Paul Davies and Will Lang, Met Office Chief Meteorologists, look forward to the next 25 years of operational meteorology.

The accuracy of weather forecasts has been one of the great scientific success stories of the last 70 years.  Investment and advances in meteorological science and in Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) has delivered models of greater complexity and higher resolution. Undoubtedly this investment should, and does, result in major socio-economic benefits.  

It would be wrong to rely on NWP improvements alone to generate year-on-year improvements in service quality, however, recognising that the definition of quality is very much in the eye of the end user. Many of the critical roles operational meteorology undertakes are dependent on the advice we give and in the interpretation of increasingly complex information for users.    

Although these improvements in accuracy generate major socio-economic benefits the commensurate increases in data volumes and complexity of information available present significant challenges to full exploitation.

For ‘business critical decisions’ the role of an operational meteorologist or someone acting in an expert advisory role is seen by end users as critical – and these roles are the ones for which we gain much recognition. Moreover, the working assumption a decade or so years ago was that the number of customers requiring operational meteorological advisory roles would diminish as automated services and machine to machine data exchange became more important. The reverse has been true with the introduction (or in some cases re-introduction) of forecast advisors and the increasingly important role of operational meteorology as a profession going forward to 2050.  

There’s never been a more important time to be part of our profession  

Today’s late-career operational meteorologists will have trained as forecasters in the late 20th century, in a world and in a profession probably unrecognisable to those learning their trade today.  For those who spent formative years in Weather Centres, briefing pigeon racers, local radio presenters and irate farmers in between making hourly observations and hand-drawing charts all seemed very important at the time. In retrospect however, operational meteorology then felt rather more parochial in nature – closer to a group of local customers but paradoxically remote from the decisions they may have been making.  

These days the stakes are undeniably higher, and weather advice feels much more closely tied to mission- or business-critical decisions and safety of life considerations, often on a national or global scale. We have a much better understanding of our customers and a much greater forecasting capability to apply to their needs. The weather is changing, and sensitivities to the weather are increasing, bringing ever greater responsibility on meteorologists. The profession will face challenges and will change again and again over the next 25 years, but for those who have chosen it due to its ability to make a positive difference, and who are also willing to change, this could be a golden age of operational meteorology.  

Be prepared for extreme weather

Climate change is quickly making our severe weather more frequent and more extreme. Our society, infrastructure and economic systems remain vulnerable. It is almost inconceivable that we won’t face some kind of game-changing extreme weather events in the UK over the next 25 years.  

Let’s consider what happened in Valencia in October 2024 and ask, ‘could this happen here’? We’ve seen occasional 200 mm+ convective events here in the UK over the years, and the statistics suggest their frequency is increasing. What if one of those happened across London, or South Wales, or Glasgow? No doubt the UK’s approach to risk assessment and disaster management will remain world-leading, as will our forecasting and warning capability. The event may be perfectly well-forecast and well-warned for, and emergency planning and response may well proceed precisely according to plan. But there will be catastrophic impacts anyway, including a significant loss of life.  Equally plausibly, a supercharged version of the 2022 heatwave might kill tens of thousands, melt our transport and power networks and cause whole communities to be destroyed through wildfires.  

As operational meteorologists, we need to be prepared for these kinds of events. This means tuning our systems and honing our skills to recognise the potential for extremes. It also means readying the organisations who employ us for the scrutiny they will inevitably face, rightly or wrongly, when they occur.   

We can’t always be right, but we need to preserve trust in us

It’s easy for the public and the media to criticise or joke about the perceived inaccuracy of weather forecasts. That’s partly a reflection of our national obsession with the weather.  People are naturally annoyed, even angry, when plans go awry due to the information we’ve provided.  This reveals a dependency on the weather and a general acceptance that there is value in weather forecasts to make everyday decisions – an acceptance that the forecasts are usually right.  For each of our users a ‘cost/loss’ equation comes into play, often unconsciously; ‘Do I trust forecasts enough to keep taking action, understanding that they might not always be correct?’ It’s this bond of trust between meteorologist and customer which is the fundamental need for forecast accuracy.  

