Burkina Faso

País de monitoreo remoto
As of December 2017, FEWS NET reduced its coverage and reporting on Burkina Faso. Currently, FEWS NET analysts monitor the food security situation and prepare regular, but lighter reports for Burkina Faso, and will draft special reports as needed to provide early warning or in-depth analysis of food insecurity drivers.
Maio 2018

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
Would likely be at least one phase worse without current or programmed humanitarian assistance
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners.

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3+: Crisis or higher
Would likely be at least one phase worse without
current or programmed humanitarian assistance
FEWS NET classification is IPC-compatible. IPC-compatible analysis follows key IPC protocols but does not necessarily reflect the consensus of national food security partners.
FEWS NET Remote Monitoring countries use a colored outline to represent the highest IPC classification in areas of concern.

IPC 2.0 Acute Food Insecurity Phase

Presence countries:
1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3: Crisis
4: Emergency
5: Famine
Remote monitoring
countries:
1: Minimal
2: Stressed
3+: Crisis or higher
Would likely be at least one phase worse without
current or programmed humanitarian assistance
FEWS NET Remote Monitoring countries use a colored outline to represent the highest IPC classification in areas of concern.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3: Crisis
4: Emergencia
5: Hambruna
Se estima que seria al menos una fase peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisisque es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero nonecesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3+: Crisis o peor
Se estima que seria al menos una fase
peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
La manera de clasificación que utiliza FEWS NET es compatible con la CIF. Un análisisque es compatible con la CIF sigue los protocolos fundamentales de CIF pero nonecesariamente refleja el consenso de los socios nacionales en materia de seguridad alimentaria.
Para los países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza un contorno de color en el mapa CIF que representa la clasificación más alta de CIF en las áreas de preocupación.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurida d Alimentaria Aguda

Países presenciales:
1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3: Crisis
4: Emergencia
5: Hambruna
Países de monitoreo remoto:
1: Minimo
2: Acentuada
3+: Crisis o peor
Se estima que seria al menos una fase
peor sin ayuda humanitaria actual o programada
Para los países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza un contorno de color en el mapa CIF que representa la clasificación más alta de CIF en las áreas de preocupación.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

1: Minimale
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Urgence
5: Famine
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
La manière de classification que FEWS NET utilise est compatible avec l’IPC. Une analyse qui est compatible avec l’IPC suit les principaux protocoles de l’IPC mais ne reflète pas nécessairement le consensus des partenaires nationaux en matière de sécurité alimentaire.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

1: Minimale
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pire
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans
l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
La manière de classification que FEWS NET utilise est compatible avec l’IPC. Une analyse qui est compatible avec l’IPC suit les principaux protocoles de l’IPC mais ne reflète pas nécessairement le consensus des partenaires nationaux en matière de sécurité alimentaire.
Pour les pays suivis à distance par FEWS NET, un contour coloré est utilisé pour représenter la classification de l’IPC la plus élevée dans les zones de préoccupation.

IPC 2.0 Phase d'Insécurité Alimentaire Aiguë

Pays de présence:
1: Minimale
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Urgence
5: Famine
Pays suivis à distance:
1: Minimale
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pire
Serait probablement pire, au moins une phase, sans
l'assistance humanitaire en cours ou programmée
Pour les pays suivis à distance par FEWS NET, un contour coloré est utilisé pour représenter la classification de l’IPC la plus élevée dans les zones de préoccupation.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceirosnacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

1: Minima
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pior
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência
humanitária em vigor ou programad
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceirosnacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.
Para os países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza um contorno de cor no mapa CIF para representar a classificação mais alta da CIF nas áreas de preocupação.

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

Países com presença:
1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Países sem presença:
1: Minima
2: Stress
3+: Crise ou pior
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência
humanitária em vigor ou programad
Para os países de Monitoreo Remoto, FEWS NET utiliza um contorno de cor no mapa CIF para representar a classificação mais alta da CIF nas áreas de preocupação.

Maio 2018

Junho - Setembro 2018

CIF 2.0 Fase de Insegurança Alimentar Aguda Baseado

1: Minima
2: Stress
3: Crise
4: Emergência
5: Fome
Poderia ser pior sem a assistência humanitária em vigor ou programad
A maneira de classificação que utiliza FEWS NET é compatível com a CIF. A análise compatível com a CIF segue os protocolos fundamentais da CIF mas não necessariamente reflete o consenso dos parceirosnacionais com respeito a segurança alimentar.
As mensagens-chave
  • Despite the difficult security situation in most of the north of the country, market supplies of staple cereals remain near average. On the other hand, the ban on cereal exports to Niger and the opening of 20 points of sale for cereals subsidized by the government have contributed to the stabilization of prices compared to past months. Overall in main markets, prices for cereals remain above the five-year average: 15 to 33 percent for millet and 22 to 41 percent for sorghum, except in Gorom-Gorom market where prices are stable.

  • Although prices for small ruminants being above the five-year average, the high prices of staple cereals do not favor market access for poor market-dependent households. Terms of trade for goats/millet or goats/sorghum has decreased compared to normal in Livelihood Zones 8 and 7 by about 33 and 26 percent respectively. In Livelihood Zone 5 terms of trade remain stable overall.

  • Main sources of income for poor households include livestock sales and gold panning, with increased movement to these sites. Due to the increased prices for staple foods, supply of small ruminants at markets has increased about 10 percent compared to average. Nevertheless, demand remains higher than average, except for the decrease of about 15 percent in Gorom-Gorom. In border communes, particularly those most affected by insecurity, the number of livestock collectors has decreased, and the length of markets has become shorter, which contributes to a decrease in prices for farmers.

  • Cases of moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) recorded in the first trimester of 2018 at health facilities in the Sahel region are generally slightly below (4 percent) those recorded during the first trimester of 2017. However, the reduction in the number of meals per day by households (one meal rather than the usual two) and the deterioration of livelihoods in Livelihood Zone 8 leaves poor households in Stressed (IPC Phase 2). On the other hand, in Livelihood Zones 7 and 5 where households still have access to two meals per day like usual, most poor households continue to be in Minimal (IPC Phase 1) level of food insecurity.

Mercados e Comércio

Monitoria dos Preços
Boletins de Preços

Formas de vida

Livelihoods Zone Narrative

Mapa das zonas de formas de vida

About FEWS NET

A Rede de Sistemas de AlertaPrecoce de Fome é líder na provisão de alertas precoces e análises relativas à insegurança alimentar. Estabelecida em 1985 com o fim de auxiliar os responsáveis pela tomada de decisões a elaborar planos para crises humanitárias, a FEWS NET provê análises baseadas em evidências em cerca de 35 países. Entre os membros implementadores refere-se a NASA , NOAA, USDA e o USGS, assim como a Chemonics International Inc. e a Kimetrica. Leia mais sobre o nosso trabalho.

  • USAID Logo
  • USGS Logo
  • USDA Logo
  • NASA Logo
  • NOAA Logo
  • Kilometra Logo
  • Chemonics Logo