>  Alerts archive   >  issue 31
©OCHA

South Sudan: IPC Results October 2020 - July 2021

Overview of the process

The IPC Acute Food Insecurity analysis was conducted in South Sudan from October 26th to November 16th, 2020. During the analytical process, the country IPC Technical Working Group members reached consensus on the IPC classification for 73 counties. However, consensus was not reached in relation to the estimation of populations in IPC Phase 5 in six other counties, namely: Akobo and Pibor (Jonglei & Pibor administrative area), Aweil South (Northern Bahr el Gahzal State) and Tonj East, Tonj North and Tonj South (Warrap State). In line with IPC protocols, the South Sudan IPC Technical Working Group partners requested an external Quality Review to assess the presence of populations in IPC Phase 5 (Catastrophe) in these six counties. During this process, the quality review team found that Pibor county presented a very concerning situation, with some indicators surpassing the IPC Phase 5 (Famine) thresholds. This resulted in the activation of a Famine Review. Following the completion of the Famine Review of Pibor and the Quality Review of the other five counties, in early December, findings from these exercises were shared with the South Sudan IPC Technical Working Group. On December 18th, 2020, an IPC report was published at country level which reflects the technical consensus of country IPC Technical Working Group members for 73 counties and different findings from the external quality review and famine review for six other counties. On this webpage, you will find this report as well as other reports and information products produced as a result of the external reviews, including an information product by the IPC Global Support Unit on Consolidated Findings from the South Sudan IPC Technical Working group & External Reviews, the Famine Review report and the Quality Review report.

South Sudan IPC Technical Working Group: IPC Acute Food Insecurity & Acute Malnutrition. October 2020 - July 2021

Download country report

This report was produced at the country level and may not reflect the technical views of some partners regarding six counties which prompted external reviews, nor the conclusions from these reviews.

Consolidated Findings from the South Sudan IPC Technical Working group & External Reviews

Download global information product

The content of this information product is based on the outcomes of the IPC analysis conducted by the South Sudan IPC Technical Working Group covering 73 counties in which technical consensus was reached, combined with the conclusions of the external reviews conducted for six additional counties (namely, Akobo, Pibor, Aweil South, Tonj East, Tonj North and Tonj South).

Summary of Conclusions from External Reviews

The IPC Acute Food Insecurity analysis was conducted in South Sudan from October 26th to November 16th, 2020. During the vetting session of the analysis, a breakdown in consensus among the country IPC Technical Working Group members emerged in relation to the estimation of populations in IPC Phase 5 in six counties, namely: Akobo and Pibor (Jonglei State), Aweil South (Northern Bahr el Gahzal State) and Tonj East, Tonj North and Tonj South (Warrap State). In line with IPC protocols, on November 17th, 2020, the South Sudan IPC Technical Working Group partners requested the IPC Global Support Unit to conduct a Real Time Quality Review (RTQR) to assess the presence of populations in IPC Phase 5 (Catastrophe) in the IPC Acute Food Insecurity analysis regarding the six counties for which consensus had not been reached. The IPC Global Support unit, thus, organized and coordinated the review, which was undertaken by a team of nine IPC experts from IPC global partner organizations who reviewed the analysis conducted by the South Sudan analysis team along with the evidence available. During this process, the quality review team found that Pibor county presented a very concerning situation, with some indicators surpassing the IPC Phase 5 (Famine) thresholds. Therefore, the team recommended to the IPC Global Support Unit that a Famine Review be undertaken for this county. This resulted in the activation of the Famine Review Committee (FRC) on November 19th, 2020, in accordance with the IPC Famine Guidance Note . Meanwhile, the quality review team pursued the review of the five other areas, namely Akobo, Aweil South, Tonj East, Tonj North and Tonj South. The Famine Review Committee, composed of five independent international food security and nutrition experts, conducted the review of Pibor county from November 20th to December 2nd. The Famine Review Committee used the analysis and all evidence used by the South Sudan IPC Food Security and Acute Malnutrition Technical Working Groups as well as other relevant data and information made available during the review. On December 2nd, the results of the Real Time Quality Review and the Famine Review were presented to the South Sudan IPC Technical Working Group and the final reports were subsequently shared for consideration and incorporation in the IPC analysis report at country level.
Download Summary Report

