The Nature Restoration Regulation and the Water Framework Directive: enhancing restoration of freshwater ecosystems, or muddying the waters?

The Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC (WFD) and the Nature Restoration Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 (NRR) both require MemberStates to restore freshwater ecosystems. This study analyzes how these two instruments interact, identifying both synergies and conflicts. Itexamines the overlap between the objectives of the two instruments; the potential tensions between the targets of “good ecological status”under the WFD and “good condition” in the NRR, as well as inconsistencies between their non-deterioration obligations; the possible inte-gration of existing river basin governance with new NRR requirements; the enforcement mechanisms under the WFD and their applicabilityto the NRR; and the coherence of freshwater restoration with other policy domains, especially agriculture. Findings suggest that the NRR’smore flexible, broad-scale approach to restoration could help overcome several regulatory and practical weaknesses that have limited theWFD’s effectiveness, but only if Member States and the Commission address the regulatory mismatch between the two regimes. The WFD’sclear non-deterioration obligations and established enforcement mechanisms could reinforce Member States’ duties under the NRR. None-theless, the new regime could exacerbate implementation problems stemming from limited policy coordination, as the NRR neither requirescoordination among the multiple authorities involved in restoration projects, nor establishes a framework for conflict resolution. In short, theNRR ignores the experience of WFD that effectiveness depends not only on ambition, but also on governance design. This gap could signif-icantly hinder the achievement of the NRR’s objectives, including its goal of restoring 25,000 km of free-flowing rivers across the EU.