month

Professional

  • ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • ✓ Unlimited full-text search
  • ✓ Framework self-assessment
  • ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs NIST CSFCMMC vs NIST 800-53FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53NIST CSF vs SOC 2HIPAA vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs SOC 2ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between African Union Malabo Convention and EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)?

African Union Malabo Convention has 30 controls across its framework, while EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852) covers 20 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 12 overlapping controls (40% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Implementation and Final Provisions, where 4 African Union Malabo Convention controls have no direct EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852) equivalent.

How many controls map between African Union Malabo Convention and EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)?

Of 30 total African Union Malabo Convention controls, 12 map directly to EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852) controls — representing 40% coverage. The remaining 18 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping African Union Malabo Convention to EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)?

18 African Union Malabo Convention controls have no direct equivalent in EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852). The highest concentration of gaps is in Implementation and Final Provisions with 4 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.

Which control domains have the most gaps between African Union Malabo Convention and EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities (Regulation 2020/852)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Implementation and Final Provisions (4 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

Related Resources

How to Map Controls Across Frameworks|Multi-Framework Compliance Guide|Compliance Glossary

This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.