Malawi

Presence Country
August 2022

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: Mínima
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: Mínima
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: Mínima
2: Acentuada
3: Crisis
4: Emergencia
5: Hambruna
Países de monitoreo remoto:
1: Mínima
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.

August - September 2022

Projected food security outcomes, August to September 2022

October 2022 - January 2023

Projected food security outcomes, October 2022 to January 2023

IPC v3.1 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
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
  • Households face constrained access to food purchases in markets due to atypically high prices exacerbated by limited access to income, particularly in rural and low-income urban families in southern Malawi. Buying and retail prices for the maize staple continue to be atypically high in the immediate post-harvest period. June to July, prices of maize grain increased by a range of 7.1 percent to 46.3 percent in all except two FEWS NET monitored markets. Prices rose the most in northern Malawi markets ranging from 7 to 46 percent, followed by central Malawi markets at 10 to 28.2 percent and southern Malawi being the least at -1.9 to 16.3 percent. Compared to the same time last year, the prices in July 2022 were higher by a range of 75.8 to 226 percent and compared to the five-year average; the July 2022 prices were higher by a range of 67.0 to 171.4 percent. Drivers for price increases remain the increased market demand, especially in southern Malawi, increased transactional costs due to rise in fuel prices, general inflation due to global factors and the recent devaluation of the local currency, the Malawi Kwacha, and higher demand in markets across the border in Tanzania (through to Kenya).

  • Recent household survey data indicates a worsening situation across most of Malawi, characterized by high reliance on consumption and livelihood-based coping. According to the Malawi household food security bulletin for June to July 2022, 88 percent of households report an acceptable food consumption score. However, 70 percent of households also reported a reduced coping strategy index of severe, indicative of heavy reliance on consumption-based coping such as reducing the number of meals per day to prolong existing food stocks. There is a 51 percent increase in households reporting severe consumption-based coping compared to last year, from 18 percent in 2021 to 69 percent. Further, the proportion of households reporting severe consumption-based coping was evenly spread throughout each region, indicating a deterioration of food security conditions across most rural Malawi.

  • In Malawi, acute food insecurity outcomes continue to worsen, particularly in southern Malawi. In most south Malawi districts, very poor and households face Stressed (IPC Phase 2) and Crisis (IPC Phase 3) critical food insecurity outcomes. Very poor and poor households currently in Stressed (IPC Phase 2) will likely transition to Crisis (IPC Phase 3) food security outcomes from October 2022 through the lean season, November to March 2023. The anticipated deterioration in food security conditions is driven by the coinciding impact of multiple tropical storms, below-average crop production, limited income opportunities, and worsening macroeconomic shocks on financial access to food, including reliance on coping strategies to meet food needs. Currently, in the Lower Shire livelihood zone, the above-mentioned shocks have already exacerbated existing vulnerabilities and food insecurity, including limited coping capacity, resulting in Crisis (IPC Phase 3) acute food insecurity outcomes for the area. Households in central and northern districts remain in Minimal/None (IPC Phase 1) outcomes which will persist through December 2022, with some very poor households likely facing Stressed (IPC Phase 2) outcomes due to unfavorable macro-economic conditions.

Food Security

Malawi Food Security Classification (August 2022 - January 2023)

Near term (August 2022 - September 2022) food security outcomes and forward-looking analysis representing the most likely food security outcomes for medium term (October 2022 - January 2023) periods.

Downloads

Markets & Trade

Price Bulletin
Cross Border Trade Report

Production & Trade Flow Maps

Supply and Market Outlook

Enhanced Market Analysis

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