A reliable water supply, electricity when we need it and a home protected from flooding. These are the foundations of everyday life. When the infrastructure behind them fails, households bear the consequences.

As leaders gather for COP31, global progress on climate action means protecting those essential services must be central to the discussion. Investing in resilience is a national and economic security priority, and the decisions we make now will shape how well our homes, communities and essential services withstand disruption for decades to come.

Recent UK government advice urges households to ‘Be Ready’ and prepare for disruptions. It is a practical reminder of how much daily life depends on infrastructure we rarely notice until it stops working. Following the UK’s hottest summer on record, and with El Niño expected to strengthen into a very strong event, the need to prepare is clear.

The costs are already substantial. In the UK, we are particularly susceptible to flooding, and this year proved that we are not immune to heatwaves and drought. Flooding costs the UK an estimated £2.3 billion annually,¹ while the five heatwaves between May and July 2026 were estimated to have caused more than £4.4 billion in lost productivity.² For households, the consequences can include damage to their homes and disruption to work and daily life. Investing in resilience can reduce that disruption, protect essential services and support Britain’s long-term prosperity.

Flooding costs the UK an estimated £2.3 billion annually, while the five heatwaves between May and July 2026 were estimated to have caused more than £4.4 billion in lost productivity

For Lloyds Banking Group, serving households and businesses across Britain, this connects the infrastructure we help finance with the services our customers rely on. Progress will depend on filling the £11 billion annual gap in UK adaptation investment identified by the UK Climate Change Committee, with the government, infrastructure owners and financial institutions each having a role in turning that shared interest into practical investment.

The Haweswater Aqueduct Resilience Programme illustrates how long-term finance can support that goal, with replacement infrastructure designed to last for over 100 years.

The approximately £3 billion program is replacing six tunnel sections of an aqueduct that supplies drinking water to around 2.5 million people across Cumbria, Lancashire and Greater Manchester. A £300 million National Wealth Fund credit-enhancement facility, backed by a HM Treasury guarantee, helped reduce financing risk and attract private investment. Scottish Widows is supporting the program as a senior lender, with Lloyds providing banking services. Most importantly, households will benefit from a continued, reliable water supply for generations to come.

Public support and private finance can work together to fund essential infrastructure, with clear responsibilities for delivery and benefits for the communities it serves. Investment elsewhere should start with where disruption is most likely, how businesses can prepare and what protection suits local needs. The priority is fewer interruptions to daily life and the essential services communities rely on.

Insurance has an important role in making resilience investment work for households as well as businesses. Insurers’ understanding of physical climate risks can help owners, lenders and investors assess where protection is needed and the value of reducing exposure. Working with the government, the industry can explore how investment in prevention and longer-term approaches to risk can help sustain access to cover. The aim should be to reduce both the damage people experience and the financial strain that follows rather than relying on insurance alone after an event.

Businesses need to adopt commercially pragmatic mindsets that answer honestly how their assets and operations are designed for climate conditions that are already disrupting how we live and operate. Those answers carry real financial consequences: insurance costs and availability, access to capital, asset valuations, financing terms, and long-term competitiveness. Preparedness is the difference between an organization’s short-term viability and long-term prosperity.

Better data can help lenders, investors and insurers understand where infrastructure is exposed and assess the value of measures to protect it. Climate risk varies from place to place, so investment decisions need to reflect local conditions. The task is to make that understanding a routine part of financing, valuation and insurance decisions by directing investment toward the resilience needs of communities instead of waiting for disruption to reveal them.

Businesses need to adopt commercially pragmatic mindsets that answer honestly how their assets and operations are designed for climate conditions that are already disrupting how we live and operate

Finally, the public and private sectors must finance nature-based and engineered solutions together, because truly resilient infrastructure depends on both. Nature is one of our greatest assets: nature-based solutions such as wetland restoration can help protect communities from extreme weather, lower long-term costs, and generate wider economic, environmental and social value. When we look beyond individual megaprojects and take a holistic approach that includes the natural world, we can most effectively protect the critical functions of society, nature and economy alike.

The UK has deep expertize in finance and insurance. The challenge is to turn that expertize into more reliable services for households and more resilient places to live and work.

The government can provide clear frameworks that support long-term investment. Infrastructure owners should plan for future climate conditions. Lenders, investors and insurers should use their understanding of physical risks to inform where and how capital is deployed.

COP31 is an opportunity to focus attention on that task. The priority is investment that helps keep water running, power available and homes better protected from flooding. 

---

References

¹ https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/estimating-potential-economic-costs-of-flooding/estimating-potential-economic-costs-of-flooding#calculating-potential-economic-costs-aad-of-flooding

² Verdant (2006), The Cost of Heat Summer 2026 Heatwave: an economic update

BRUSSELS — The Netherlands and Spain on Friday submitted candidates to succeed Christine Lagarde, who steps down as president of the European Central Bank on Feb. 7.

Pablo Hernández de Cos, a former governor of Spain’s central bank, and the Netherlands’ Klaas Knot, a former president of the Dutch central bank, were the only candidates to emerge after the 5 p.m. deadline, as expected.

Their candidacies are part of a larger game of musical chairs that includes France and Germany, as Europe’s four economic powerhouses negotiate how to secure their seats on the ECB’s executive board.

The ECB is one of the most powerful institutions in Europe, responsible for setting interest rates to keep prices stable at 2% over the medium-term. The six-person executive board oversees the central bank’s day-to-day activities and an army of economists who scrutinize financial markets and the economy at large.