IPC FAMINE REVIEW

In 2020, Pibor was particularly affected by sub-national and localized violence and flooding, which destroyed homes, livelihoods, burned to the ground key infrastructure, caused massive displacements (estimated above 60,000 people), cut off access to humanitarian services, and created almost insurmountable operational challenges for humanitarians delivering aid. These local shocks, together with macroeconomic trends, have also brought a significant increase in prices. Coordinated attacks of unprecedented violence took place in February-March and June-July, in Lekuangole and Gumuruk payams. These attacks displayed extraordinary mobilization of forces, heavy weaponry, and different tactics, in a way that was distinct from previous raids that focused on the acquisition of cattle. The 2020 attacks rather targeted civilians (385 fatalities, more than 350 abductions, more than 8,000 orphans), houses (about 39,000 homes were burnt), burning crops, razing towns and destroying infrastructures, markets, schools, facilities and warehouses, including those stocking humanitarian assistance. After the attacks, a second flood affected the area. The flood had the biggest magnitude in the history of greater Pibor and left a huge impact on people’s shelters and livelihood, particularly livestock - which is considered the main livelihood for the community in the area. The households who planted after the attacks have lost most of their harvest. Thousands of people were displaced due to violence and atypical flooding and are increasingly unable to engage in livelihood activities and access food through traditional agricultural activities. Due to the high likelihood of a resurgence in conflict, the displaced population is not manifesting intentions of return. Floods, extremely violent local and subnational conflict in 2020 and fear of retaliatory attacks severely hampered livestock production and agricultural cultivation. A continued erosion of coping capacity will likely further increase reliance on Humanitarian Food Assistance (HFA), access to which may also be restricted by flooding and insecurity.
Download the IPC Famine Review

REAL TIME QUALITY REVIEW

The IPC Acute Food Insecurity analysis was conducted in South Sudan from October 26th to November 16th, 2020. Due to breakdown in technical consensus in relation to the estimation of populations in IPC Phase 5 (Catastrophe) in six counties, on November 17th, the IPC South Sudan Technical Working Group (TWG) partners requested the IPC Global Support Unit (GSU) to conduct a Real Time Quality Review (RTQR) to assess the presence of population in IPC Phase 5 (Catastrophe) in the counties of Akobo, Aweil South, Pibor, Tonj East, Tonj North and Tonj South. During this process, the county of Pibor was found to present a very concerning situation, with some indicators surpassing the IPC Reference Table thresholds for IPC Phase 5 and concerns over the estimation of the nutrition evidence reliability. The RTQR proceeded with the activation of the Famine Review Process on November 19th, 2020, in accordance with the IPC Famine Guidance Note.
Download the Real Time Quality Review

THE IPC FAMINE FACT SHEET

The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) defines famine as a widespread scarcity of food, which is accompanied by very high levels of malnutrition, starvation, near collapse of livelihoods, and increased mortality. A Famine classification (IPC Phase 5) is the highest phase of the IPC Acute Food Insecurity scale and is attributed when an area has at least 20% of households facing an extreme lack of food, more than 30% of children suffering from acute malnutrition, and two people for every 10,000 die each day. Catastrophe is a classification of household populations in IPC Phase 5. Catastrophe indicates that the area does not portray the famine conditions mentioned above as a whole, meaning less than 20 percent of the population is experiencing famine conditions, therefore, a Famine classification cannot be arrived at. In other cases, populations could exist in IPC Phase 5 (more than 20%) when assessing the acute food insecurity component only, but malnutrition and/or mortality have not (yet) reached famine thresholds at an area level.
Download the IPC Famine Fact sheet

visit the FAMINE FACTS Microsite

Q&A

What is the current situation in the six counties of South Sudan?

According to the IPC Real Time Quality Review (RTQR) conducted by senior analysts from IPC Global partners under the coordination of the IPC Global Support Unit in mid-November 2020, five counties have been identified as having populations in IPC Phase 5 (Catastrophe): Akobo (5%), Aweil South (5%), Tonj East (5%), Tonj North (10%) and Tonj South (5%).

During the RTQR process, the quality review team found that Pibor county presented a very concerning situation, with some indicators surpassing the IPC Phase 5 (Famine) thresholds. Therefore, the team recommended that a Famine Review be undertaken for this county. The Famine Review Committee, composed of five independent international food security and nutrition experts, conducted the review of Pibor county from November 20th to December 2nd.

Based on the evidence available, the review concluded that the Western part of Pibor county, including 4 payams (Gumuruk, Pibor, Lekuangole and Verteth) are classified in IPC Phase 5 (Famine Likely). The Famine Review Committee has also concluded that the same areas are likely to remain in IPC Phase 5 (Famine Likely) over the next 6 months. 

 

 

 

What are the main drivers of the food insecurity in the affected areas?

