Sudán del Sur

País donde estamos presentes
Noviembre 2019

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Países sem presença:
1: Minima
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pior
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência
humanitária em vigor ou programad
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.

Noviembre 2019 - Enero 2020

Febrero - Mayo 2020

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
  • Although the availability of the main harvest, seasonal livestock products, and fish and wild foods has relatively reduced the severity of food insecurity in many areas of South Sudan, Crisis (IPC Phase 3) or worse outcomes remain widespread. Emergency (IPC Phase 4) is present in Ulang, Maiwut, and Maban of Upper Nile and Duk of Jonglei, driven by flood-induced crop losses and disruptions to food assistance delivery and market functioning. As flood waters recede, households in flood-affected areas are likely to benefit from enhanced fish and wild food availability and to regain access to food assistance; however, they are expected to face large cereal deficits and an early start to the 2020 lean season. Food assistance needs in early 2020 will likely be higher than late 2019, given already high needs in 2019 and the expectation of refugee returns. Should a resurgence of conflict prevent populations from accessing natural food sources or food assistance, Famine (IPC Phase 5) would be likely in areas where food insecurity is already severe.

  • Security conditions remain relatively calm after the extension of the pre-transitional period by an additional 100 days from November 12 to enable the parties to implement outstanding issues, including security arrangements and administrative divisions. No large-scale conflict events were reported in November, though some armed clashes between government forces and non-signatory armed groups occurred in Central Equatoria. Overall, improved security continues to facilitate relatively better trade flows of locally produced and imported food commodities. However, insecurity and road ambushes remain common in Greater Equatoria, while recent heavy rain and flooding have impeded trade flows and market functioning in Greater Upper Nile and parts of Northern Bahr el Ghazal and Eastern Equatoria. River transportation routes remain functional from Sudan to Leer, Juba to Adok Port, and Ethiopia to Maiwut.

  • As previously reported, the June to September main rainfall season culminated in severe flooding that affected nearly 1 million people, more than a third of whom are located in Maban of Upper Nile and along the river Pibor in Pibor of Jonglei. The floods have affected areas that were already experiencing Crisis (IPC Phase 3) or worse outcomes, given poor households’ high levels of vulnerability due to the erosion of food and incomes sources during the protracted conflict and humanitarian access constraints. In Greater Upper Nile region, more than 3 million people – equivalent to more than 60 percent of the population – were in need of assistance and facing high, ‘Critical’ (GAM WHZ 15-29.9 percent) levels of acute malnutrition prior to the start of the floods in October. The population in need has now likely risen.

  • Although analysis of satellite-derived data shows that many flood-affected areas are not major cropping areas, a preliminary estimate by FAO indicates approximately 72,611 MT of cereals have potentially been lost in 36 flood-affected counties. Further, due to flooding, post-harvest losses in 2019 are expected to exceed the typical national average of 20 percent, based on previous Crop and Food Security Assessment Mission (CFSAM) data. Additionally, an estimated 3 million heads of livestock are likely to have been affected by loss of forage, waterborne disease, injury, or death. Final verification of the impact on crop and livestock production will be conducted by the national FAO/WFP CFSAM in late December or early January 2020.

  • Although data on humanitarian food assistance (HFA) distribution in October is not yet available, an analysis of September HFA distribution data indicates that HFA continues to mitigate more extreme outcomes in parts of Greater Bahr el Ghazal and Greater Upper Nile. Based on this information, Crisis! (IPC Phase 3!) is likely in 22 counties in November. Although flooding has made some roads impassable, primarily in Greater Upper Nile, HFA delivery to the flood-affected population is underway. As of  mid-November, WFP has reached more than 585,000 flood-affected people with food and nutrition assistance, including 11 percent of the population in Pibor, and accessibility will gradually improve as flood waters recede.

  • Depreciation of the South Sudanese Pound, low cereal supply, and disruptions to trade flows continue to drive high staple food prices. Trade in late October and early November may have also been negatively affected by political uncertainty surrounding the peace deal. A FEWS NET rapid assessment of Konyokonyo market in Juba found that traders were not stocking during this period, due to anticipation of losing their goods. Despite slight declines in the retail price of cereals at the start of the harvesting period, prices generally remain above October 2018 and the five-year average. In October, the retail price of a malwa (3.5 kg) of white sorghum ranged from 157 to 160 percent above October 2018 and ranged from 215 to 348 percent above the October five-year average in Juba, Aweil, and Wau reference markets.

Tempo, Clima, e Agricultura

Calendario estacional

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