Resolving the GERD Dispute: How Worldviews and the Water-Energy-Food Nexus Can Foster Nile Basin Cooperation

Illustrative Image: Resolving the GERD Dispute: How Worldviews and the Water-Energy-Food Nexus Can Foster Nile Basin Cooperation
Image Source & Credit: The exchange Africa
Ownership and Usage Policy

A recent study by Endaylalu, G. A., & Arsano, Y. (2024) titled “Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam Project Controversies: Understanding the Role of Worldviews and Nexus” published in African Anthropologist reveals that contrasting national worldviews and siloed sectoral approaches fuel the GERD dispute, but a nexus framework offers pathways toward cooperative solutions.

This article investigates why the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) has become a focal point of contention among Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan. Rather than treating the dispute purely as a technical or legal issue, the authors introduce an integrated worldview–nexus framework to uncover deeper drivers of conflict and avenues for cooperation.

“

Contrasting national worldviews and siloed planning drive the GERD conflict, but a nexus approach offers pathways for regional cooperation.
– Endaylalu, G. A., & Arsano, Y. 2024

Background and Motivation
Ethiopia, positioned on the Blue Nile (Abbay), possesses immense untapped hydropower potential—estimated at around 45,000 MW. Under the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) regime (1991–2018), the country aggressively pursued hydropower expansion, growing capacity from just 370 MW in 1991 to over 5,200 MW by 2023. GERD, the flagship of this strategy, symbolizes Ethiopia’s ambition to lift millions out of poverty, energize its industrial base, and strengthen national unity. However, this upstream project has provoked strong reactions from downstream Egypt, which relies on the Nile for over 90% of its freshwater, and from Sudan, which has adopted a cautious, shifting stance.

Core Concepts Worldview
At the heart of the GERD dispute lie contrasting national worldviews—coherent belief systems that shape how countries perceive, value, and manage water.

Ethiopia’s Development-Centered Worldview sees water as a vital engine for national transformation. Grounded in modern hydraulic thinking, this worldview emphasizes capturing every drop of water for economic development, particularly through hydropower. GERD is not merely a dam; it is a symbol of progress, self-reliance, and political legitimacy.

Egypt’s Water Security-Centered Worldview treats the Nile as the country’s lifeblood—integral to its identity, agriculture, and very survival. With deep historical ties to the 1959 Nile Waters Agreement, Egypt views any upstream interference as a threat to its rightful share and national security. GERD, in this context, is perceived as a destabilizing force that challenges Egypt’s historical entitlements.

Sudan’s Middle-Ground Worldview is more ambivalent. On one hand, GERD offers tangible benefits like cheap electricity and flood regulation. On the other, concerns over dam safety and downstream irrigation impacts create hesitation. Sudan’s position shifts depending on domestic priorities and regional political alignments, at times leaning toward Egypt, at other times toward Ethiopia.

The Nexus Approach: Connecting Water, Energy, and Food
To move beyond zero-sum thinking, the nexus approach offers a pathway for integrated planning. Rather than treating water, energy, and food as separate sectors, this paradigm recognizes their interdependence. For example, hydropower from GERD could stabilize regional power supply and support irrigation in both Ethiopia and Sudan. Yet, rapid dam filling might reduce downstream water availability, harming agriculture in Egypt and Sudan.

The nexus framework emphasizes managing trade-offs and synergies across sectors and borders. It calls for coordinated, transboundary planning and investment—breaking free from siloed national strategies. Through this lens, the GERD dispute is not just about water flows but about conflicting development paths, fragmented governance, and missed opportunities for cooperation.

How the Study was Conducted

The study adopts a qualitative case study approach centered on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), selected for its geopolitical significance, scale, and far-reaching impacts across water, energy, food, and environmental sectors. The research draws on diverse data sources and analytical tools to uncover how competing national worldviews and sectoral priorities shape the regional discourse around GERD.

Data Collection Methods
The research relied on two primary data collection methods: semi-structured interviews and document analysis.

