November/2025

Nile River Water Conflict: Scarcity, Dams, and Regional Power Struggles.

The Nile River, stretching over 6,650 kilometers, is the longest river in the world and the lifeline of northeastern Africa. Its waters sustain more than 300 million people across 11 nations, providing drinking water, agricultural irrigation, hydropower, and economic opportunities. Yet, the Nile is also the center of one of the most complex and sensitive water disputes on earth. The struggle for control and fair use of the Nile’s water — particularly between Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan — reflects deep-rooted political tensions, historical claims, and regional power dynamics.

At the core of this tension lies the fact that the water system is not balanced. Upstream countries like Ethiopia contribute most of the water flow — especially through the Blue Nile — yet historically had little control over how the river’s water was used. On the other hand, Egypt and Sudan, located downstream, relied heavily on outdated but powerful colonial-era agreements that gave them the bulk of the Nile’s water. These treaties did not include upstream states, creating long-lasting disagreement over water ownership and rights.

In recent years, the competition over the Nile has intensified as population growth, climate change, and rapid development place increasing pressure on limited water resources. Ethiopia’s construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) — Africa’s largest hydropower project — has become a symbol of national pride but also a major geopolitical flashpoint. Egypt fears reduced water flow could threaten agriculture and life itself, while Ethiopia argues for its right to harness its resources for development. Sudan holds a strategic middle position, benefiting from regulated flows yet worried about potential water management risks.

The Nile conflict is not merely about water — it is about sovereignty, economic security, energy independence, historical identity, and regional stability. This multi-layered dispute is shaping alliances, influencing foreign policy, and determining the future development of the region. Understanding the roots, dynamics, and future of the Nile River water conflict is therefore crucial for predicting regional peace, sustainable water management, and development in East Africa.

Nile Basin Population Growth (Millions)

Purpose: Shows rising population pressure → more water demand → greater conflict risk

The Nile River, stretching more than 6,600 kilometers across eleven countries, is the lifeline of Northeast Africa and the world’s longest river. For thousands of years, it has sustained civilizations, supported agriculture, and shaped the economic and social fabric of the region. Today, it remains one of the most strategic and politically sensitive water systems on Earth. However, rapid population growth, climate change, and competing national interests have intensified the contest for control over its waters, creating one of the most critical water disputes of the 21st century.

Egypt, which relies on the Nile for over 95% of its water, historically held dominant rights to its flow through colonial-era agreements. Sudan, positioned between upstream and downstream nations, seeks to balance its water needs with its political relations. Ethiopia, meanwhile, contributes nearly 85% of the river’s water through the Blue Nile and has emerged as a major player with the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). This massive hydroelectric project symbolizes Ethiopia’s economic ambitions but has triggered alarm in Egypt and Sudan due to potential impacts on downstream water availability.

The Nile River water conflict is not only a dispute about a river; it represents issues of sovereignty, development, and regional power alignment. The struggle highlights the challenges of transboundary water governance in an era of water scarcity and climate stress. As the populations of Nile Basin states rise and rainfall patterns shift, cooperation becomes essential—yet mistrust, national pride, and geopolitical maneuvering continue to complicate negotiations. Understanding the complexities of this conflict requires examining historical treaties, hydropolitics, developmental needs, and environmental realities that shape the future of this shared river basin.

Water Contribution & Dependency

Historical Background & Colonial Water Treaties

The Nile River conflict cannot be understood without examining its historical roots, especially the colonial-era agreements that shaped current political tensions. For centuries, Egypt was the dominant power in the Nile Basin, relying heavily on the river for agriculture and settlement. When Britain colonized much of the basin in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it prioritized the interests of Egypt, which was crucial for cotton production and imperial strategy. As a result, treaties favored Egypt and largely ignored upstream nations like Ethiopia, Uganda, and Kenya.

One of the earliest significant agreements was the 1929 Nile Waters Treaty, signed between Egypt and Britain on behalf of its East African colonies. This treaty granted Egypt veto power over upstream projects that could threaten its water supply and allocated the majority of the Nile’s flow to Egypt. Sudan received only a limited share, despite being a key riparian state. The agreement completely excluded Ethiopia, which supplies most of the water through the Blue Nile.

After Sudan gained independence, a new treaty—the 1959 agreement between Egypt and Sudan—further strengthened their control. Egypt received 55.5 billion cubic meters (BCM) of Nile water annually, while Sudan received 18.5 BCM. This treaty again ignored upstream states and reinforced Egypt’s claim to historical water rights. Ethiopia rejected these agreements from the start, viewing them as illegitimate and imposed by colonial powers.

