Bhutan's healthcare is guided by Gross National Happiness, focusing on equal access for all. The system is mainly public-funded, with limited private insurance options within the country. However, private international health insurance is crucial for expatriates, tourists, and citizens needing advanced care overseas.

Palestine's healthcare and insurance systems are deeply affected by conflict, economic struggles, and political instability. These factors significantly influence the availability, quality, and funding of both public and private health insurance.

Uzbekistan's healthcare is transforming with the new State Health Insurance Fund (SHIF) introducing public health insurance. Meanwhile, private and international insurance markets cater to expatriates, businesses, and affluent citizens seeking superior and global healthcare options. Both systems strive to enhance healthcare access but differ in funding, service quality, and target demographics.

South Sudan’s health insurance landscape is still in its developmental stages, characterized by an underdeveloped public health insurance system and a very limited private insurance market. Both systems are nascent and serve only small segments of the population, leaving the majority to rely heavily on out-of-pocket spending or donor-funded health services. Despite these challenges, understanding the differences and similarities between public and private health insurance is essential for identifying paths toward Universal Health Coverage (UHC).

Health insurance in Nigeria is broadly categorized into public and private systems, each playing a distinct role in the nation’s effort toward achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC). While both aim to improve access to healthcare, they differ in structure, funding mechanisms, target populations, and service delivery.