The impact of conflict and civil insecurity is deepening food insecurity in South Sudan, with over half of the population (about 7.7 million people or 57 percent of the analysed population) experiencing high levels of acute food insecurity IPC AFI Phase 3 or above (Crisis or worse) between April and July 2025. Among them, 83,000 people are experiencing catastrophic levels of food insecurity, classified in IPC AFI Phase 5 (Catastrophe), particularly in Pibor County (Greater Pibor Administrative Area), and the counties of Luakpiny/Nasir, Ulang, and Malakal in Upper Nile State. Among them are 39,000 returnees who fled the conflict in Sudan and are currently classified in IPC AFI Phase 5.

In Luakpiny/Nasir and Ulang, which face a risk of Famine under a worst-case scenario, urgent and immediate action is needed for these populations, including large-scale and multi-sectoral response and the protection of humanitarian access to prevent the total collapse of livelihoods, increased starvation, death and possible deterioration into a full-blown Famine.

In addition, around 2.4 million people (18 percent of the analysed population) are in IPC AFI Phase 4 (Emergency) and nearly 5.2 million people (38 percent of the analysed population) are in IPC AFI Phase 3 (Crisis). These populations require urgent humanitarian response to meet food needs, protect lives and livelihoods, and reduce further deterioration.

In locations with populations facing IPC AFI Phase 5 (Catastrophe) and counties classified in IPC AFI Phase 4 (Emergency) acute food insecurity, it is recommended that humanitarian food security assistance (HFSA) is scaled up immediately to save lives and prevent the total collapse of livelihoods. Furthermore, it is recommended that counties in IPC AFI Phase 3 with high proportions of populations in IPC AFI Phase 4 (Emergency) are also prioritised to avoid them deteriorating to a higher phase.

South Sudanese returnees should also be monitored closely to understand the evolution of their food security and nutrition situation so response can be tailored appropriately and with conflict sensitive considerations. Furthermore, it is important to build the profile of returnee households that are classified in IPC AFI Phase 5 (Catastrophe) to assistmresponding agencies to identify and support them appropriately.

• Continue to advocate for peace and a cessation of conflict.
• Scale up livelihood support in the form of seeds and tools (farm inputs) to support agricultural production to reduce dependency on food assistance and imports. Farmers also need support to adapt to climate-induced environmental changes by training them on climate-smart agricultural practices and distributing climate-adapted crop varieties.
• Evidence-based scaling up and targeting multi-sectoral humanitarian assistance should be conducted in counties facing IPC AFI Phase 3 or worse acute food insecurity to stem further deterioration.
• Flood early warning systems and disaster risk reduction strategies need continued investment to minimise losses associated with flooding events. The dissemination of early warning messages through media, such as radio, needs to be carried out during the periods when the risk is highest.
• With most of the population lacking access to formal banking systems and instead investing in livestock to preserve their capital, it is important to conduct vaccination and treatment campaigns to ensure animal health and minimise livestock losses to disease.
• With illnesses and malnutrition affecting the food security pillar of utilisation, it is important to invest in WASH and health service delivery systems, including through emergency nutrition support (in kind, cash, vouchers etc.), especially during the lean season when waterborne disease incidences and acute malnutrition prevalence increase.