The end of colonial rule led to increasing disputes. African nations asserted sovereignty over their natural resources, emphasizing equitable water sharing based on international water laws. Ethiopia especially grew more assertive, culminating in the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) project launched in 2011—seen as a strategic move to reclaim control over the Blue Nile waters.

Modern international frameworks, such as the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention and the 2010 Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) signed by upstream states, promote fair and reasonable utilization. However, Egypt and Sudan have been reluctant to abandon historical treaty advantages. This legal conflict—between “historic rights” and “equitable utilization”—remains at the core of Nile tensions.

Thus, colonial-era agreements left a complicated diplomatic legacy. The unequal water distribution created mistrust, shaped modern national identities, and established geopolitical rivalries that persist today. As new actors emerge and climate pressures grow, revisiting this historical framework is essential for long-term cooperation and stability in the Nile Basin.

Modern Drivers of the Nile Conflict

The modern Nile River dispute is shaped by a combination of demographic pressure, economic ambition, climate risks, and competing energy needs among basin states. While historical treaties set the foundation for mistrust, contemporary realities have intensified competition for this critical water resource more than ever before.

One of the most dominant drivers is population growth. The combined population of Nile Basin countries exceeds 300 million and is expected to reach nearly 600 million by 2050. Egypt’s population alone is growing rapidly, currently surpassing 110 million people, with limited freshwater sources beyond the Nile. Ethiopia is also experiencing a demographic boom, with more than 120 million citizens and a strong demand for development. This steady population rise has increased water consumption and intensified the urgency for sustainable water policies.

Economic development plays another central role. Ethiopia’s ambition to industrialize and expand its agricultural sector led to the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD)—Africa’s largest hydropower project. For Ethiopia, GERD symbolizes economic independence and energy security, promising electricity for millions and revenue from power exports. Conversely, Egypt perceives the dam as a potential threat to its historical water supply, raising concerns about reduced flow during GERD’s filling and long-term operation phases. Sudan stands in the middle, anticipating benefits such as flood control and electricity from GERD but also fearing sudden water regulation risks.

Climate change further magnifies tensions. Changes in rainfall patterns, prolonged droughts, and rising temperatures threaten water security in the region. The East African drought cycles have worsened in recent years, reducing rainfall over the Ethiopian Highlands—the primary source of Nile waters. Meanwhile, Egypt faces sea-level rise affecting the Nile Delta, risking agricultural losses and freshwater contamination from the Mediterranean. These climate-related stresses make water management a security priority for all river basin states.

Finally, food and energy security drive competition. Egypt relies heavily on irrigation for agriculture, while Sudan aims to expand its vast arable land. Ethiopia seeks to transition into a regional power hub powered by hydropower. These conflicting development priorities complicate negotiations and make compromise difficult.

In summary, modern drivers of the Nile conflict include rapid population growth, competing economic agendas, energy demands, agricultural expansion, and the escalating impacts of climate change. Without cooperative management, these pressures threaten to deepen mistrust and escalate tensions in a region where water scarcity poses serious social, economic, and political risks. The future of the Nile hinges on building trust, equitable sharing mechanisms, and scientific water-management solutions that support development for all basin nations.

The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD)

The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) has become the centerpiece of the modern Nile River dispute and a symbol of national pride for Ethiopia. Located on the Blue Nile near the Sudan border, GERD is Africa’s largest hydropower project, designed to generate more than 5,000 MW of electricity—enough to power millions of homes and transform Ethiopia into a regional energy exporter. For Ethiopia, the dam is not merely an infrastructure project; it represents economic liberation, industrial development, and sovereignty over its natural resources.

Ethiopia argues that GERD is essential for its development journey. The country faces widespread energy shortages, with nearly half of its population historically lacking reliable electricity. GERD promises to expand industrial zones, support modern agriculture, and attract foreign investment. Additionally, surplus energy is expected to be exported to neighboring countries, strengthening Ethiopia’s geopolitical influence. Ethiopian leaders emphasize that unlike irrigation dams, GERD is primarily for hydropower, meaning the water will eventually flow downstream, not be consumed.

However, Egypt sees GERD through a very different lens. With over 95% of its fresh water sourced from the Nile, Egypt fears that GERD could reduce water availability, especially during periods of drought or during the dam’s filling stages. Egyptian authorities highlight the country’s vulnerability as a desert nation dependent on the river for agriculture, drinking water, and industry. They argue that unilateral decisions on Nile management threaten their national security, calling for legally binding agreements on drought management and reservoir filling schedules. Egypt also cites historical treaties granting it priority access to Nile waters—a position Ethiopia rejects as colonial-era injustice.