A total of 38 purposively selected resource persons were interviewed across multiple governance levels:

Regional level: Experts from the Eastern Nile Technical Regional Office (ENTRO)

National level: Officials and experts from key Ethiopian ministries (Water & Energy, Foreign Affairs, Agriculture, Irrigation), Ethiopian Electric Power, the Environmental Protection Authority, the GERD Public Participation Council, and academia

In addition, a broad range of documents were reviewed, including:

Official Ethiopian strategies and plans (e.g., Climate-Resilient Green Economy Strategy, Abbay Basin Master Plan)

Technical documents such as feasibility studies, power system expansion blueprints, and electrification programs

Legal texts like Egypt’s 2014 Constitution and the 1959 Nile Waters Agreement

Government communications, such as public statements, letters to the UN Security Council, and relevant UNSC resolutions

Reports by national and international panels of experts, the Eastern Africa Power Pool, and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

Academic and grey literature on Nile hydropolitics, transboundary water governance, hydropower, and the water-energy-food nexus

Analytical Framework
Two interlinked frameworks guide the analysis:

Worldview Analysis – Examines each riparian state’s framing of GERD through five dimensions: ontology (what exists), epistemology (how knowledge is produced), axiology (values), anthropology (human-nature relations), and societal vision. This lens helps reveal how Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan differently conceptualize the dam’s purpose, benefits, and risks.

Nexus Analysis – Applies a water-energy-food-environment (WEFE) nexus perspective to identify cross-sector linkages, trade-offs, and potential synergies in hydropower development, highlighting both national dependencies and regional interdependencies.

Data Processing and Interpretation
Interview transcripts were thematically coded based on core worldview dimensions and nexus linkages. Documentary materials were analyzed for discursive cues, such as language that securitizes water use or frames development as a national imperative. A comparative synthesis then traced points of convergence and divergence in the three countries’ worldviews and planning practices.

What the Authors Found

The authors found contrasting national worldviews and siloed sectoral approaches fuel the GERD dispute, but a nexus framework offers pathways toward cooperative solutions.

Why is this important

Integrated Worldview–Nexus Framework Uncovers Root Causes: The study reveals that deeply held national worldviews—such as Ethiopia’s developmental imperative and Egypt’s existential water concerns—are central to the GERD deadlock. Recognizing these foundational beliefs is essential to overcoming zero-sum politics.

Breaks Down Disciplinary Silos in River Basin Management: By using a nexus approach, the research demonstrates that water, energy, food, and environmental issues are deeply interconnected and cannot be addressed in isolation. Integrated planning is key to identifying synergies and managing trade-offs.

Provides Concrete Tools for Negotiators and Policymakers: The study offers actionable solutions such as joint impact assessments, coordinated dam filling schedules, benefit-sharing mechanisms, and trust-building workshops that address the concerns of all riparian states.

Creates a Scalable Model for Global Transboundary Disputes: Beyond the Nile, this framework serves as a transferable blueprint for resolving conflicts in other shared river basins like the Mekong, Amazon, and Danube by highlighting the role of competing narratives and cross-sector integration.

Supports Sustainable Development and Conflict Prevention: Aligning upstream energy goals with downstream food and ecological needs contributes to the SDGs and helps prevent conflict. Institutionalizing nexus thinking across ministries and borders strengthens resilience and regional cooperation.

What the Authors recommended

• The authors advocates implementing a Basin-Wide Nexus Approach; Integrate water, energy, food, and environmental planning to identify shared benefits and manage trade-offs—such as aligning dam operations with regional irrigation, power, and flow needs.
• The study emphasizes establishing negotiation forums that involve technical experts, policymakers, and civil society from all riparian states, while recognizing and respecting each country’s unique historical and cultural worldview.
• Collaboratively model various dam operation and drought scenarios, openly exchange data, and align expectations on water availability, energy generation, and agricultural impacts.
• Link cooperation to tangible rewards—such as hydropower trade, flood control, and drought relief—while providing safeguards for downstream users and incentives for upstream stakeholders.
• In addition, reform national agencies to support cross-sector coordination, establish a legal framework for a Nile-wide authority, and invest in training and regular workshops to foster trust, technical capacity, and conflict resolution.

In conclusion, the GERD dispute is not merely a technical or legal impasse but a reflection of deeper, competing national worldviews and fragmented sectoral planning. By adopting an integrated worldview–nexus framework, the study highlights the urgent need for collaborative, cross-sectoral, and transboundary approaches that recognize interdependencies and shared interests. Moving from confrontation to cooperation requires not just political will but a fundamental shift in how the Nile Basin countries perceive and manage their shared resources.