Kenya

Pays où nous sommes présents
Mai 2020

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.

Mai 2020

Juin - Septembre 2020

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
  • In May, an atypically high number of households are likely facing Stressed (IPC Phase 2) or Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes in Kenya. Poor urban households dependent on casual wage labor or work in the informal sector continue to face difficulty purchasing their minimum food needs due to the impacts of COVID-19 movement restrictions on economic activity. In some rural areas, recent floods, localized market closures, slowdowns in food supply chains resulting in high prices, and the absence of school meals are negatively affecting household food access. On the area level, however, the above-average long rains season is broadly beneficial for livestock and crop production and continues to drive Stressed (IPC Phase 2) or Minimal (IPC Phase 1) outcomes.

  • As of May 26, 2020, the Kenya Ministry of Health has confirmed 1,348 cases of COVID-19 with 891 active cases and 52 deaths across 27 counties. Restrictions such as a nightly curfew and movement in and out of Nairobi Metropolitan Area, Kilifi, Kwale, Mandera, and Mombasa counties remain in place until at least June 6. Additional movement restrictions in and out of the Eastleigh neighbourhood in Nairobi and Old Town in Mombasa are in place due to the rising number of COVID-19 cases.

  • According to satellite-derived data, cumulative March to May rainfall broadly ranges from 120 to 200 percent of average across the country. Localized areas of Turkana, Wajir, Isiolo, Laikipia, Kwale, Kitui, and Tana River have received 200 to 400 percent of average rainfall. Recent heavy rains led to floods in 36 counties, where over 800,000 people were affected, including 237 fatalities and over 116,000 displaced. The floods also led to loss of property and livestock, considerable damage to crops, and disruption of agricultural activities in high and medium maize production areas. Worst-affected areas include Tana River, Mandera, Marsabit, and Turkana. With Lake Victoria reaching its highest water level on the historical record and a high likelihood of above normal rainfall in June, there is a threat of additional flooding from overflowing dams and river backflow. There also remains an increased risk for waterborne diseases, evidenced by an outbreak of cholera in Marsabit and Turkana and ICPALD/FAO’s Rift Valley Fever alert.

  • More desert locust hopper bands have been detected in northwest Kenya where control operations are ongoing. Mature swarms are still present in northwest and central Kenya, but damage to rangeland or crops are localized. Following a revised appeal for 32.1 million USD to curb the spread of the desert locusts, 61 percent of the requested funds have been received. The impacts of the desert locusts will likely continue to be mitigated given the ongoing procurement of necessary equipment for ground and air operations. However, efforts are likely to continue to be limited by insecurity in some areas along the Kenya-Somali border, most notably in Mandera county.

  • Despite the floods and desert locust infestation, the above-average rains continue to improve livestock production and crop growth prospects on the national level. Remote sensing imagery shows above-normal vegetation conditions across most of the country in mid-May, though localized areas of below-normal conditions are present. While late-planted crops (early to mid-April) in parts of the eastern and southeastern marginal agricultural lowlands are likely to be water-stressed in coming weeks with the end of the rainfall season, impacts may be locally significant but offset by above-average yields in terms of net national maize production.  Most early planted maize crops are in good condition and in the reproductive to maturity stages.

  • Maize grain prices are being impacted by COVID-19 movement restrictions. In April, maize prices in urban reference markets ranged from 11 to 22 percent above the five-year average driven by delayed supply of cross-border imports from neighboring countries due to border restrictions and mandatory COVID-19 screenings of truck drivers. In Tharaka, Kilifi, Garissa, Wajir, and Mandera, above-average maize prices were 6 to 22 percent above their five-year averages primarily driven by declines in household stocks, COVID-19 related delays in the supply chain, and increased demand due to higher prices of substitutes. Across the rest of country, prices were mostly average except in Kitui, Makueni, and Turkana, where maize prices were 6 to 21 percent below average given proximity to cross-border source markets and available household stocks. 

  • Livestock prices in pastoral areas currently range from 19 to 51 percent above average due to good body conditions and reduced supply to the markets as livestock owners aim to replenish their herds. As a result, the goat-to-maize terms of trade is currently eight percent above average in Mandera and 28 to 56 percent above average across all other markets; however, the goat-to-maize terms of trade are near average in Wajir.

     

     

Marchés et commerce

Observatoire des Prix
Bulletins des prix
Bulletin de Commerce Transfrontalier

Moyens d’existence

Livelihoods Zone Narrative

Carte des zones de moyens d'existence

.

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