Decoding nationalistic biases in the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam research

Abstract

ABSTRACT The Nile Basin, supporting 40% of Africa's population, faces a critical challenge in aligning developmental goals with water security needs. The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) illustrates this dilemma: it promises substantial energy benefits for Ethiopia but raises downstream water scarcity concerns, particularly in Egypt. This study examines GERD-related research to understand how academic perspectives may influence regional tensions or foster collaboration. Through systematic analysis of 79 articles published between 2011 and 2023, we utilized quantitative sentiment analysis to explore potential biases linked to researcher nationality, methodology, and co-authorship diversity. Findings reveal a statistically significant nationalistic bias, with Egyptian and Ethiopian researchers showing negative and positive sentiments, respectively, suggesting research can inadvertently shape polarized public and political stances on GERD. Importantly, studies with diverse co-authorship displayed reduced bias, underscoring the value of multi-national collaboration in mitigating partiality. Contrary to expectations, qualitative methods did not necessarily correlate with extreme positions, while quantitative methods appeared vulnerable to unintended bias. These insights highlight the need for critically assessing academic objectivity in transboundary resource issues, advocating for interdisciplinary and collaborative research to build mutual trust, which could potentially inform and improve regional diplomatic efforts.