![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/bmjgh\/files\/2025\/05\/SudanKitchen_Crop.jpg\")
<\/h6>\nFamine Unsaid<\/strong><\/h6>\nSince the Sudanese conflict began in April 2023, saying the \u201cF\u201d word \u2013 \u201cFamine\u201d – in the country, let alone responding effectively, has been a largely unmet challenge. In December 2024, the Sudanese government rejected the declaration of famine<\/a> in five areas of the country, by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) famine review committee, as \u201cpure fabrication\u201d and one that would allow aid agencies to use \u201cfood as a pretext\u201d to achieve their objectives. Even before the IPC report\u2019s release the de-facto Sudanese government announced their withdrawal from the system<\/a> accusing it of \u201cissuing unreliable reports that undermine Sudan\u2019s sovereignty and dignity\u201d. This confirmed what was already implicitly understood, that talking about famine in Sudan can trigger political repercussions and access restrictions in an already constrained humanitarian space.<\/p>\nConsequently, addressing hunger in Sudan is challenging for all humanitarian actors, including locally led groups running community kitchens across the country. This environment has also created a dangerous data vacuum. Key tools for monitoring nutrition and food security have been disrupted by conflict, and political interference. Now, the collapse of early warning systems<\/a> like FEWS NET, following US funding cuts, has expanded blind spots. The resulting gaps in existing data hinder assessments of famine hot spots, masking the true scale of nutritional needs across the country.<\/p>\nAvoiding the word\u2014famine\u2014doesn\u2019t lessen the crisis or the responsibility to the Sudanese suffering. Instead, it deepens the silence, obstructs collaboration, and let’s fear take hold, deterring data sharing at all levels.<\/p>\n
Researchers and Responders Partnership<\/strong><\/h6>\nThere are no magic solutions, but we have found that when data is shared equitably and interpreted collectively, especially with local actors, it can become an act of consensus-building that can shed light on contexts previously invisible. This allows humanitarians to speak clearly about the current realities, plan forward, and respond at scale. One such effort involved the development of a methodology to estimate food availability and calories delivered through community kitchens in acute conflict settings. Working collaboratively, researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) partnered with Hadhreen<\/a>, a Sudanese organisation operating community kitchen in besieged settings to convert routine data\u2014daily reports and monthly invoices, often sent via WhatsApp as text or photos\u2014into operational impact. First Hadhreen created an innovative data workflow: generating unique kitchen codes, organising data in the cloud, and developing scripts to extract and digitise critical information. This then enabled researchers to combine and track data on food supplies and convert it into calorie estimates, providing a vital tool for monitoring, reporting, and learning about community kitchens\u2019 impact on food security.<\/p>\nAyman, a programme coordinator at Sadagaat<\/a> reflects on these innovations through collaboration:<\/p>\n\u201cConnectivity barriers, insecurity and capacity gaps can all lead to a scare and fragmented understanding of our impact from the data, but with collaboration between field and research teams there is a possibility to understand our interventions and speak about the crisis we see every day.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\nThis spirit of collaboration was evident during a workshop building on this approach, organised by DataQ<\/a> a Sudanese research and capacity strengthening organisation, where key kitchen operators from Sudan, humanitarian practitioners, and researchers gathered. The event catalysed conversations around capturing the unique work of community kitchens\u2014 through data utilisation, impact measurement, and partnerships.<\/p>\nAn important takeaway from the workshop was the recognition of how extractive data practice can be between local and international actors. While international agencies and researchers may have the tools to transform raw data into advocacy, funding appeals, or policy shifts, local responders are often left out of that cycle. Many expressed a lack of access to these tools, as well as a lack of visibility into what their data could do once shared. More critically, they are forced to make impossible trade-offs, between spending time collecting and processing data, protecting their teams, or simply delivering life-saving services. The result is a disconnect: local actors generate vital data but are rarely supported to use it for their own learning, planning, advocacy, or fundraising. With this recognition, came a growing momentum and demand for this to change.<\/p>\n