Looking ahead to 2050 we can assume that forecasts will be significantly more accurate and that people will be more dependent on both the weather and weather forecasts. We always need to remain aware that the trust our users have in us is hard-earned and fragile. Forecasts will improve but they will still occasionally be wrong, and even only occasional forecast ‘busts’ will weigh much more than the frequent successes in the equation of trust.  Setting expectations for our performance, including our fallibilities, will be even more important in building the case that using forecasts is generally worthwhile. 

Make the case for meteorology and for science  

Following on from the above, in recent years the international weather community has placed huge importance in demonstrating the value and return on investment in weather services. This is how national meteorological services justify their existence as public bodies, but also as enablers for the rest of the national and global ‘weather enterprise’. For example, the 2024 UK study of the economic value of the Met Office estimated a benefit-to-cost ratio of at least 19:1.  Such figures are typical of modern national meteorological services. Collectively, we thought we’d come up with the killer argument to win the debate about the value of weather services – ‘because they are worth it.’  

However, we’ve also seen recent examples around the world of such evidence not being enough, being disbelieved or just ignored in the face of various other views and differing models of how science should be funded and who it should benefit.  

We can’t rest on our laurels. We need to keep evidencing our value and making the case for investment in weather services, and the science and infrastructure which support them.   

Control the narrative, combat misinformation, but we can’t be ‘gatekeepers’ for weather information

Weather information is everywhere. Weather misinformation is also, unfortunately, everywhere, whether it is fuelled by climate-change scepticism, conspiracy theories, anti-authoritarian ideology or just plain misunderstanding or lazy journalism.  

By 2050, probably much sooner, everyone will have access to all of this information anywhere and at any time at the touch of a screen. They won’t be able to digest all of it. So, what will they see?  Some of this will be determined by algorithms or packaged up according to editorial policies of providers.  But they’ll also be able to tailor the information they choose to see, to their locations, their activities, their risk appetites and other personal preferences.   

Which data and which sources should people trust? In this future vision, the vital role of the operational meteorologist becomes clear. As an influencer, as an interpreter, educator and guide, as a trusted voice of truth within a bewilderingly complex information landscape.  

We shouldn’t look to ignore or close down public discourse around the weather when we don’t necessarily agree with it, nor should we prevent data reaching people for fear of misinterpretation. Keeping silent is no longer an option. We do need to engage with differing narratives though, challenging them where appropriate, and leading when necessary.  

Embrace technology but recognise the power of human interaction  

Within the next five years, AI will work its way into every aspect of our working lives, though its use in observations, NWP and post-processing, through data interrogation and interpretation tools for forecasters, through to the products and services for our customers.  

Due to COVID-19, most of us can work from home most of the time. This has many advantages, both for individuals (eg. work/life balance, reduced travel costs and carbon footprints) and for organisations (eg. greater resilience and staff retention, a more diverse talent pool and greater geographical coverage). There are also disadvantages, however, particularly with regards to our relationships and the face-to-face interactions which we know are so integral to good decision making. The next few years will see us fully understand hybrid working to find the right balance. These changes will also allow us to re-evaluate historical norms about the way that operational meteorologists should work. For example, by 2050 shift-working will be the exception rather than the norm. 

Widen the definition of the profession – multidisciplinary by default  

There will be few, if any, ‘pure’ meteorology jobs by 2050. We’ll still need scientists to understand and model atmospheric processes with greater precision, but there will be few outstanding problems in theoretical meteorology.  Some current areas of operational meteorology will soon be fully automated or won’t exist at all.  For the rest of us, it’ll all be about combining meteorological insights with other disciplines and other sources of information. That’s where the value lies and always has. Weather and data science, weather and natural hazards, weather and the economy, weather and human behaviours, weather and leisure, weather and transport, weather and public safety. We need to diversify and redefine the profession to include all of these elements and ensure that we train our future operational meteorologists to meet these growing requirements. This also means redefining the competencies within the profession, recognising what have previously been regarded as niche specialisms as fundamentals.  

We need to act as a community. Let’s work together to define the profession, its standards, its ethics and its future.  Let’s make sure we can all tell a story about why we love working with the weather, and the benefits it brings to others.   

Things will be different

Finally, those of us who trained as forecasters around the turn of the century tend to have a rose-tinted view of what the profession was – and what it should remain. Chart-drawing, colouring in, filling in numbers in boxes, nipping outside to make an observation, shift-work as the norm. Operational meteorology has always changed though. Please feel free to ignore us. Reshape the profession as you think best. It’s yours now.