Sudán del Sur

País donde estamos presentes
Marzo 2019

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
Not mapped
Would likely be at least one phase worse without current or programmed humanitarian assistance
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners.

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3+: Crisis or higher
Would likely be at least one phase worse without current or programmed humanitarian assistance
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners.
FEWS NET Remote Monitoring countries use a colored outline to represent the highest IPC classification in areas of concern.

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

Presence countries:
1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
National Parks/Reserves
Remote monitoring
countries:
1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3+: Crisis or higher
Would likely be at least one phase worse without current or programmed humanitarian assistance
Not mapped
Concentration of displaced people – hover over maps to view food security phase classifications for camps in Somalia, Sudan, and Uganda.
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners.
FEWS NET Remote Monitoring countries use a colored outline to represent the highest IPC classification in areas of concern.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3: Crisis
4: Emergencia
5: Hambruna
Sin mapa
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisisque es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero nonecesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3+: Crisis o peor
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisisque es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero nonecesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria.
Para los países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza un contorno de color en el mapa CIF que representa la clasificación más alta de CIF en las áreas de preocupación.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

Países presenciales:
1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3: Crisis
4: Emergencia
5: Hambruna
Parques y reservas
Países de monitoreo remoto:
1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3+: Crisis o peor
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
Sin mapa
Concentración de personas desplazadas – coloque el puntero sobre el mapa para ver la clasificación de los campos en Somalia, Sudán y Uganda.
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisisque es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero nonecesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria.
Para los países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza un contorno de color en el mapa CIF que representa la clasificación más alta de CIF en las áreas de preocupación.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

1: Minimale
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Urgence
5: Famine
Non cartographié
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
La manière de classification que FEWS NET utilise est compatible avec l’IPC. Une analyse qui est compatible avec l’IPC suit les principaux protocoles de l’IPC mais ne reflète pas nécessairement le consensus des partenaires nationaux en matière de sécurité alimentaire.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

1: Minimale
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pire
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
La manière de classification que FEWS NET utilise est compatible avec l’IPC. Une analyse qui est compatible avec l’IPC suit les principaux protocoles de l’IPC mais ne reflète pas nécessairement le consensus des partenaires nationaux en matière de sécurité alimentaire.
Pour les pays suivis à distance par FEWS NET, un contour coloré est utilisé pour représenter la classification de l’IPC la plus élevée dans les zones de préoccupation.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

Pays de présence:
1: Minimale
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Urgence
5: Famine
Parcs et Réserves
Pays suivis à distance:
1: Minimale
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pire
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
Non cartographié
Concentration de personnes déplacées – passez le curseur au-dessus de la carte pour voir la classification de la sécurité alimentaire des camps de déplacés en Somalie, au Soudan et en Ouganda.
La manière de classification que FEWS NET utilise est compatible avec l’IPC. Une analyse qui est compatible avecl’IPC suit les principaux protocoles de l’IPC mais ne reflète pas nécessairement le consensus des partenaires nationaux en matière de sécurité alimentaire.
Pour les pays suivis à distance par FEWS NET, un contour coloré est utilisé pour représenter la classification de l’IPC la plus élevée dans les zones de préoccupation.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Não mapeado
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceirosnacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

1: Minima
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pior
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceirosnacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.
Para os países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza um contorno de cor no mapa CIF para representar a classificação mais alta da CIF nas áreas de preocupação.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

Países com presença:
1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Parques e reservas
Países sem presença:
1: Minima
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pior
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
Não mapeado
Concentração de pessoas deslocadas – desloque o cursor sobre os mapas para ver as classificações de fases de segurança alimentar dos acampamentos na Somália, Sudão e Uganda.
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceiros nacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.
Para os países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza um contorno de cor no mapa CIF para representar a classificação mais alta da CIF nas áreas de preocupação.

Marzo - Mayo 2019

Junio - Septiembre 2019

CIF v3.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3: Crisis
4: Emergencia
5: Hambruna
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisisque es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero nonecesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria.
Mensajes clave
  • Extreme levels of acute food insecurity persist across South Sudan in March. The population in Crisis (IPC Phase 3) or worse has increased relative to during the October to January harvesting period, and Catastrophe (IPC Phase 5) outcomes are likely among worst-affected households in Canal/Pigi and Pibor of Jonglei, Panyikang of Upper Nile, and Cueibet of Lakes. High levels of acute food insecurity are driven by little or no harvests, seasonally low or no consumption of livestock products, and localized insecurity that is limiting access to assistance, markets, and wild foods. A risk of Famine (IPC Phase 5) persists in South Sudan.  

