Kenya

Presence Country
July 2021

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
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 only maps the Eastern half of DRC.
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
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisis que es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero no necesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria. FEWS NET presenta el mapa para el este de la RDC solamente.
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
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. FEWS NET ne cartographie que l’est de la RDC.
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
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. FEWS NET mapeia apenas a metade leste da RDC.
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.

July - September 2021

October 2021 - January 2022

IPC v3.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
Concentration of displaced people
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.
Key Messages
  • Crop and livestock production is below average in eastern and northern Kenya following the cumulatively below-average March to May long rains. Harvests in marginal agricultural areas are ongoing and expected to be below average. In marginal agricultural and pastoral areas, livestock continue to migrate for forage and water resources, reducing household access to milk access and income as livestock body conditions deteriorate. Anticipated below-average crop harvests and declining livestock sale values are expected to result in lower household income, reducing household purchasing power and market access to food, driving Stressed (IPC Phase 2), and Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes in marginal agricultural and pastoral areas. 

  • Across the marginal agricultural areas, yields are expected to be below average due to the below-average planted acreage and poorly distributed March to May long rains. Harvesting is ongoing for beans, cowpeas, pigeon peas, and green grams. The maize crop varies from the knee-high to harvesting stage and is in poor condition due to moisture stress, with the maize crop in Taita Taveta likely to be in very poor condition. In Embu (Mbeere), there are reports of fall armyworm (FAW) infestations of the maize crop, which is likely to impact yields negatively. In Kilifi, the late-planted maize crop is in good condition, supported by near-average rainfall in June and July, with cassava, vegetables, and mangoes currently being harvested. Overall, the poor crop yields in marginal agricultural areas are reducing agricultural labor opportunities for households during the harvest. However, the harvest is maintaining household food availability in the short-term, supporting area-level Stressed (IPC Phase 2) outcomes, but the most vulnerable households are expected to be in Crisis (IPC Phase 3).

  • In the pastoral areas, vegetation is seasonally declining, and distances from water sources to grazing areas for livestock are atypically high. Across most pastoral areas, trekking distances range from 10.5-23.8 km, 23-65 percent above the three-year average. However, trekking distances are average in Mandera and 9-12 percent below average in Wajir and Marsabit, but livestock watering frequencies are expected to decline. The decline in rangeland resources continues to drive intra- and inter-county and cross-border livestock migration. Resource-based conflicts have resulted in increased tension, human fatalities, and restricted livelihood activities in affected areas. Livestock prices range from average to 8 percent above the five-year average across most pastoral markets due to fair livestock body conditions. However, in Turkana and Wajir, livestock prices are 7-20 percent below average due to declining livestock body conditions. As rangeland resources continue to deteriorate, Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes are likely to persist as livestock body conditions decline, impacting household access to milk and income.

  • In June, maize prices were 18-23 percent above the five-year average in Mandera, Wajir, and Garissa, driven by high demand for household consumption and livestock feed. However, prices ranged from average to 17 percent below average across the rest of the country, supported by local stocks and cross-border imports. In Nairobi and Mombasa, maize prices were 28-38 percent below average, supported by cross-border sources. Bean prices are on a decreasing trend and range from average to 27 percent below average as harvests occur across Kenya. However, in marginal agricultural areas, bean prices were 9-14 percent above the five-year average due to high demand and the expected below average and slightly delayed long rains harvest.

  • As of July 29, Kenya has registered 201,009 cumulative COVID-19 cases since mid-March 2020, with a seven-day rolling average of around 843 new cases per day. Kenya has administered 1.71 million COVID-19 vaccine doses, with around 2 percent of the population receiving at least one vaccine dose. On July 1, the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) warned that Kenya is likely to experience a fourth wave of infections between July and August, attributed to the fast-spreading Delta variant. On June 29, in response to the rise in daily cases, the government continued the country-wide and “hot spot” specific restrictions. The continuation of the COVID-19 related restrictions is likely to continue impacting urban poor income-earning opportunities and drive the continued engagement in coping strategies indicative of Stressed (IPC Phase 2) and Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes. 

Food Security

Kenya Food Security Classification (July 2021 - January 2022)

Near term (July 2021 - September 2021) food security outcomes and forward-looking analysis representing the most likely food security outcomes for medium term (October 2021 - January 2022) periods.

Downloads

Livelihoods

Livelihoods Zone Narrative

Livelihood Zone Map

.

About FEWS NET

The Famine Early Warning Systems Network is a leading provider of early warning and analysis on food insecurity. Created by USAID in 1985 to help decision-makers plan for humanitarian crises, FEWS NET provides evidence-based analysis on approximately 30 countries. Implementing team members include NASA, NOAA, USDA, USGS, and CHC-UCSB, along with Chemonics International Inc. and Kimetrica.
Learn more About Us.

Link to United States Agency for International Development (USAID)Link to the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) FEWS NET Data PortalLink to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Link to National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Earth ObservatoryLink to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Weather Service, Climage Prediction CenterLink to the Climate Hazards Center - UC Santa BarbaraLink to KimetricaLink to Chemonics