Sudan’s stance is more complex. Initially supportive due to expected benefits such as flood control, sediment reduction, and cheaper electricity, Sudan later expressed concerns over dam safety and potential disruptions to its own dams and irrigation systems. The absence of real-time water coordination raises fears of sudden water surges or shortages affecting Sudanese infrastructure.

International actors, including the African Union, United States, and United Nations, have attempted to mediate without achieving a lasting agreement. While Ethiopia insists on African-led negotiations and rejects external pressure, Egypt seeks global diplomatic support. The dispute risks escalating into political or military confrontation if unmanaged, though all parties publicly express preference for peaceful resolution.

In essence, GERD reflects the intersection of development aspirations and hydropolitical fears. It symbolizes Ethiopia’s rise and ambition but also Egypt’s anxiety and dependence. The dam has changed the regional power balance, making cooperation and trust-building essential to avoid destabilizing a region already challenged by climate stress and population growth.

Climate Change, Drought, and Water Scarcity in the Nile Basin

Climate change is emerging as one of the greatest threats to water security in the Nile Basin. While political disputes and dams often dominate discussion, long-term climatic trends pose an even deeper risk to the stability of water supplies. The Nile Basin region is already one of the most climate-sensitive areas in the world, and rising temperatures, unpredictable rainfall, and prolonged droughts are intensifying pressures on the river.

The Ethiopian Highlands—source of most Nile water—are experiencing changing rainfall patterns. Historically, this region received heavy seasonal rainfall feeding the Blue Nile, but climate models predict increasing variability. Some years bring intense floods due to heavy rains, while others bring extreme drought conditions. This inconsistency threatens Ethiopia’s hydro-dependent system and makes GERD’s reservoir crucial for energy stability. However, it also raises concerns among downstream countries about water flow reliability during dry years.

Egypt faces an even more serious climate challenge. As a desert nation almost entirely reliant on the Nile, it is highly vulnerable to temperature rises and declining water availability. Climate projections suggest Egypt may lose up to 15% of its Nile water share by mid-century due to evaporation and reduced flows. Meanwhile, sea-level rise threatens the Nile Delta, one of Africa’s most fertile agricultural zones. Saltwater intrusion is slowly degrading farmland and contaminating groundwater, reducing agricultural productivity and endangering food security.

Sudan, positioned between Ethiopia and Egypt, also experiences climate extremes. Increased heat and irregular rainfall are causing soil degradation and desertification in many areas. At the same time, Sudan occasionally experiences seasonal flooding—particularly in the past decade—highlighting the complexity of climate stress. Better water regulation from dams like GERD could help Sudan manage extreme seasonal flows, but only if coordinated properly with downstream countries.

Climate change also fuels social and political instability. Water shortages contribute to internal displacement, crop failures, and food price spikes. Past droughts in Ethiopia and Sudan have triggered humanitarian crises, and scarcity in the region increases risks of migration and conflict. For Egypt, reduced Nile flows threaten national security and economic stability, magnifying geopolitical tensions over water control.

While climate change is a shared challenge, cooperation remains limited. Experts emphasize the need for joint river-flow monitoring, drought-management plans, and investment in climate-resilient agriculture. A basin-wide adaptation strategy could transform shared risk into shared opportunity. Yet mistrust and competing national interests slow progress.

In conclusion, climate change is not a future threat—it is already reshaping the Nile Basin. The river’s long-term sustainability depends not only on technical negotiations about dams but also on collective climate resilience strategies. Without joint planning, climate-driven water scarcity may deepen existing disputes and undermine regional stability.

Political Negotiations, Diplomacy, and International Mediation

Efforts to resolve the Nile River conflict have been ongoing for decades, involving regional diplomacy, international mediation, and technical negotiations. Despite many dialogue rounds, no comprehensive water-sharing agreement has been achieved, reflecting deep mistrust and competing national interests between Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan.

Negotiations intensified after Ethiopia launched the GERD project in 2011. Egypt initially viewed the dam as a unilateral action that threatened its vital water supply. Ethiopia, however, insisted that GERD was a sovereign development right and emphasized that it would not significantly reduce downstream water availability. Sudan, positioned between the two, has shifted its stance multiple times—balancing potential benefits from hydropower and flood control with fears of water regulation disruptions.

