Sudán del Sur

País donde estamos presentes
Marzo 2018

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.

Marzo - Mayo 2018

Junio - Septiembre 2018

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.
Mensajes clave
  • Crisis (IPC Phase 3) and Emergency (IPC Phase 4) persist  in all regions of South Sudan, though assistance is preventing more extreme outcomes in several counties. Many households have depleted their food stocks and are reliant on wild foods and fish, which will become less available over the coming months. Despite the expectation of continued assistance delivery, not all households will be reached and some are likely to face Catastrophe (IPC Phase 5).

  • Crisis (IPC Phase 3) and Emergency (IPC Phase 4) outcomes are expected to continue in the most likely scenario, with continued humanitarian assistance preventing more extreme outcomes. However, in a worst-case scenario characterized by a persistent absence of assistance, Famine (IPC Phase 5) would be expected. Central and southern Unity, northwestern Jonglei, and Wau of Western Bahr el Ghazal remain of greatest concern. Additionally, Kapoeta East of Eastern Equatoria is of increasing concern, as livestock are away from homesteads, many households are unable to afford staple foods, and insecurity is preventing the delivery of assistance to several areas, incuding Jie, Mogos, and Kauto.

  • FEWS NET’s Food Security Outlook for February to September 2018 and the IPC’s January 2018 analysis assumed the continuation of assistance in many counties of Greater Upper Nile. In these counties, distribution data from January and February indicate the majority of planned beneficiaries were reached, though with variations across counties. Data on deliveries in March are not yet available. Throughout South Sudan, roughly 900,000 people were reached with general food distributions in January and 1.05 million in February, lower than the number of beneficiaries reached at the same time last year. Given that 6-7 million people are expected to be in need during the projection period, assistance above currently planned and funded levels is needed throughout the projection period to save lives and protect livelihoods. 

  • Conflict continues to cause displacement and disrupt trade flows and market functioning. In Upper Nile, armed clashes in late March in Fashoda and Nasir are disrupting trade flows through Sobat River. As a result, market supplies in local markets are very low, driving food price increases above already extreme levels. Armed clashes between Government forces and armed opposition in mid-March in Lasu of Yei displaced an estimated 1,000 people. Conversely, trade flows along the Kaya-Yei road of Central Equaroria, Magwi-Torit road of Eastern Equatoria, and Renk-Melut/Malakal roads of Upper Nile have improved compared to previous months as a result of relative calm.

  • In Greater Equatoria, first-season cultivation is ongoing in several areas. In Magwi and highland areas of Budi, some farmers have already planted. In parts of Yei and Lainya, some planting of first-season crops is also occurring, though insecurity and lack of seeds and tools is limiting the area under cultivation. Rainfall in March has been above average, and there is an increased risk of greater than normal levels of flooding between March and September.    

Tempo, Clima, e Agricultura

Amenazas Climáticas Globales

Remote Sensing Imagery

Mar 2017

Dekad 3 (21st - 31st)
Sep 2017

Dekad 3 (21st - 30st)
Sep 2017

Dekad 3 (21st - 30st)
Sep 2017

Dekad 3 (21st - 30st)
Calendario estacional

Mercados y comercio

Observatorio de Precios
Boletines de Precios
Informes sobre el Comercio Transfronterizo

Medios de vida

Mapa de zonas de medios de vida
Calendario de monitoreo estacional

About FEWS NET

La Red de Sistemas de Alerta Temprana contra la Hambruna es un proveedor de primera línea de alertas tempranas y análisis sobre la inseguridad alimentaria. Creada por la USAID en 1985 con el fin de ayudar a los responsables de tomar decisiones a prever crisis humanitarias, FEWS NET proporciona análisis asentados en evidencia sobre unos 35 países. Entre los integrantes del equipo ejecutor figuran la NASA, NOAA, USDA y el USGS, así como Chemonics International Inc. y Kimetrica. Lea más sobre nuestro trabajo.

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