How good is your forecast? Why user-centred evaluation matters

A scientifically accurate forecast is not necessarily a useful forecast. While traditional verification methods are essential for assessing predictive performance, they do not always tell us whether forecasts provide the information people need to take informed decisions.

Our newest paper highlights the importance of moving beyond statistical accuracy towards user-centred, decision-relevant forecast evaluation. The central idea is simple: the value of a forecast should be assessed not only by how well it predicts an event, but also by how effectively it supports the decisions of those who rely on it.

We introduce a flexible evaluation framework that brings together scientific verification, user-defined thresholds, local knowledge and real-world decision-making contexts. By actively engaging users in the evaluation process, we can better understand what constitutes a useful forecast, communicate uncertainty more meaningfully, and build trust between forecast providers and users.

Ultimately, this work advocates an important shift in how we develop and evaluate forecasts and climate services: from measuring predictive skill alone to understanding their value for decision-making. This is a crucial step towards ensuring that advances in forecasting science translate into actionable information and greater societal impact.

More information about the publication:

Emerton, R., S. J. van Andel, K. Egan, et al. 2026. " How Good Is Your Forecast? The Importance of User-Centred, Decision-Relevant Evaluation of Forecasts and Climate Services." Meteorological Applications 33, no. 5: e70234. https://doi.org/10.1002/met.70234