Live

Water under pressure

Europe’s water systems are under immense strain. Despite a series of legal frameworks, including the Urban Wastewater Directive (91/271/EEC), the Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC), the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC), nitrogen pollution remains a continent-wide problem.

Artificial fertilizers, manure, wastewater, and fossil fuel emissions have pushed roughly one-third of rivers, lakes, and coastal waters, along with 81% of EU marine waters, into a state of eutrophication. The consequences are visible: algal blooms, dead zones devoid of life, declining biodiversity, and ecosystem degradation. Pollution also increases the risk of water shortages, making it unsafe for humans and wildlife.

Wetlands – nature’s hidden ally

Natural wetlands act as biological filters. They capture and break down excess nutrients, including nitrogen, preventing them from reaching rivers and seas. Across Europe — from Norway to Serbia — existing wetlands currently remove about 25% of annual nitrogen input.

However, history tells a different story. Since the Industrial Revolution, Europe has lost nearly three-quarters of its wetlands —  around 78.4 million hectares, more than twice the size of Germany. In countries like Lithuania, Italy, and Finland, the loss exceeds 75%.

Restoration – ambitious plan or ecological dream?

Research published in Nature Water suggests that restoring part of these lost wetlands could dramatically improve water quality. An ambitious scenario, restoring a quarter of drained land (about 3% of Europe’s land area), could reduce nitrogen loads by up to 36% — but at the cost of a significant drop in agricultural production.

A more balanced approach targets areas already likely to be abandoned by 2040. Restoring around 15% of historic wetlands could cut nitrogen pollution by roughly 20% — a smaller, yet more achievable effect with minimal impact on farming. This strategy seems politically more feasible, considering the tensions surrounding the Common Agricultural Policy and food producers’ lobbying.

Geography matters

The benefits of wetland restoration aren’t equal across Europe. The most promising areas combine high nitrogen surplus with significant historic wetland loss. The Rhine basin, for example, has far greater restoration potential than the Rhône basin.

Other promising areas include the Elbe, Vistula, and Oder river basins. Restoration efforts should therefore be precise, focusing on locations where they deliver the greatest ecological and economic impact.

The economics of restoration – cost or investment?

Restoring wetlands requires substantial investment. Estimates range from €17 billion to €358 billion per year, depending on the scenario. While these figures seem high, they should be weighed against the costs of inaction — nitrogen pollution damages are estimated at €70 – 320 billion annually.

Including additional ecosystem services makes the case even stronger. Wetlands not only purify water but also sequester carbon, mitigate floods, stabilize groundwater, protect coastlines, and support biodiversity. From an economic perspective, wetlands are an asset, not a cost.

Political and social challenges

The European Water Resilience Strategy, adopted in June 2025, identifies wetland restoration as a key tool to tackle water and nitrogen crises. But implementation requires coordination with other policies, particularly the European Green Deal, the Natural Resource Restoration regulation (NRR), and Common Agricultural Policy instruments.

Tensions remain between environmental protection and farmers’ interests. Will payment-for-ecosystem-services schemes, like compensation for creating habitats on fallow land, provide enough incentive? Are the Member States willing to bear the political costs of reducing agricultural output in favor of wetland restoration?

A survival strategy or a starting point?

Research is clear: protecting existing wetlands is essential, and restoring them offers a real chance to reduce nitrogen pollution. But between theory and practice lies a landscape of economic, political, and social tensions. Wetland restoration can be an investment in the future of Europe’s ecosystems and communities — but without strong political will and compromises with the farming sector, it risks stalling.

Written by

Shape the conversation

Do you have anything to add to this story? Any ideas for interviews or angles we should explore? Let us know if you’d like to write a follow-up, a counterpoint, or share a similar story.

Write a counterargument article Write a related article