Berlin is determined to hold onto the seat that German economist Isabel Schnabel will vacate on Jan. 3, when she leaves the ECB for a job at the International Monetary Fund. Paris, meanwhile, is targeting the ECB’s chief economist role once the Irish incumbent Philip Lane concludes his eight-year term on May 31.

Eurozone finance ministers will take stock of the ECB shuffling at Monday’s Eurogroup meeting in Brussels. Neither Hernández de Cos nor Knot are scheduled to attend the closed-door meeting. But their national ministers will talk up their respective compatriots.

Diplomats expect EU leaders to engage in horse trading at an informal summit in Dublin at the end of next week. The deadline for candidates to replace Schnabel is on Nov. 27.

Ask a 22-year-old and a 70-year-old in the UK today whether they use digital tools to manage their money, and the answer is increasingly the same: yes. Ask them whether they feel confident doing so, and you get two very different answers.

Financial empowerment is the term we use to refer to the knowledge, skills, tools and opportunities that allow an individual to take control of their financial life and improve their financial wellbeing over time.

Britain increasingly banks, budgets and borrows online — a shift made possible at scale by advances in digital technology and the data and analytics behind it. But how confident people feel doing it is the real story of financial empowerment in Britain right now, and it offers valuable insight for policymakers and industry alike.

Different lives, shared financial ambitions

For a decade, Lloyds Banking Group’s Consumer Digital Index has tracked how people across the UK engage with digital technology and the confidence they have in doing so. Its analysis shows that more than 75 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds have used artificial intelligence (AI) for personal finance in the past year — the highest adoption of any generation. Yet they’re also the least confident using the tools they’ve adopted: just 64 percent of 18- to 24-year-old digital tool users feel confident using them, rising steadily to 85 percent among 65- to 74-year-olds.

Britain increasingly banks, budgets and borrows online — a shift made possible at scale by advances in digital technology and the data and analytics behind it.

Look across the UK and the picture shifts again. According to the index, London is the UK’s AI finance capital — 49 percent of digitally engaged respondents use it weekly, reporting the nation’s highest average savings of £562 after following AI-powered recommendations.^* Yet Londoners who use digital tools feel less confident doing so than anyone else in the country. Wales leads the UK on financial engagement and knowledge — how actively people manage their finances and how well they understand them — with the highest proportion nationally of those surveyed saying digital tools have helped them grow their pensions and investments. Yorkshire and the Humber leads on digital budgeting, and Northern Ireland shows some of the lowest adoption alongside some of the strongest outcomes among those who do engage.^** How people use digital tools to manage their money across the UK is as varied as the lives, places and ambitions behind it.

These insights insist that financial empowerment should be a national priority. While people across different generations and in different places are engaging with digital money tools differently, the ambition is the same — to have confidence, capability and control over their financial future.

It can’t be enabled in the same ways to everyone. A 20-year-old in Croydon, a 45-year-old in Leeds juggling debt and family costs, and a 70-year-old in Cardiff drawing down a pension will need different things to feel confident in managing their money online.

While people across different generations and in different places are engaging with digital money tools differently, the ambition is the same — to have confidence, capability and control over their financial future.

But strip away the age and the postcode, and what people want is remarkably consistent: the confidence to decide, the capability to act, and the control to plan ahead without being derailed by the next bill.

That’s the common connection between a Gen Z Londoner testing an AI budgeting tool and a Boomer in Edinburgh checking her pension pot on an app before bed.

Financial access is only the starting point

The UK has made big steps toward building digital access — nearly nine in ten digital tool users across the UK (88 percent) now manage their money online weekly. That’s a real achievement, but access was never the finish line and cannot be taken for granted.

A second goal is to turn that access into outcomes, in ways that reflect how differently people actually experience money. That means building financial education into schools and workplaces earlier and closing the trust gap around AI-generated advice for the younger users adopting it fastest. Places with the least developed financial habits should be given support designed for their circumstances, not advice scaled down from somewhere else.

As the UK’s largest digital bank, with around 22 million customers now managing their money through our apps, we have as much reason as anyone to get this right — and a role to play in doing it. Our ambition is to make finance simpler, smarter and more connected for every moment that matters, which is why we’re using AI, data and digital tools in practical, purposeful ways to help customers make better financial decisions and protect themselves from harm. By using our reach, technology and connectivity, we can help more people and businesses build stronger financial futures and realise their ambitions.

Financial empowerment is a national economic opportunity

The size of the prize is substantial. Independent research commissioned by Lloyds Banking Group and led by the University of Nottingham puts the value of turning digital access into financial confidence at up to £100 billion for the UK economy over the next decade — roughly £3,500 per household.

Our ambition is to make finance simpler, smarter and more connected for every moment that matters, which is why we’re using AI, data and digital tools in practical, purposeful ways.

Confidence changes what people do with their money. Instead of just getting through the week, they start to plan, adapt and invest in what comes next. Multiply that across millions of households, and the effect stops being personal and starts being national.

Digital access got the UK this far. Confidence, capability and control are what will get it the rest of the way — and building them should be a national priority.

---

Notes:

^*Savings figures are self-reported estimates and are not verified against transactional data. They should be interpreted as perceived impacts rather than guaranteed outcomes.

^**The Northern Ireland outcome findings are based on a small sample, n<100, and should be interpreted as indicative rather than statistically representative of the wider population.