  • In February 1.2 million people were reached with humanitarian food assistance (HFA) through WFP and this assistance continues to play a key role in mitigating worse outcomes in many areas. Given that the reach of HFA deliveries in February was lower than originally expected, outcomes in March are likely worse in some counties than previously projected. Additionally, some counties in which the January IPC analysis indicated populations are likely in Catastrophe (IPC Phase 5), including Pibor and Cueibet, have not received HFA between December and February and it is expected that extreme need persists among worst-affected households in these counties. Overall, the reach of HFA is lower than the estimated 7.1 million people in need. 

  • Conflict has declined in South Sudan in March compared to January and February. Relative stability in Mawuit has encouraged the return of an estimated 4,000 people from Ethiopia, and key informant information indicates that some IDPs from Bentiu have returned to Leer and Mayendit, likely putting additional stress on available food sources in recipient areas. However, armed clashes have persisted in several areas including Lakes State and Greater Yirol, as well as Abiemnhom of Unity, Sobat corridor of Upper Nile, Kediba of Mundri East, and rural parts of Yei, disrupting markets, trade flows, and basic services delivery. In Tonj North of Warrap, cattle-raiding has led to the loss of lives and livestock. In Jur River of Western Bahr el Ghazal, clashes between pastoralists and farmers in mid-March also led to the loss of lives and displaced an estimated 9,000 people.

  • Information from the recently released 2018/19 CFSAM report estimates net cereal production at approximately 745,000 tons, 15.5 percent below the five-year average and 2.5 percent lower than 2017/18 production. The poor performance of the 2018 cropping season was driven by below-average and erratic rainfall, pest infestations, and insecurity. According to data from the 23rd FSNMS, around 57 percent of households harvested cereals expected to last only 1 to 4 months, compared to around 7 months in pre-crisis years. This is corroborated by rapid assessments conducted by FEWS NET in mid-February in Cueibet of Lakes and mid-March in Pibor of Jonglei which found that many households have already depleted stocks. In bimodal areas, the March to May rainfall has started in most southern areas and total seasonal rainfall is now forecast to be average with some localized areas of above-average rainfall.

  • Staple food prices remain very high due to below average production, further depreciation of the South Sudanese Pound (SSP), low market supplies, high transportation costs, and relatively low imports from Sudan. Based on price data from CLiMIS, the retail price of white sorghum in February in Juba was 187 percent above the five-year average, though 83 percent lower than February 2018. In Wau, the retail price of sorghum was 562 percent higher than the five-year average and 193 percent higher than last year. Fuel prices increased from 200 to 240 SSP/liter in Juba and 360 to 435 SSP/liter in Wau between February and March 2019. Trade flows to rural markets including in Leer and Mayendit of Unity, Duk of Jonglei, and Maiwut of Upper Nile have slightly improved given relative improvements in security in recent months and seasonally improved road access.

  • HFA is expected to scale up to between 2.5 and 4 million people per month during the lean season and is expected to prevent more extreme outcomes in several areas; however, food security is still likely to deteriorate based on current outcomes and past trends. An estimated 7.7 million people will be in need of food assistance during the May-July/August peak of the lean season, and the population in Catastrophe (IPC Phase 5) is also expected to increase. The January IPC acute malnutrition analysis projected the prevalence of global acute malnutrition (GAM) to remain at Serious (GAM (WHZ) 10.0-14.9%) or above in 55 counties between May and August. A risk of Famine (IPC Phase 5) is expected to persist in areas of greatest concern, though new areas could emerge quickly in the event that conflict escalates.

Mercados y comercio

Observatorio de Precios
Boletines de Precios
Informes sobre el Comercio Transfronterizo

Medios de vida

Mapa de zonas de medios de vida
Calendario de monitoreo estacional

About FEWS NET

La Red de Sistemas de Alerta Temprana contra la Hambruna es un proveedor de primera línea de alertas tempranas y análisis sobre la inseguridad alimentaria. Creada por la USAID en 1985 con el fin de ayudar a los responsables de tomar decisiones a prever crisis humanitarias, FEWS NET proporciona análisis asentados en evidencia sobre unos 35 países. Entre los integrantes del equipo ejecutor figuran la NASA, NOAA, USDA y el USGS, así como Chemonics International Inc. y Kimetrica. Lea más sobre nuestro trabajo.

  • USAID Logo
  • USGS Logo
  • USDA Logo
  • NASA Logo
  • NOAA Logo
  • Kilometra Logo
  • Chemonics Logo