In total, 1.32 million people in the rural population are in a crisis phase (IPC Phase 3), a percentage of about 18% of the population analyzed (the metropolitan area and the main cities not taken into account), and the departments the most affected are the North-East and HT07 1 area of ​​Grand-Anse.

• In addition to the residual impacts of the 2015/2016 drought, the Northeast Department was the most heavily affected by the hurricane Irma.
• The HT07 zone of Grand-Anse, in addition to the residual impacts of Hurricane Matthew (October 2016), was affected by the bad weather of late April / early May 2017 that negatively impacted the performance of the campaign. According to the results of the CFSAM2 the loss of performance is estimated at around 5 to 25%.

It should be emphasized that this classification by major livelihood zones may, however, have significant disparities at the lower scale, at the commune level, for example, depending on the existence of stimulating factors such as the presence of irrigated systems in operation. binding factors such as strong geographical isolation or a localized climate anomaly, for example. Recall that the phase is determined by the phases of the 20% of the population in worse condition. We can cite, among others, the case of Haut Artibonite and Gonâve, the zone of low North-West, and the coastal zone of the South department which could be in a phase worse than that of the middle zone of where they are.

According to analysts from the IPC Technical Working Group, we can expect a deterioration of the food security situation for the projection period from March to June 2018 in certain areas due to the lean season. As a result, in addition to the two zones classified in crisis phase for the current period (North-East department and the mountainous areas of Grand-Anse), the coastal communities of Grand-Anse are likely to enter the crisis phase. . Apart from the 3 zones mentioned above, a change of phase is not expected in the other zones that will remain in IPC Phase 2 (Stress).

Some factors, however, may change the scenarios, including:

• A deficit / delay in rainfall that would disrupt the establishment of the next spring agricultural campaign;
• socio-political troubles;
• An acceleration of inflation following a devaluation of the gourde, an increase in the prices of petroleum products or a rise in prices on the international market.

Recommendations for the next steps for analysis and decision making

• The CNSA has just initiated training sessions at the decentralized level with a view to setting up working groups. Therefore, it is desirable to continue this effort of decentralizing IPC analyzes, which will allow to reduce the cost of analyses and also the durability of IPC analyses;
• Support the CNSA to strengthen the food-insecurity early warning system;
• Advocate with partner institutions for livelihood zones to be better considered as units of analysis (in addition to administrative units). This would facilitate decision-making insofar as one would have smaller and more homogeneous units;
• Continue to support the CNSA financially in the implementation of the IPC;
• Better valorise observatory bulletins during IPC analyzes;
• Better involve structures at the decentralized level in IPC analyzes;
• Improve the dissemination of the results of the analysis, especially at the departmental and communal level;
• Consider the possibility of achieving an urban IPC classification, taking into account the high prevalence of insecurity food and malnutrition at the city level, particularly in the metropolitan area and taking into account on the other hand the high concentration of the population at the city level