Throughout the years, several diplomatic forums attempted to broker agreements. The African Union (AU) led multiple negotiation rounds, promoting African-based solutions and regional ownership. Meanwhile, the United States, the European Union, and the United Nations offered mediation roles at different times. In 2020, the U.S. facilitated talks in Washington and nearly reached a draft agreement, but Ethiopia withdrew, arguing the process was politically pressured and biased in favor of Egypt.

A key contention in negotiations has been whether the agreement should be legally binding. Egypt insists on a binding treaty that guarantees minimum annual water flows and outlines drought-management rules. Ethiopia favors flexible, non-binding guidelines that preserve its right to future upstream development. Sudan demands real-time water-release coordination to protect its dams and agricultural schemes.

Beyond water concerns, regional geopolitics influence the negotiation landscape. The conflict has shaped alliances, with some Gulf and African states expressing support for one side or another. Ethiopia has attempted to strengthen regional ties through energy cooperation programs, offering electricity exports to its neighbors. Egypt has engaged African Union states, European partners, and the Arab League to rally diplomatic support. Sudan remains cautious, seeking stability but wary of becoming overly aligned with either side.

International actors emphasize peaceful resolution and the avoidance of escalatory measures. Although military rhetoric has occasionally surfaced, all states publicly acknowledge that war over the Nile would be catastrophic. Mediation efforts now increasingly encourage technical solutions, such as joint data-sharing, drought coordination, and basin-wide planning frameworks. The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI), though not universally accepted, remains the closest institution for cooperative water governance across the region.

Ultimately, successful diplomacy requires trust-building, transparency, and recognition that long-term peace depends on shared benefits rather than zero-sum competition. The Nile can become a source of regional integration instead of rivalry—if countries move beyond political posturing toward scientific cooperation and equitable water management frameworks.

Economic and Social Impacts on Basin Countries

The Nile River plays an irreplaceable role in the economic and social fabric of Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia. As water scarcity rises and political tensions persist, the consequences extend far beyond hydropolitics, affecting agriculture, energy, public welfare, and regional stability.

For Egypt, the Nile is the foundation of national survival. Nearly 95% of Egyptians live along the river, and agriculture consumes most of its water supply. Key crops such as wheat, rice, and cotton rely on Nile irrigation, and any reduction in river flow could trigger food shortages and economic strain. Rising water stress already forces Egypt to expand costly desalination projects and import more food, burdening the economy. Socially, water insecurity contributes to unemployment in rural areas and growing public concern about national sovereignty. The Nile is embedded in Egyptian identity—any perceived threat sparks strong public emotions and political pressure on policymakers.

Sudan experiences mixed economic and social impacts. Access to the Nile enables irrigation in fertile regions like Gezira, supporting one of Africa’s largest agricultural schemes. Better water regulation from GERD could help Sudan expand agriculture, generate cheap electricity, and reduce flooding. However, uncoordinated water releases could threaten Sudanese dams, disrupt irrigation, and damage crops. In rural communities, water shortages or floods influence migration patterns and community livelihoods. Social cohesion is also affected when water shortages intensify tribal tensions in drought-prone areas.

For Ethiopia, the Nile and GERD represent pathways to economic transformation. GERD promises electricity generation that can power industries, reduce energy poverty, and enable regional energy exports. More than 50 million Ethiopians have historically lacked stable electricity, making hydropower vital for development. Increased water storage could also stabilize farming systems affected by irregular rainfall. However, upstream irrigation expansion could create future tensions if water use rises significantly. Socially, GERD has generated national pride, but displacement during construction and local environmental concerns have affected nearby communities.

In all basin countries, communities dependent on agriculture are most vulnerable. Farmers face unpredictable water availability, climate stress, and policy uncertainty. Rising food prices and unemployment risks can fuel social unrest, especially among youth populations. At the same time, the Nile dispute influences urban economies: energy shortages in Ethiopia and Sudan hinder industrial growth, while Egypt’s crowded cities face growing pressure on infrastructure and public services.

Ultimately, the Nile can either deepen disparities or create shared prosperity. Regional power trade, agricultural cooperation, and integrated river-management systems could produce significant economic gains for all states. However, continued mistrust risks transforming water scarcity into humanitarian and political crises. Ensuring fair water use and collaborative development strategies will be essential to support millions of livelihoods across the Nile Basin.

Military Risks, Security Concerns, and Conflict Scenarios

Although the Nile River conflict has largely remained diplomatic, the risk of military escalation has always been present. Water scarcity is increasingly viewed as a national security issue, and the Nile dispute illustrates how vital natural resources can influence defense strategies and geopolitical alignments.

