West Africa

July 2019 to January 2020

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.

July - September 2019

Cartes des Résultats estimés les plus probables de la sécurité alimentaire, juin à septembre 2019: Minimal (Phase 1 de lIPC) dans le plupart de la region. Stress (Phase 2 de l'IPC) dans l'est de Mali, sud du Niger, nord du Nigeria, et sud du Tchad. Crise (Phase 3 de l'IPC) dans Tillaberi Niger, Tibesti Tchad, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, et Republque centreafricaine. Urgence (Phase 4 de l'IPC) dans le nord-est du Nigeria.

October 2019 - January 2020

Cartes des Résultats estimés les plus probables de la sécurité alimentaire, juin à septembre 2019: Minimal (Phase 1 de lIPC) dans le plupart de la region. Stress (Phase 2 de l'IPC) dans le nord du Nigeria. Crise (Phase 3 de l'IPC) dans Tillaberi Niger, Tibesti Tchad, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, et Republique centreafricaine. Urgence (Phase 4 de l'IPC) dans le nord-est du Nigeria.

IPC v3.0 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
Concentration of displaced people – hover over maps to view food security phase classifications for camps in Nigeria.
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.
Key Messages
  • Improved rainfall during the first and second dekads of July allowed widespread planting and weeding in the Sahelian and Sudanese zones. Crop development varies from sprouting to early growth in the Sudanese zone. Seasonal cumulative rainfall indicates that rainfall has been average to above-averageover most of the region.  Deficits are small in most affected areas except in western Mauritania, central and northern Senegal where they are severe. Fall Armyworm infestations reported in Burkina Faso and Chad are under control.

  • Ongoing pasture regeneration and surface water availability are significantly reducing livestock feeding difficulties, however, in western Mauritania and northern Senegal, where the lean season started early, livestock feeding remains a concern. In the Liptako-Gourma region and the greater Lake Chad basin, conflict and civil insecurity continue to negatively impact livestock movements.

  • In markets, demand is experiencing a slight seasonal increase, but well below the usual increase. Prices remain below last year and similar to slightly below average in most countries due to good stock levels and low institutional purchases. However, they remain atypically high in conflict areas and in the Tibesti region of Chad, where market flows and operations are disrupted. In the future, demand will experience a seasonal increase as well as prices, but will not exceed last year's levels; they will generally follow the seasonal trend.

  • Most of the region will remain in Minimal (IPC Phase 1) until September 2019. However, Stressed (IPC Phase 2) will continue until September, for poor households in Niger in the northwestern Tahoua region and the southern Tillabéry region, in Mali in the rice growing areas of the Niger Delta and in the Timbuktu River Valley in Gao due to the poor harvests in 2018/19. Stressed (IPC Phase 2!) affects host and internally displaced households in northern and central Burkina Faso, poor households in southern Mopti and Gao in Mali and the Diffa region of Niger through food assistance as insecurity continues to disrupt markets and livelihood activities. However, many IDPs still are not able access their agricultural fields or humanitarian aid in Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali, Chad and Nigeria.

  • Crisis (IPC Phase 3) affecting the Tibesti region may improve to Stressed (IPC Phase 2) in August with the resumption of trade flows with Libya. However, Crisis (IPC Phase 3) will remain until September in the regions around Lake Chad, the Tillabéry region of Niger, CAR and Cameroon due to armed conflicts and/or civil insecurity that significantly disrupt household livelihoods. Households in northeastern Nigeria affected by the Boko Haram conflict continue to depend on humanitarian aid for access to food and will remain in Crisis (IPC Phase 3), and in Emergency (IPC Phase 4) particularly in Borno State and incidentally Yobé State. In adjacent areas that remain inaccessible to humanitarian actors, the food situation could be similar or worse.

Markets & Trade

Livelihoods

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 some 28 countries. Implementing team members include NASA, NOAA, USDA, and USGS, along with Chemonics International Inc. and Kimetrica. Read more about our work.

USAID logoUSGS logoUSDA logo
NASA logoNOAA logoKimetrica logoChemonics logo