This collaboration hasn\u2019t been without challenges. Building trust and mutual understanding is a process that is especially challenging considering the politics surrounding the conflict and famine in Sudan. Nevertheless, as those who run community kitchens have encouraged:<\/p>\n
\u201cWe can\u2019t work alone to bring visibility to the needs we see daily. Assembling the bigger picture requires both a willingness to tell this story but also the ability to tell it fully by harnessing the power of multiple streams of data from different actors.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\nThe Road Ahead<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\nThis example highlights the untapped potential of existing operational data of local actors, when harnessed collectively. By doing so, we can not only visualise the impact of humanitarian actors in Sudan but also lay the groundwork for collective advocacy to address the political sensitivities that obscure the true scale of the hunger crisis in the country<\/p>\n
To be effective, collaboration must prioritise capacity-sharing\u2014not just data extraction. Approaches should involve co-designing with local responders to deliver timely, relevant insights from the data they collect so those insights may inform their own<\/em> operational decisions, storytelling, and advocacy. Closing the loop on the data cycle is not just a matter of equity its effectiveness.<\/p>\nWhen coalesced and collectively understood, data can make the invisible visible and drive accountability for the systemic failures that allow famine to persist. The way forward demands sustained collaboration, democratised research and learning, and the courage to speak of the crisis in Sudan, openly and in unison.<\/p>\n
Authors: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n- Samantha Olson<\/a> is an emergency nurse and humanitarian professional, holding a Master\u2019s in Global Public Health, she currently leads research coordination for the AMBER Sudan project at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.<\/li>\n
- Arwa Babiker<\/a> is a medical doctor with a Master\u2019s degree in International Public Health and the Cofounder of DataQ<\/a>.<\/li>\n
- Ahmed Mohamed is the Planning and Programs Manager at Hadhreen NGO<\/a> and a humanitarian professional with over 15 years of experience in sustainable development and crisis response in Sudan.<\/li>\n
- Yamna Ouchtar (PhD) is a data scientist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, working on the use of AI in public health and the humanitarian sector.<\/li>\n
- Ayman Eissa Bassi<\/a>, is a Programme Coordinator at Sadagaat NGO<\/a>, focusing on WASH and Food Security & Livelihoods (FSL) in conflict-affected areas of Sudan.<\/li>\n
- Laura Skrip<\/a> is a quantitative epidemiologist jointly appointed at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Nagasaki University.<\/li>\n
- Maysoon Dahab<\/a> is an infectious disease epidemiologist and the co-director of the Sudan Research Group<\/a> at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Since the Sudanese conflict began in April 2023, saying the \u201cF\u201d word \u2013 \u201cFamine\u201d – in the country, let alone responding effectively, has been a largely unmet challenge. In December 2024, the Sudanese government rejected the declaration of famine<\/a> in five areas of the country, by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) famine review committee, as \u201cpure fabrication\u201d and one that would allow aid agencies to use \u201cfood as a pretext\u201d to achieve their objectives. Even before the IPC report\u2019s release the de-facto Sudanese government announced their withdrawal from the system<\/a> accusing it of \u201cissuing unreliable reports that undermine Sudan\u2019s sovereignty and dignity\u201d. This confirmed what was already implicitly understood, that talking about famine in Sudan can trigger political repercussions and access restrictions in an already constrained humanitarian space.<\/p>\n Consequently, addressing hunger in Sudan is challenging for all humanitarian actors, including locally led groups running community kitchens across the country. This environment has also created a dangerous data vacuum. Key tools for monitoring nutrition and food security have been disrupted by conflict, and political interference. Now, the collapse of early warning systems<\/a> like FEWS NET, following US funding cuts, has expanded blind spots. The resulting gaps in existing data hinder assessments of famine hot spots, masking the true scale of nutritional needs across the country.<\/p>\n Avoiding the word\u2014famine\u2014doesn\u2019t lessen the crisis or the responsibility to the Sudanese suffering. Instead, it deepens the silence, obstructs collaboration, and let’s fear take hold, deterring data sharing at all levels.