Somália

País com presença
Maio 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Países sem presença:
1: Minima
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pior
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência
humanitária em vigor ou programad
Não mapeado
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.

Maio 2019

Junho - Setembro 2019

Fases de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda baseadas em IPC v3.0

1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Concentração de pessoas deslocadas
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a IPC. A análise compatível com a IPC segue os protocolos fundamentais da IPC mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceirosnacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.
As mensagens-chave
  • After the onset of the Gu 2019 rainfall season was delayed by 10 to 30 days across Somalia, rainfall performance improved in May but remained largely below average and characterized by erratic, poor distribution. Severe to exceptional drought conditions persist in parts of the Northeast, particularly in Bari. Although moderate to heavy rainfall has improved conditions in other parts of central and northeastern pastoral areas and elevated seasonal totals to above average in parts of the South – most notably in Hiiraan and across the cowpea belt – poor distribution is still likely to result in below-average crop and livestock production overall. Emergency (IPC Phase 4) and Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes are expected through at least September across the country.

  • In most pastoral areas, livestock body conditions and household access to water are beginning to improve due to progressive pasture and water regeneration. Although births in the Gu are low, medium livestock conception is ongoing, which is anticipated to lead to medium births and milk production during the October to December Deyr season. Nevertheless, due to the gradual pace of livestock recovery and the mid-June to September dry period, Emergency (IPC Phase 4) and Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes are expected in the pastoral livelihood zones of East Golis, Guban, Hawd, Northern Inland, and Addun through at least September. Exceptions include some parts of pastoral and agropastoral areas in southern Somalia where above-average May rainfall is improving livestock conditions and food security more rapidly, sustaining Stressed (IPC Phase 2) or Minimal (IPC Phase 1) outcomes.

  • Rainfall has supported cowpea crop development in central agropastoral areas. However, water resources remain below average in most southern agropastoral and riverine areas. This has led to competition over access to irrigated water, and total Gu production is most likely to be below average with localized instances of crop failure. Deficits will likely be most severe in Southern Agropastoral livelihood zone in Hiiraan and Gedo and in Southern Rainfed Agropastoral livelihood zone of Lower Juba and Lower Shabelle. In these areas, food security is expected to deteriorate until the start of the Gu harvest in late-July/August, and then resume as food stocks are quickly depleted. However, better-than-expected improvements in livestock body conditions are likely to prevent severe outcomes. Crisis (IPC Phase 3) or Stressed (IPC Phase 2) is likely in many areas through late 2019.

  • In agropastoral areas of the Northwest, farmers suspended short-cycle maize planting due to below-average Gu rainfall. Land preparation and dry sowing of long-cycle sorghum is now in process in anticipation of an average Karan (June-September) rainfall season. Should the current forecast hold, normal seed germination and crop development would be likely. However, total Gu/Karan production is still expected to be below average due to early season losses. Crisis (IPC Phase 3) is expected to persist in Northwestern Agropastoral and Togdheer Agropastoral livelihood zones, and some poor households are likely in Emergency (IPC Phase 4).

About FEWS NET

A Rede de Sistemas de AlertaPrecoce de Fome é líder na provisão de alertas precoces e análises relativas à insegurança alimentar. Estabelecida em 1985 com o fim de auxiliar os responsáveis pela tomada de decisões a elaborar planos para crises humanitárias, a FEWS NET provê análises baseadas em evidências em cerca de 35 países. Entre os membros implementadores refere-se a NASA , NOAA, USDA e o USGS, assim como a Chemonics International Inc. e a Kimetrica. Leia mais sobre o nosso trabalho.

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