  • Conflict: Since the September 2018 peace agreement, incidences of large scale conflict have not been reported. However, localised conflicts, including intercommunal violence, cattle raiding, revenge killings and kidnapping, have been reported across various counties, impacting households’ ability to access food, and livelihood sources. Moreover, humanitarian assistance deliveries in some parts of the country have been disrupted due to the insecurity. The consumption of wild food has reportedly also been affected by conflict as the fear of attack prevents households from searching for wild foods in other areas. Incidences of conflict have also led to limited access to farming and farmland, directly impacting households’ ability to plant and benefit from any own production in the harvest period.  
  • Flooding: Based on UNOCHA figures, more than a million people have been affected by floods since July 2020. The worst affected state is Jonglei where an estimated 404,000 people have been affected. Flood waters have damaged farmland, livestock, household assets and feeder roads, and impeded humanitarian assistance delivery. Areas affected by flooding are expected to have markedly low crop production. According to FAO, around 321,007 livestock died due to flooding, primarily in Jonglei, Upper Nile and Lakes states. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What needs to be done to avert the situation?

Recommendations to Decision Makers:

 

  1. Take all necessary measures to halt the violence in Pibor and other parts of South Sudan and protect civilians from ongoing and future insecurity.
  2. Prevent any resurgence of the conflict through support to conflict resolution at all relevant levels.
  3. Take all necessary steps to protect civilians in Pibor, whether still in their home areas or displaced to other parts of the county.
  4. Take all necessary steps to ensure continuous access for humanitarian organizations to all populations in need of assistance and overall respect for the humanitarian space so that the basic rights of the people can be fulfilled. This includes unhindered access to set up humanitarian assistance pipelines and prepositioning of stocks, and ensuring the delivery of services is uninterrupted and that people have access to the available services and assistance.
  5. Ensure unhindered mobility for people to carry out their livelihood activities and access to markets and basic services.
  6. Facilitate the flow of basic commodities. Ensure that additional resources allocated to Pibor are not diverted from resources originally planned for other areas, in line with the “Do No Harm” principle.

Recommendations to Country Humanitarian Stakeholders:

  1. Scale up humanitarian assistance to address the food security, health, nutrition and water services needs of populations throughout South Sudan in IPC Phase 3 and above; not only those in IPC Phase 5 (Famine). The rapid response may involve prioritizing the immediate provision of lifesaving health and nutrition services, including the delivery of higher nutrition value commodities to the most food insecure populations as an immediate famine prevention measure.
  2. Scale up humanitarian protection in Pibor.
  3. Pre-positioning commodities for delivering humanitarian assistance in the eastern part of Pibor is essential to respond to the needs of the anticipated influx of displaced people should the conflict increase in the western part of the county.
  4. Enhance the provision of reliable health and nutrition services in the area to provide adequate coverage of OPD and IPD services for primary and secondary care, as well as timely preventative activities, including immunization for children and ANC services for women. Ensure emergency preparedness in case of outbreaks of diarrheal diseases, including cholera.
  5. Restore access to clean water and an acceptable level of sanitation for both Internally Displaced Populations and host communities.
  6. Immediately conduct data collection of food security and health and nutrition outcomes, as well as mortality, across Western and Eastern Pibor, with a particular focus on the displaced populations.
  7. Conduct regular (weekly) combined monitoring and reporting on key assumptions about risk factors used for the projection of Famine Likely across Western and Eastern Pibor including:
  • Conflict and population movements;
  • Access to markets, basic food commodity prices, volumes and flows in the area, and coping strategies;
  • Public health factors, including: disease outbreaks, admissions in nutrition programmes, availability and utilization of medical and nutrition services and supplies, WASH;
  • Data collection methods:
  • Ensure that sampling for data collection allows for adequate representativeness of areas identified as current or future hotspots;
  • Ensure that data collection methods selected for the FSNMS adhere to standard procedures for nutrition assessments by following the relevant parts of SMART guidelines on team training, measurement standardization, data cleaning and quality assessment, and full documentation of sampling methods and challenges encountered in the field;
  • Ensure that MUAC data collection methods used in IRNA rapid assessments follow standard protocols and IPC guidance, including for data recording and systematically include MUAC screenings in field missions ensuring appropriate documentation of training, data collection methods and challenges encountered in the field.

 

 

 

What is Famine Likely vs Famine?

