MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402818222 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ad7744

Toward integrated dam assessment: evaluating multi-dimensional impacts of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on Sudan

2024· article· en· W4402818222 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Basheer, Khalid Siddig, Zuhal Elnour, Mosab O. M. Ahmed, Claudia Ringler

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersSociety for the Study of School PsychologyInternational Fine Particle Research InstituteUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsThe RenaissanceGrand ChallengesWater resource managementGeographyEnvironmental scienceHistoryPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) on the Nile is expected to influence many ecosystem services, such as flood regulation, hydro-electricity production, food supply, and habitat provision, among others. Understanding these impacts (positive and negative) requires a comprehensive evaluation framework. This study develops and applies an integrated simulation framework for assessing the impacts of the GERD on Sudan, focusing on the simultaneous economywide effects of riverine flood hazards, irrigation water supply, hydropower generation, and floodplain-dependent industries, namely traditional fired clay brick production. The simulation framework incorporates three models: a river infrastructure system model, a flood model, and a Computable General Equilibrium Model. Results indicate positive impacts for hydropower generation and flood control, marginal benefits for water supply to existing irrigation, and negative consequences for brick production and the construction sector. Assuming that the GERD starts its long-term operation in 2025, we find an overall positive economic impact on Sudan’s Gross Domestic Product in 2025, with an increase of up to just over 0.1%, subject to river flow conditions. Recognizing the differences in impacts across sectors and income groups, the study emphasizes the need for interventions that ameliorate negative effects. While the study captures several impacts, other effects on the environment, recession agriculture, and soil fertility require further investigation. Still, our findings underscore the importance of adopting an integrated simulation approach to dam evaluation, acknowledging the interconnected nature of water and related sectors in national economies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207