According to the last IPC analysis, the majority of the population in rural Livelihood Zones was classified in “Stressed” situation (IPC Phase 2), maintaining minimally adequate food consumption, but unable to afford some essential non-food expenditures without using coping strategies. 

An estimated 11% of the population (about 660,000 people) with major gaps in food consumption was classified as being in a “Crisis” situation (IPC Phase 3).

During the next 6 (six) months (April - September 2015), an increase in income opportunities associated with agriculture, availability of vegetables and fruits, and seasonal remittances are expected to contribute to improved food availability and access. However, near-record levels of food prices and reducing remittances remain concerning challenges in rural areas to improve their livelihoods and meet their nutritional needs. 

Main contributing factors to food insecurity:

• Reduced agricultural outputs
  In 2014, domestic production of cereal and potatoes was reduced by 5.4% and 23.5% respectively on a year-on-year basis.
  The Food Security Monitoring System (FSMS) conducted by WFP in December 2014 also confirmed that households had less winter food stocks compared to the same period of 2013 due to reduced harvest, particularly in Livelihood Zone 6, 7 and 11, where a large share of the population produces crops for both domestic consumption and sale or exchange of the surplus in local markets.
  Heavy and unexpected snowfall and frost in March 2015 damaged livelihoods and households assets in a number of districts in the Sughd region.
• Reductions in remittances
  A sharp depreciation of Russian rouble and economic slowdown started in late 2014 resulted in the reduction of remittance inflow by 8% in US dollar terms and decrease of the number of labour migrants by 11% in first 3 months of 2015. The results of the FSMS in April 2015 also showed reduced frequency and amount of the remittances due to an increased cost of work permit in Russia. The depreciation of the Russian Rouble against the US Dollar and Tajik Somoni compounded the decrease in the volume of remittances and hence the purchasing power of the families of migrant workers.
• High food prices 
  The prices of some basic food commodities, including wheat flour remained alarmingly high. This strengthened the pressure on low income households who spent over 60% of their income on food, potentially worsening their diets. These effects were compounded by reduced purchasing power due to reduced remittances and crop failurein some areas.
• Physical access
  Remoteness also pushed food security situation of the part of the population in highland and mountainous areas of Livelihood Zone 1, 3, 9 and 12 to “Crisis” (Phase 3). The physical access to market was constrained by long distances and high transportation in these areas. In Murgab, Rushan, Jergatol, Kuhistoni Mastchoh, Panjakent and Asht the access was hampered by heavy snow and avalanches.

Based on discussions leading to consensus among the IPC Technical Working Groups (TWG) in KurganTyube, Kulob, Gharm, Khujand and Khorog, experts recommended the following activities and interventions:

• Close partnership with the Government, including local authorities is essential to design, targe and implement relevant interventions to address the current food insecurity in households’ level.
• Unconditional forms of assistance should be provided to vulnerable families that do not have able bodied members, and who cannot undertake the manual works. Such intervention is particularly appropriate in areas, which population are in IPC Phase 3 (with more than 20% of the population classified to be in “Crisis” acute food insecurity situation) and is particularly important when rising food prices may remain already severely affected groups in a desperate situation with respect to food security and living standards.
• Households residing in food insecure and disaster prone areas should be supported in designing new projects directed to livelihoods protecting and disaster risk reduction. The aim of these programmes should be supporting households’ food requirements in the short term, while generating useful community assets that support local agricultural production, income generation and builds resilience to food insecurity in future. This intervention is recommended in areas, where the population experiences “Stressed” food security outcomes.
• Special emphasis should be given to programs that aim to improve irrigation systems and provide better access of the households and the farmers to water. Coordination in identifying vulnerable zones and geographical priorities for water resource management projects should be improved between partners.
• Farmers and households engaged in production of agricultural crops should be better supported in combating pests in fruit and potato cultivation, advice and expertise on using the quality seeds and pesticide should be provided.
• Efforts in job creation should be enhanced. Migrants who returned home from Russia and have required skills in specific fields should be given a priority in providing an alternative opportunities.
• Investment in construction of greenhouses for a longer growing season for vegetables should be increased. This will improve the availability and access to vegetables and fruits in the markets.
• Explanatory and educational activities on nutrition and food dietary diversity issues amongst population should be enhanced. Households residing in remote areas should particularly be benefitting from this activity.
• An emphasis should be given in providing support to the population of Algha, Muqsu and Sartalo Jamoats in Jergatol district, Rasht Valley Irrigated Potato Zone, where majority of the households after losing the main livelihoods have been leaving their actual locations to other areas within the country and to neighbouring Kyrgyzstan.