For Egypt, the Nile is a red line. Egyptian leaders have repeatedly stated that any severe disruption to the river’s flow threatens the country’s existence. Military officials in Egypt have at times suggested that force could be used if diplomacy fails. The country has invested in modernizing its military capabilities, especially air and naval power, partially as a deterrent against any water-related threats. Egypt’s historical military strength, combined with its reliance on the Nile for nearly all freshwater, makes the issue uniquely sensitive.

Ethiopia, however, insists that GERD is a peaceful development project and has repeatedly rejected threats. The dam is heavily protected, and Ethiopia has strengthened regional alliances and defense systems around it. Ethiopia’s leadership views GERD as a symbol of sovereignty and resilience—deeply tied to national pride. Any foreign strike on the dam would likely trigger regional instability and retaliation.

Sudan sits in a vulnerable middle position. A military confrontation would place Sudan at immediate risk due to its geographic location between Egypt and Ethiopia. Sudan fears humanitarian and infrastructure disasters, especially since any attack on the dam could cause catastrophic flooding downstream. As a result, Sudan advocates a diplomatic balance, seeking cooperation rather than confrontation.

Beyond direct military action, hybrid conflict scenarios also exist. These may include cyberattacks on water-control systems, sabotage of infrastructure, pressure through regional alliances, or proxy political influence campaigns. In today’s interconnected world, cyber warfare targeting dam systems or water monitoring infrastructure could destabilize water management without open conflict.

International actors play a critical role in discouraging escalation. The African Union, United Nations, and United States have consistently urged peaceful negotiation. Global powers view the Nile as strategically significant—not only for regional stability but also for global trade routes, energy markets, and humanitarian security. A war over the Nile would generate refugee flows, disrupt trade in the Red Sea region, and threaten African economic integration efforts.

Despite strong rhetoric, a full-scale war remains unlikely, primarily due to the devastating consequences for all parties and international pressure against escalation. However, unresolved tensions could spark localized clashes, covert operations, or political destabilization. To avoid such risks, long-term strategies must include transparent data-sharing, joint security agreements, and mechanisms for crisis communication.

In conclusion, while military confrontation over the Nile remains a worst-case scenario, the ongoing dispute emphasizes that water security is now a strategic defense priority. The safest path forward requires sustained diplomacy, trust-building, and cooperative regional planning to ensure the river becomes a source of peace—not conflict.

Cooperative Solutions & Future Pathways

Although the Nile River conflict is often framed as a zero-sum struggle, cooperation offers a far more prosperous and peaceful future for all basin countries. A shared-benefit approach—rather than a water-sharing battle—can transform the Nile into a foundation for regional development, food security, and energy integration.

1. Shared Water-Management Systems

The first step toward long-term stability is establishing a joint river-management mechanism, where Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia coordinate water release schedules, monitor river flow, and manage drought periods transparently. Such technical cooperation reduces mistrust and ensures all states receive water when needed most. Real-time data sharing, satellite monitoring, and joint hydrological centers could strengthen trust and scientific collaboration.

2. Regional Energy Cooperation

Ethiopia’s GERD can generate over 5,000 MW of electricity—much more than Ethiopia alone needs. A regional power-sharing agreement where Ethiopia exports clean hydropower to Egypt and Sudan would create mutual dependence instead of rivalry. Egypt and Sudan would receive cheap renewable energy, while Ethiopia would gain stable revenue, reducing political friction and fostering long-term cooperation.

3. Agricultural Innovation and Water Efficiency

Egypt and Sudan expend large volumes of water through traditional flood irrigation. Transitioning to modern irrigation systems such as drip and sprinkler methods can save billions of cubic meters annually. Shared agricultural research centers, technology transfer programs, and farmer-training initiatives could help adapt crops to climate stress and maximize productivity while using less water.

4. Basin-Wide Climate Adaptation Strategy

All Nile countries face climate risks—droughts in Ethiopia and Sudan, sea intrusion and evaporation losses in Egypt. A Nile Basin Climate Task Force could coordinate:

● drought-mitigation plans
● early-warning systems
● joint storage and flood protection strategies
● reforestation and soil-conservation campaigns

This would improve resilience and reduce vulnerability to extreme climate shifts.

5. Diplomacy and Conflict-Prevention Framework

Permanent diplomatic forums are essential for dialogue. A Nile Peace & Development Council with AU, UN, and international observers could ensure disputes do not escalate. Regular summits, technical committees, and crisis-communication channels would reduce the risk of miscalculation or military escalation.

