Uganda

País com presença
Março 2021

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
National Parks/Reserves
Would likely be at least one phase worse without current or programmed humanitarian assistance
Concentration of displaced people
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
Concentration of displaced people
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
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
Parques y reservas
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
Concentración de personas desplazadas
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
Concentración de personas desplazadas
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
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
Parcs et Réserves
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
Concentration de personnes déplacées
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
Concentration de personnes déplacées
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
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
Parques e reservas
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
Concentração de pessoas deslocadas
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
Concentração de pessoas deslocadas
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
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.

Março - Maio 2021

Junho - Setembro 2021

Fases de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda baseadas em IPC v3.0

1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Parques e reservas
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
Concentração de pessoas deslocadas
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
  • In bimodal areas, delayed and below-average cumulative rainfall since late February has led many farmers to plant later than normal and resulted in below-normal pasture and water availability. Deficits are most significant in parts of Acholi, Lango, Teso, and West Nile sub-regions, where rainfall is 25-50 percent of the long-term average. Planting conditions are relatively more favorable in the Southwest. However, forecasts indicate an increased likelihood of above-average rainfall in April and, as of late March, episodic rainstorms have already occurred in some localized areas and destroyed developing and standing crops. Based on these factors, the first season harvest will likely begin late in June/July. Crop production totals and pasture and water availability, which FEWS NET previously projected would be above average, are now likely to vary at the sub-regional level.

  • In March, Kenya imposed a temporary ban on maize imports from Uganda and Tanzania before announcing enhanced food safety standards to control mycotoxin levels. The unanticipated disruption to the local and cross-border maize trade led to a sudden decline in formal exports, though this was partially offset by informal trade and smuggling. Consequently, retail maize prices fell by 3-7 percent in rural markets such as Masindi, Kamwenge, Kyegegwa, and Mubende in early March. Although regional trade in food commodities showed signs of recovery in the last quarter of 2020, the uncertain regulatory environment is now likely to suppress maize exports and maize prices in the short-to-medium term. However, sorghum and bean exports to Tanzania, Kenya, and South Sudan are still most likely to be above the five-year average.

  • Despite the poor start of the agricultural season, Minimal (IPC Phase 1) outcomes will most likely be sustained through September across rural bimodal areas and urban areas. However, the number of households facing Stressed (IPC Phase 2) or Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes is still likely to be higher than the five-year average. Household and market food supplies remain higher than normal following near-to above-average crop production in late 2020 and suppressed demand during the COVID-19 pandemic. Stable to below-average retail staple food prices continue to facilitate food access for purchase-dependent households, whose income levels are affected by below-normal agricultural labor demand and the slow recovery of income-generating activities in urban areas. Labor demand is also expected to rise as farmers complete planting in April.

  • In Karamoja, the population in Crisis (IPC Phase 3) or Stressed (IPC Phase 2) is rising and expected to peak before the harvest in July. Household income from all livelihood sources is insufficient to meet their food and non-food needs during the ongoing lean season. Many households have inadequate livestock to sell, face high competition for labor and natural resource sales, and have eroded coping capacity amid the economic impacts of the pandemic and limited school feeding programs. The retail price of sorghum dropped sharply in February and ranged as much as 25 percent below the five-year average, but this was driven by low demand linked to insufficient household income and the availability of substitutes (e.g., cassava and potatoes). According to WFP, the prevalence of global acute malnutrition is atypically high in Moroto and Napak, which prompted blanket supplementary feeding.

  • Many refugees continue to face slight to moderate food consumption gaps or engage in negative livelihoods coping strategies. Food stocks from the second season are already exhausted, and the delay in first season rainfall has likely reduced already limited access to on-farm labor and related income sources. Further, refugee households have low coping capacity due to the impacts of more stringent COVID-19 restrictions in refugee-hosting districts in 2020 on local economic activity. With food assistance reduced to a 60 percent ration (cash or in-kind) as of February, Crisis! (IPC Phase 3!) outcomes are likely prevalent. Crisis (IPC Phase 3) outcomes are expected even during the June/July harvest period, when an anticipated pipeline break in food assistance funding may cause further reductions in rations after May. According to UNHCR/OPM, Uganda hosted 1,462,164 refugees and asylum seekers as of February 28.

Food Security

Uganda Food Security Classification (February 2021 - September 2021)

Current (February 2021) food security outcomes and forward-looking analysis representing the most likely food security outcomes for the near term (February 2021 - May 2021) and medium term (June 2021 - September 2021) periods.

Downloads

Formas de vida

Livelihoods Zone Narrative

Livelihood Zone Map

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