In the May-June 2016 period eight districts out of ten, i.e. Mafeteng, Leribe, Berea, Qacha’s Nek, Quthing, Mokhotlong, Thaba-Tseka, and Butha Buthe are classified as Phase 2 ‘Stressed’. Two districts (Maseru and Mohale’s Hoek) are in Phase 3 ‘Crisis’. There is no district that is classified in Phase 4, although all districts have population ranging from 4 to 15) that are thought to be facing an emergency food insecurity situation (Phase 4). All in all 44% of the total rural population are expected to be in Phase 1 (‘No/Minimal Acute Food Insecurity’), 34% in Phase 2 (‘Stressed’), 13% in Phase 3 (‘Crisis’), and 8% in Phase 4 (‘Emergency’).
First projection from July to October 2016: this is typically a post-harvest period when households have some food stock from their own production, and food prices are relatively stable with slight increases towards the end of the period. This year, however, very few if any households have stocks due to very poor harvest. This means that households become market dependent sooner than usually during the projection period. Food prices are expected to be higher than average and increasing due to lack of domestic production, and higher demand, and the dependence on imports from South Africa. Prices, even with government subsidies, are expected to increase by 15-25% compared to average over the projection period in all districts. In Mokhotlong, however, prices are expected to dramatically increase by up to 70%. In total, it is estimated that between 20 and 31% of the rural population will experience No or Minimal acute food insecurity (IPC Phase 1), 33% will be in Phase 2 (‘Stressed’), 26% in Phase 3 (‘Crisis’), and 11% in Phase 4 (‘Emergency’). The worst affected households, classified Phases 3 and 4, are typically the poor and very poor, who lack sufficient income to purchase food at higher food prices, as well as those who have already depleted or will deplete their main livelihood assets, such as livestock, in order to cover their food and non-food needs. All the districts are expected to be in Phase 3 ‘Crisis’ in the projection period, with typically up to a maximum of 15% of the population in Phase 4 ‘ Emergency’ by district.
Second projection from November 2016 to March 2017: Rainfall in the post-harvest period is typically very low, condition confirmed by rainfall forecast for 2016. Since water levels are already low due to poor rainfall, it is likely that the wheat harvest taking place early in the second projection period will be lower than usual. The peak of the lean season, normally taking place from December to February, is expected to manifest earlier (December) and more severely than usual due to depleted stocks, low winter wheat harvest and high food prices. Despite these conditions, it is still expected that food security situation is somewhat better compared to the first projection period. This is due to the fact that many households are expected to be able to increase their income by engaging in casual labour, given that the expected ‘La Nina’ phenomenon could bring ample rains to the county starting in October, thus increasing demand for agricultural labour. In the peak of the lean season, this source of income is likely to facilitate households’ access to food. In addition, social safety net programmes and food subsidies, are expected to lessen the impact of the lean season. In general, 46% of the rural population is expected to remain in IPC Phase 1, 29% will be in Phase 2 ‘Stressed’, 16% in Phase 3 ‘Crisis’, and the remaining 8% will be in Phase 4 ‘Emergency’. All the districts, except Leribe and Mokhotlong, will remain in Phase 3 ‘Crisis’ over the second projection period, with between 5 and 13% of rural population in Phase 4.
Acute Food Insecurity Population estimates from April to June 2016
Acute Food Insecurity Population estimates from Jul;y to October 2016
Acute Food Insecurity Population estimates from November 2016 to March 2017
RECOMMENDATION FOR POLICY AND DECISION MAKERS
- For the estimated 8 to 11% of people in IPC Phase 4 in the different analysis periods it is recommended that government and partners should provide humanitarian aid urgently in order to avoid detrimental food consumption gaps and loss of livelihoods and livelihood assets, and in order to prevent acute malnutrition rates from deteriorating. Although detailed profile analyses were not done, it is assumed that the households in IPC Phase 4 are those poor households who have no food stocks, have very limited sources of income, and have no assets such as savings or animals to rely on. Relief activities should be complemented by increasing the resilience of these households to adapt to increasingly frequent droughts in Lesotho, for example by strengthening programmes on livelihood diversification, poverty reduction, education, erosion control and environmental conservation, and increasing agricultural and livestock productivity among others.
- For the estimated 13-26% of people in IPC Phase 3 in the different analysis periods it is recommended that government and partners implement urgent humanitarian aid in order to protect their livelihoods and prevent loss of assets through unsustainable coping, and to reduce gaps in food consumption. Interventions should also focus on reduction/prevention of acute malnutrition rates. Given the relatively small gaps that the households in Phase 3 have compared to those in IPC Phase 4, they are likely to require somewhat less intensive or lengthy assistance than households found in Phase 4. Relief activities should be complemented by activities aimed at increasing the resilience of these households to droughts, and to reduce poverty levels, as also mentioned in the paragraph above.
- For the estimated 29-34% of people in IPC Phase 2 in the different analysis periods it is recommended that the Government and partners should implement activities aimed at increasing resilience of these households, and improving the productivity of the agricultural sector (crop production and livestock sectors). However, these activities have a lower priority than those needed for households in emergency and crisis situations (IPC Phases 3 and 4).
- For the Lesotho food security situation monitoring and analysis system: It is recommended that the Government and partners should continue active collaboration in terms of collection of primary data, and in coordination and implementation analysis activities by LVAC with partner support. Storage of historical data by LVAC is also recommended, as well as continued training and capacity building of staff in food security analysis in general, and in IPC analysis in particular. It is also recommended to increase the partner participation in LVAC and IPC activities e.g. by asking more international and national NGO conducting food security analysis and interventions to join the partnership.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IPC MONITORING OF THE SITUATION
- It is recommended that the LVAC IPC Technical Working Group updates the IPC Acute Food Insecurity analysis in October for the second projection period, based on more accurate information on the conditions at the time and e.g. forecast for the rainy season.
- A key factor to monitor over the projection periods is food prices. They are expected to be higher than usually during these periods, and have a large impact on ability of households, especially those households that are poor or very poor, to access a sufficient quantity of food.
- While there are discussions about the potential occurrence of La Niña in late 2016/ early 2017, which has historically brought above normal rainfall and isolated floods to the country, the projection assumes normal to good rainfall for the season 2016/17. If the phenomenon of La Niña brings flooding and loss of assets during the last projection period, the situation between Nov/16 to Mar/17, the projected severity of acute food insecurity can be worse given e.g. negative impacts on green maize harvest and material losses.