6. Fair Water-Utilization Principles

A long-term treaty based on equitable and reasonable use—not historic dominance or unilateral action—can protect the rights of both upstream and downstream states. Incentives such as financial investment, infrastructure partnerships, and water-saving programs could encourage all sides to commit to shared development.

The Nile basin stands at a crossroads. The river can either become a source of regional rivalry or a symbol of African unity. Cooperation offers a future where:

● Ethiopia grows economically and exports energy
● Sudan stabilizes water systems and expands agriculture
● Egypt protects its water security while modernizing irrigation

Mutual benefit is not an idealistic dream—it is the only sustainable solution.



The Nile River conflict reflects a profound intersection of history, geography, and national ambition. For centuries, the Nile served as a source of life and power in northeast Africa, shaping civilizations and defining national identities. Today, as water demand rises, populations expand, and climate change accelerates, the river has become a battleground of competing development strategies and sovereignty claims.

Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia each face unique pressures. Egypt views the Nile as its lifeline, critical for water security, agriculture, and national stability. Ethiopia sees Nile development, especially GERD, as a path to economic transformation, energy independence, and regional influence. Sudan stands between both, balancing opportunities for irrigation expansion and energy gains with fears of water shocks and dam safety. These realities make the river not just a shared resource but a shared vulnerability.

Despite tensions, the trajectory of the region does not have to be conflict-driven. Cooperative water governance, data transparency, joint energy markets, climate-adaptation policies, and modern agricultural strategies can turn scarcity into shared prosperity. The key lies in recognizing that unilateral control over a transboundary river is unsustainable. Lasting peace will depend on transforming the river into a platform for integration rather than rivalry.

The future of the Nile will be determined not only by treaties or dams, but by trust, diplomacy, and shared benefit systems. A cooperative Nile Basin can generate energy for millions, feed vast agricultural lands, and strengthen climate resilience across Africa. In contrast, a fractured Nile risks instability, humanitarian crises, and halted development. Ultimately, the Nile’s greatest power is not in its waters alone, but in its ability to connect nations. If managed wisely, it can become a source of unity—a river that sustains not only life, but also peace and progress for generations to come.

References

Abtew, W., & Dessu, S. B. (2019). The Nile River Basin: Water, Agriculture, Governance and Livelihoods. Routledge.
Arsano, Y. (2007). Ethiopia and the Nile: Dilemmas of national and regional hydro-politics. Center for Security Studies.
Cascão, A. E., & Nicol, A. (2016). GERD: New norms of cooperation in the Nile Basin? In A. Earle, D. M. Jägerskog, & J. Öjendal (Eds.), Transboundary Water Management and the Climate Change Debate (pp. 99–113). Earthscan.
El-Fadel, M., El-Sayegh, Y., El-Fadl, K., & Khorbotly, D. (2013). The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam: Benefits, costs, and implications for cooperation in the Nile Basin. Water Resources Development, 29(4), 573–587.
Enyew, F. B., Sahlu, D., Tarekegn, G. B., Hama, S., & Debele, S. E. (2024). Performance evaluation of CMIP6 climate model projections for precipitation and temperature in the Upper Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia. Climate, 12(11), 169.
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2021). Nile River Basin Water Resources Statistical Report.
Gleick, P. H. (2020). The world’s water: The biennial report on freshwater resources. Island Press.
Nile Basin Initiative. (2021). State of the Nile Basin Report 2021. Nile Basin Initiative.
Nile Basin Initiative. (2023). Climate Change Approach Paper — Nile Basin Initiative.
Salman, S. M. A. (2016). The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and the Nile Basin: Implications for transboundary water cooperation. Water International, 41(4), 550–573.
Swain, A. (2011). Challenges for water sharing in the Nile Basin: Changing geo-politics and changing climate. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 56(4), 687–702.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2025). Nile Basin Initiative partners strive to better monitor pollution in rivers.
United Nations (UN). (2023). Water cooperation and conflict in Africa — Nile Basin Insights. UN Water Report.
Wheeler, K. G., Hall, J. W., Abdo, G. M., Dadson, S., & Zagona, E. (2018). Exploring cooperative transboundary river management strategies for the Eastern Nile Basin. Water Resources Research, 54(11), 9224–9254.
Yihdego, Z., Rieu-Clarke, A., & Cascão, A. E. (2017). The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and the Nile Basin: Implications for transboundary water cooperation. Brill.