Seychelles vs Sub-Saharan Africa: Private prepaid plans
Private prepaid plans over time
- Seychelles
- Sub-Saharan Africa
How they compare
Sub-Saharan Africa currently reports 36.3% against 23.2% in Seychelles, a difference of 13.1%.
That makes Sub-Saharan Africa's figure about 1.6 times Seychelles's.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Sub-Saharan Africa has been ahead every year.
Seychelles ranks 5th and Sub-Saharan Africa ranks 2nd of 53 countries.
Sub-Saharan Africa has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Seychelles | Sub-Saharan Africa | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.0% | 42.8% | 42.8% | Sub-Saharan Africa |
| 2000s | 8.7% | 36.3% | 27.6% | Sub-Saharan Africa |
| 2010s | 23.2% | 35.4% | 12.2% | Sub-Saharan Africa |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher private prepaid plans, Seychelles or Sub-Saharan Africa?
- Sub-Saharan Africa, at 36.3% against 23.2% in Seychelles as of 2011.
- What is the difference in private prepaid plans between Seychelles and Sub-Saharan Africa?
- 13.1%, with Sub-Saharan Africa ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Seychelles and Sub-Saharan Africa?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 1995 to 2011.
- How do Seychelles and Sub-Saharan Africa rank globally for private prepaid plans?
- Seychelles ranks 5th and Sub-Saharan Africa ranks 2nd of 53 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Health Organization (http://www.who.int/nha/country/en/), published as Private prepaid plans (% of private expenditure on health). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Prepaid and risk-pooling plans are the expenditure on health by private insurance institutions. Private insurance enrolment may be contractual or voluntary, and conditions and benefits or basket of benefits are agreed on a voluntary basis between the insurance agent and the beneficiaries. They are thus not controlled by government units for the purpose of providing social benefits to members.