Somalie

Pays où nous sommes présents
Avril 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.

Avril - Mai 2019

Juin - Septembre 2019

IPC v3.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

1: Minimale
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Urgence
5: Famine
Concentration de personnes déplacées
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.
Messages clés
  • Below-average rains across most of Somalia during the 2018 Deyr (October-December), followed by harsh weather conditions during the dry Jilaal (January-March 2019) season and the poor performance of the Gu (April-June 2019) rains in April, has led to worsening  drought conditions in many parts of the country.

  • This has caused deterioration in pasture availability and widespread water shortages in most pastoral and agropastoral livelihood zones, leading to earlier-than-normal water trucking, atypical livestock movements to watering points, and declines in livestock body conditions and milk production.

  • The worst-affected areas include Northern Inland Pastoral (NIP), East Golis Pastoral, Addun Pastoral and Hawd Pastoral livelihood zones. In these areas, severe pasture and water deficits and early water trucking have been reported. The harsh Jilaal has also affected rural livelihoods in southern Somalia including Bay/Bakool Agropastoral and Southern Agropastoral of Hiiraan, although the impact is less severe compared to central and northern regions.

  • Limited saleable livestock assets, poor livestock body conditions, reduced access to milk, increased household expenditures on the rising cost of food and water, and overstretched social support networks have led to reduced food access. Further, humanitarian food  assistance levels have significantly declined compared to the final quarter of 2018. As a result, food insecurity is worsening among pastoralists in northern and central Somalia.

  • Since February 2019, both upstream and downstream water levels of the Shabelle and Juba rivers have remained very low. In some areas, river beds have dried up completely, due to prevailing drier-than-normal weather and high temperatures. This has led to extreme water scarcity for riverine communities. Off-season production in riverine areas was also 11 percent lower than estimates in January 2019.

  • The delayed and poor start of the Gu rainfall season has shortened the length of the crop growing season. Given the shortened season, below-average Gu rainfall performance, and very low river levels to date, a significant reduction of 40-50 percent in aggregate seasonal cereal output is expected in July 2019. This scenario assumes the forecast of average to near-average rainfall in May-June wil materialize in the crop growing areas of northwest and southern Somalia.

  • Consequently, food security outcomes in East Golis Pastoral of Bari; Hawd Pastoral of Nugaal, Mudug, Galgaduud and Hiiraan; and Addun Pastoral of Mudug have deteriorated from Stressed (IPC Phase 2) to Crisis (IPC Phase 3), as more households are expected to experience food consumption gaps through June 2019. Most southern regions remain Minimal (IPC Phase) or Stressed (IPC Phase 2), due to relatively better 2018 Deyr rains that supported crop production and near-average livestock holdings, though Stressed (IPC Phase 2) outcomes have become more widespread. The exceptions include Bay Bakool Low Potential Agropastoral and Southern Agropastoral of Hiiraan, where significantly below-average Deyr crop production led to Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes (Map 1). Approximately 1.7 million people are now estimated to be in Crisis (IPC Phase 3) and Emergency (IPC Phase 4) between April and June 2019, an increase of 10 percent from the previous projection of 1.55 million for February-June 2019. The number of people classified as Stressed (IPC Phase 2) remains 3.4 million.

  • Food security outcomes are expected to further deteriorate between July and September 2019, driven by the extensive impacts of the poor performance of Gu seasonal rainfall on resource availability and crop and livestock production (Map 2). In the most likely scenario, East Golis Pastoral of Sanaag, Northern Inland Pastoral, Addun Pastoral, Hawd Pastoral of northeast and central regions, and Southern Agropastoral livelihood of Hiiraan region will deteriorate from Crisis (IPC Phase 3) to Emergency (IPC Phase 4) as food consumption gaps grow, due to significant reductions in food and income sources coupled with progressive erosion of people’s coping capacities. Emergency (IPC Phase 4) will also persist in Guban Pastoral. Meanwhile, East Golis Pastoral of Bari, Coastal Deeh Pastoral and Fishing, Sorghum High-Potential Agropastoral of Bay, and Southern Rainfed Agropastoral livelihood zones will deteriorate from Stressed (IPC Phase 2) to Crisis (IPC Phase 3). Most of the rest of the country is classified as Stressed (IPC Phase 2). Accordingly, the overall number of people in Crisis (IPC Phase 3) and Emergency (IPC Phase 4) is expected to increase to approximately 2.2 million through September 2019, with an additional 3.2 million people classified as Stressed (IPC Phase 2).

  • In the worst case scenario where the Gu rains continue to perform poorly through the remainder of the season in May and June, further worsening of food security and nutrition outcomes would be likely, due to widespread crop failure resulting in deficits of more than 50 percent, a significant increase in livestock losses, and significant population displacement. As a result, food security outcomes would likely deteriorate from Crisis (IPC Phase 3) to Emergency (IPC Phase 4) in Sorghum High-Potential Agropastoral of Bay and Bakool and from Stressed (IPC Phase 2) to Crisis (IPC Phase 3) in Southern Agropastoral, Riverine Pump-Irrigation, and Riverine Gravity Irrigation livelihood zones, leading to further increases in the number of people in Crisis (IPC Phase 3) and Emergency (IPC Phase 4). Food security and nutrition outcomes among displaced populations are also expected to worsen across the country, with main IDP settlements in Baidoa, Dollow, and Mogadishu likely to deteriorate from Crisis (IPC Phase 3) to Emergency (IPC Phase 4).

About FEWS NET

Le Réseau des systèmes d’alerte précoce contre la famine est l’un des principaux prestataires d’alertes précoces et d’analyses de l’insécurité alimentaire. Constitué par l’USAID en 1985 pour aider les décideurs à planifier pour les crises humanitaires, FEWS NET fournit des analyses factuelles  concernant quelque 35 pays. Les membres des équipes de mise en œuvre incluent la NASA, la NOAA, le département américain de l ‘Agriculture (USDA) et le gouvernement des États-Unis (USGS), de même que Chemonics International Inc. et Kimetrica. Vous trouverez d’autres informations sur notre travail.

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