GMFS South Sudan CFSAM Support Kit

Transcription

1 GMFS South Sudan CFSAM Support Kit version 1.0 October, 2011

2 Table of contents 1 Disclaimer General introduction South Sudan base maps and statistics Base map Agroecological zones Trends in cereal production traditional sector ( ) Rainfall Estimate Estimated rainfall in Comparison RFE 2011 with Long Term Average (LTA ) South Sudan ARABLE LAND NDVI and cumulated rainfall compared to Long Term Average (both ) Vegetation status over arable land South Sudan PASTURE NDVI and cumulated rainfall compared to Long Term Average Vegetation status over pasture Table of contents

3 1 Disclaimer The designations employed and the presentation of material in the map(s) do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of GMFS/VITO concerning the legal or constitutional status of any country, territory or sea area, or concerning the delimitation of frontiers. The administrative units and their names shown on this map do not imply acceptance or recognition by the Government of Republic of South Sudan. This map aims only to support the work of the CFSAM team. 2 General introduction This document gives an overview of GMFS efforts to contribute to the joint FAO, WFP and JRC and Crop CFSAM in South Sudan. Its goal is to serve as an extra input during the field assessment mission in October Two first report were delivered in 2009 and This new document takes into consideration some remarks from FAO/JRC/WFP to have a better overview by reducing the number of indicators, having monthly maps, showing simpler differences indicators and have a chapter summarizing the crop statistics. Further remarks to improve the CFSAM kit are expected after the field review in order to define and improve a standard document that can be produced regularly before the field mission. The analysis is mainly based upon products derived from remote sensing low resolution sensor SPOT VGT, ENVISAT MERIS and METEO satellite in combination with land use classes derived from FAO AFRICOVER map. This document consists of four main chapters. The first part ( 3) summarizes the existing crop yield/area/production statistics from The second chapter( 4) displays the rainfall regime and its comparison with the average. The third part ( 5) is dedicated to the analysis over arable with profiles per state of vegetation index and rainfall along the season. The profiles are aggregated through the arable land mask. Two cluster analysis are performed over 2011 NDVI and its difference with the 12 year average. The last part ( 6) review the same analysis but exclusively for pasture area. The analysis are mainly focusing on detected anomaly which origins (vegetation stress, excess of water, ) need often a field control as low resolution remote sensing is detecting surface condition and hardly land cover. 1

4 3 South Sudan base maps and statistics 3.1 Base map Source: Sudan Interagency Mapping 2

5 3.2 Agroecological zones Source: World Food Programme Sudan VAM Unit; October

6 Yield (t/ha) Yield (t/ha) Trends in cereal production traditional sector ( ) Sources: Special Report - FAO/WFP Crop and food supply assessment mission to Sudan, 11 February 2004 ( ) and Special Report - FAO/WFP Crop and food security assessment mission to Southern Sudan, 17 February 2010 ( ) Yield (t/ha) per state state min max avg Upper Nile 0,68 0,75 0,87 0,47 0,79 0,54 0,81 0,91 0,87 0,85 0,43 0,63 0,43 0,91 0,72 Unity 0,67 0,85 0,80 0,62 0,75 0,71 0,86 0,80 0,93 0,98 0,42 0,65 0,42 0,98 0,75 Jonglei 0,71 0,56 0,79 0,77 0,71 0,65 0,81 0,80 0,84 1,10 0,33 0,81 0,33 1,10 0,74 N Bahr el Ghazal 0,68 0,54 0,61 0,40 0,76 0,66 0,60 0,69 0,74 0,75 0,83 0,84 0,40 0,84 0,67 W Bahr el Ghazal 0,76 0,66 0,81 0,74 0,74 0,71 0,91 0,91 1,22 1,53 0,88 0,86 0,66 1,53 0,89 Lakes 0,71 0,71 0,81 0,77 0,77 0,72 0,93 0,85 1,03 1,20 0,63 0,96 0,63 1,20 0,84 Warrab 0,96 0,85 0,92 1,25 0,78 0,79 0,78 1,25 0,92 C Equatoria 0,63 0,75 0,85 0,83 0,82 0,83 1,03 1,10 1,06 1,53 0,55 0,77 0,55 1,53 0,90 E Equatoria 0,82 0,38 0,49 0,54 0,70 0,63 0,70 0,63 0,83 1,11 0,62 0,81 0,38 1,11 0,69 W Equatoria 1,02 1,17 1,17 1,20 1,32 1,05 1,29 1,20 1,49 1,83 0,95 0,96 0,95 1,83 1,22 TOTAL 0,79 0,73 0,80 0,67 0,84 0,72 0,92 0,90 1,01 1,25 0,63 0,82 0,63 1,25 0,84 1,90 1,70 1,50 1,30 1,10 0,90 0,70 0,50 0,30 1,90 1,70 N Bahr el Ghazal W Bahr el Ghazal Lakes Warrab W Equatoria TOTAL 1,50 1,30 1,10 0,90 0,70 0,50 0,30 Upper Nile Unity Jonglei C Equatoria E Equatoria TOTAL 4