Famine Likely: If there is insufficient data for Famine classification, usually because either nutrition or mortality data are lacking, but the avail­able information indicates that Famine is likely occurring or will occur, then the famine classification is called ‘Famine Likely’. Famine Likely classification thus allows the IPC to warn about potential Famine in con­texts when there is limited data. Famines tend to occur in areas where access is not possible or very restricted, which has implications on the ability to collect data and makes it difficult to meet all the criteria for a Famine classification. Based on this observation, it has been realized that famine situations can be reliably identified and classified through a robust analysis process using available data. Based on those experiences, the IPC Global Support Unit and IPC partners have agreed to 'institutionalize' the Famine Likely methodology and classification and to add it to the famine protocols of the IPC Technical Manual Version 3.0. Even in cases with less than optimal evidence, Famine Likely applied to projections acts as an early warning mechanism and allows the IPC to inform decisions and humanitarian response to help food insecurity crises from deteriorating further.

 

Famine: The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) defines famine as an extreme deprivation of food. Starvation, death, destitution and extremely critical levels of acute malnutrition are or will likely be evident. A Famine classification (IPC Phase 5) is the highest phase of the IPC Acute Food Insecurity scale, and is attributed when an area has at least 20% of households facing an extreme lack of food, at least 30% of children suffering from acute malnutrition, and two people for every 10,000 dying each day due to outright starvation or to the interaction of malnutrition and disease. Based on the IPC protocols, a Famine classification requires evidence on food security, nutrition and mortality at or above IPC Phase 5 thresholds. 

 

It is important to note that Famine and Famine Likely are equally severe, the only difference is the amount of reliable evidence available to support the statement. In the case of Western Pibor, evidence on food security and nutrition are above the Famine thresholds, while mortality is only informed by anecdotal evidence that do not meet the minimum reliability requirements according to the IPC protocols.

 

 

What is Famine vs Catastrophe?

 

Catastrophe: Households may be classified in IPC Phase 5 Catastrophe even if the area is not classified in IPC Phase 5 Famine.  This is the case when less than 20 percent of the population is experiencing famine conditions and/or when malnutrition and/or mortality levels have not (or not yet) reached famine thresholds. Even if an area has not been classified as being in Famine, it is still crucial to identify households that are facing Catastrophic levels of acute food insecurity. Households in Catastrophe face an extreme lack of food, even after exhausting all coping strategies (eating wild foods, borrowing food from others, migrating to find food, skipping meals, selling assets to buy food, etc.) By highlighting households in Catastrophe, the humanitarian community may be able to prevent Famine at area level.

Famine is a classification of IPC Phase 5 at area level. In a given area, famine occurs when food security, nutrition and mortality altogether portray famine conditions, meaning at least 20% of the population is affected, with about one out of three children being acutely malnourished and two people dying per day for every 10,000 inhabitants due to outright starvation or to the interaction of malnutrition and disease.

 

 

How is a Famine classification arrived at?

The IPC plays a critical role in identifying famine conditions, and informing the response needed to save millions of lives. The IPC is now the primary mechanism the international community uses to analyse data and arrive at a conclusion whether famine is happening or likely happening in a country. Analyses are based on evidence gathered by a wide range of partners and multi-stakeholder technical consensus.

 

 

How does the IPC Famine Review work?

When a country IPC analysis shows a potential, or already identified situation, of famine a specific procedure is activated in order to confirm or disprove a Famine classification.

Famine Reviews can be triggered in several ways:

 

  1. When the country IPC Technical Working Group (TWG) reaches the conclusion that at least one area is classified in Famine or Famine Likely;
  2. When there is a breakdown in technical consensus regarding a Famine or Famine Likely classification;
  3. When the IPC Global Support Unit is concerned about famine conditions;
  4. When an IPC Global Partner officially requests its activation.

Once the process is triggered, the Famine Review Committee (FRC) is requested to conduct a review to ensure technical rigor and neutrality of the analysis before the results are confirmed and communicated. The FRC is a team of leading independent international food security, nutrition and mortality experts. The committee is tasked with reviewing and debating IPC evidence and results before providing guidance and recommendations to the country IPC Technical Working Group.

 

 

What is the IPC?

The IPC is a set of tools and procedures to clas­sify the severity and characteristics of acute food and nutrition crises as well as chronic food insecurity based on international stan­dards. The IPC consists of four mutually rein­forcing functions, each with a set of specific protocols (tools and procedures). The core IPC parameters include consensus building, con­vergence of evidence, accountability, trans­parency and comparability. The IPC analysis aims at informing emergency response as well as medium and long-term food security policy and programming.

 

 

Join our mailing list  

  >