<\/p>\n There are no magic solutions, but we have found that when data is shared equitably and interpreted collectively, especially with local actors, it can become an act of consensus-building that can shed light on contexts previously invisible. This allows humanitarians to speak clearly about the current realities, plan forward, and respond at scale. One such effort involved the development of a methodology to estimate food availability and calories delivered through community kitchens in acute conflict settings. Working collaboratively, researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) partnered with Hadhreen<\/a>, a Sudanese organisation operating community kitchen in besieged settings to convert routine data\u2014daily reports and monthly invoices, often sent via WhatsApp as text or photos\u2014into operational impact. First Hadhreen created an innovative data workflow: generating unique kitchen codes, organising data in the cloud, and developing scripts to extract and digitise critical information. This then enabled researchers to combine and track data on food supplies and convert it into calorie estimates, providing a vital tool for monitoring, reporting, and learning about community kitchens\u2019 impact on food security.<\/p>\n Ayman, a programme coordinator at Sadagaat<\/a> reflects on these innovations through collaboration:<\/p>\n \u201cConnectivity barriers, insecurity and capacity gaps can all lead to a scare and fragmented understanding of our impact from the data, but with collaboration between field and research teams there is a possibility to understand our interventions and speak about the crisis we see every day.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n This spirit of collaboration was evident during a workshop building on this approach, organised by DataQ<\/a> a Sudanese research and capacity strengthening organisation, where key kitchen operators from Sudan, humanitarian practitioners, and researchers gathered. The event catalysed conversations around capturing the unique work of community kitchens\u2014 through data utilisation, impact measurement, and partnerships.<\/p>\n An important takeaway from the workshop was the recognition of how extractive data practice can be between local and international actors. While international agencies and researchers may have the tools to transform raw data into advocacy, funding appeals, or policy shifts, local responders are often left out of that cycle. Many expressed a lack of access to these tools, as well as a lack of visibility into what their data could do once shared. More critically, they are forced to make impossible trade-offs, between spending time collecting and processing data, protecting their teams, or simply delivering life-saving services. The result is a disconnect: local actors generate vital data but are rarely supported to use it for their own learning, planning, advocacy, or fundraising. With this recognition, came a growing momentum and demand for this to change.<\/p>\n This collaboration hasn\u2019t been without challenges. Building trust and mutual understanding is a process that is especially challenging considering the politics surrounding the conflict and famine in Sudan. Nevertheless, as those who run community kitchens have encouraged:<\/p>\n \u201cWe can\u2019t work alone to bring visibility to the needs we see daily. Assembling the bigger picture requires both a willingness to tell this story but also the ability to tell it fully by harnessing the power of multiple streams of data from different actors.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n This example highlights the untapped potential of existing operational data of local actors, when harnessed collectively. By doing so, we can not only visualise the impact of humanitarian actors in Sudan but also lay the groundwork for collective advocacy to address the political sensitivities that obscure the true scale of the hunger crisis in the country<\/p>\n To be effective, collaboration must prioritise capacity-sharing\u2014not just data extraction. Approaches should involve co-designing with local responders to deliver timely, relevant insights from the data they collect so those insights may inform their own<\/em> operational decisions, storytelling, and advocacy. Closing the loop on the data cycle is not just a matter of equity its effectiveness.<\/p>\n When coalesced and collectively understood, data can make the invisible visible and drive accountability for the systemic failures that allow famine to persist. The way forward demands sustained collaboration, democratised research and learning, and the courage to speak of the crisis in Sudan, openly and in unison.<\/p>\n Authors: <\/strong><\/p>\nResearchers and Responders Partnership<\/strong><\/h6>\n
The Road Ahead<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n
\n