7 Area (*1000 ha) Area (*1000 ha) Area (*1000 ha) per state state min max avg Upper Nile Unity Jonglei N Bahr el Ghazal W Bahr el Ghazal Lakes Warrab C Equatoria E Equatoria W Equatoria TOTAL Relative contribution (%) Upper Nile Unity Jonglei N Bahr el Ghazal W Bahr el Ghazal Lakes Warrab C Equatoria E Equatoria W Equatoria TOTAL N Bahr el Ghazal W Bahr el Ghazal Lakes Warrab W Equatoria Upper Nile Unity Jonglei C Equatoria E Equatoria 5

8 Production (*1000 tons) Production (*1000 tons) Production (*1000 tons) per state state min max avg Upper Nile Unity Jonglei N Bahr el Ghazal W Bahr el Ghazal Lakes Warrab C Equatoria E Equatoria W Equatoria TOTAL Relative contribution (%) Upper Nile Unity Jonglei N Bahr el Ghazal W Bahr el Ghazal Lakes Warrab C Equatoria E Equatoria W Equatoria TOTAL N Bahr el Ghazal W Bahr el Ghazal Lakes Warrab W Equatoria Upper Nile Unity Jonglei C Equatoria E Equatoria 6

9 4 Rainfall Estimate 4.1 Estimated rainfall in 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011 < 25 mm mm mm mm mm > 200 mm 7

10 4.2 Comparison RFE 2011 with Long Term Average (LTA ) March April May June July August September < 25 % % % % % % % > 175 % No data or LTA rainfall = 0 mm 8

11 5 South Sudan ARABLE LAND State Total area (ha) arable land (ha)* % TOT Central Equatoria Eastern Equatoria Jonglei Lakes Northern Bahr El Ghazal Unity Upper Nile Warrab Western Bahr El Ghazal Western Equatoria TOTAL *Source: Africover 9

12 NDVI and cumulated rainfall compared to Long Term Average (both ) 10

13 11

14 5.3 Vegetation status over arable land NDVI: Cluster analysis over arable land a. Current year The cluster analysis distributed pixels in 5 classes characterised by NDVI values for each decade which are displayed into the profiles graph. The colours on the map are linked to the colour of the profiles. It gives an overview of the potential biomass production and vegetation cycle distribution over South Sudan. Clusters profiles characteristics Clusters distribution over arable land 12

15 b. Comparison with Long Term Average (LTA ) The cluster analysis is applied on the percentage of difference of 2011 NDVI with the NDVI LTA. The coloured clusters into the map are characterised by the corresponding colours of the profiles. The anomalies impact can be analysed according to their duration and the distance to the average(zero into the profile). Clusters profiles characteristics Clusters area proportion over arable land 5% 21% 40% 21% 13% Clusters distribution over arable land 13

16 6 South Sudan PASTURE State Total area (ha) pasture (ha)* % TOT Central Equatoria Eastern Equatoria Jonglei Lakes Northern Bahr El Ghazal Unity Upper Nile Warrab Western Bahr El Ghazal Western Equatoria TOTAL < ha ha ha ha ha > ha *Source: Africover

17 NDVI and cumulated rainfall compared to Long Term Average (both )

18

19 6.2 Vegetation status over pasture NDVI: Cluster analysis over pasture The cluster analysis distributed pixels in 5 classes characterised by NDVI values for each decade which are displayed into the profiles graph. The colours on the map are linked to the colour of the profiles. It gives an overview of the potential biomass production and vegetation cycle distribution over South Sudan. a. Current year Clusters profiles characteristics Clusters distribution over pasture area

20 b. Cluster Analysis: Comparison of 2011 with Long Term Average (LTA ) The cluster analysis is applied on the percentage of difference of 2011 NDVI with the NDVI LTA. The coloured clusters into the map are characterised by the corresponding colours of the profiles. The anomalies impact can be analysed according to their duration and the distance to the average(zero into the profile). Clusters profiles characteristics Clusters area Proportion for pasture 10% 16% 44% 22% 8% Clusters profiles distribution over pasture area