The Rise of AI in Weather and Climate Information and its Impact on Global Inequality
Authors: Amirpasha Mozaffari, Amanda Duarte, Lina Teckentrup, Stefano Materia, Gina E. C. Charnley, Lluis Palma, Eulalia Baulenas Serra, Dragana Bojovic, Paula Checchia, Aude Carreric, Francisco Doblas-Reyes
Organizations: Earth Sciences Department, Barcelona Supercomputing Center (BSC), Plaça d’Eusebi Güell, 1-3, Barcelona, 08034, Spain. · School of Public Health, Imperial College London, White City Campus, London, W12 7TA, United Kingdom. · Independent Researcher. · Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies (ICREA), Passeig Lluís Companys 23, Barcelona, 08010, Spain.
AI development's current trajectory risks automating and amplifying the North-South divide in the global climate information system. Frontier models are built almost exclusively in the Global North, and this inequality continues through inputs, processes, and outputs, from biased training data to unrepresentative validation, disproportionately affecting vulnerable regions. Addressing these disparities requires a Climate Digital Public Infrastructure, evaluation metrics centring well-being, and knowledge co-production to foster resilience rather than inequity.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: The lifecycle of AI model development in weather and climate sciences, tracing the workflow from initial data acquisition to downstream application. The bottom panels qualitatively illustrate the varying intensity of four key dimensions across these stages: the level of human agency and oversight, the degree of transparency and trust, the magnitude of infrastructure requirements, and the existence of market demand.
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Model
Year
Developer
Data used for training
Metrics
Training Compute
Aurora ( Bodnar et al., 2025 )
2025
Microsoft Research
Diverse mix of 6 datasets (ERA5, CMCC, IFS-HR, HRES, GFS, GFS Forecasts)
RMSE, MAE
2.5 Weeks on 32 A100
Ardavak Weather ( Allen et al., 2025 )
2025
Univ. of Cambridge, Turing Inst., Microsoft, ECMWF
Raw observations (sat radiances, station data) & ERA5 data.
RMSE, MAE, ACC
100 hours on A100
WeatherNext GenCast ( Price et al., 2025 )
2025
Google DeepMind + Google Research
ERA5 reanalysis data.
CRPS, Spread
5 days on 32 TPUv5
FengWu ( Chen et al., 2025 )
2025
Shanghai AI Lab
ERA5 reanalysis data.
RMSE, ACC
not reported
WeatherNext GraphCast ( Lam and others, 2023 )
2024
Google DeepMind + Google Research
39 years (1979–2017) of ERA5 reanalysis data.
RMSE & ACC
4 weeks on 32 TPU
NeuralGCM ( Kochkov et al., 2024 )
2024
Google, MIT, Harvard & ECMWF
ERA5 reanalysis data.
RMSE, RMSB, CRPS, spread-skill ratio
Not reported
Appendix
Table 1: List of the frontier weather and climate models, developers, training data, metrics, and compute cost (Table A1)
Deep learning has made rapid advances in weather forecasting: autoregressive models trained on atmospheric reanalyses now rival dynamical models across nowcasting, medium-range, and subseasonal-to-seasonal lead times, producing well-calibrated ensemble forecasts at reduced cost. We review these advances and consider their extension to climate horizons, where the challenge shifts from initial-condition skill to producing reliable statistical responses under altered forcings. AI-powered climate prediction systems must produce credible forced responses to drivers (e.g., greenhouse gases, land-use change) typically outside the observed record. We propose two minimum requirements for AI in climate modeling: (i) external forcing agents must enter explicitly enough to support interventions in which they vary independently; and (ii) robustness must be stress-tested in out-of-distribution regimes, including extremes and counterfactual trajectories. Using leading AI autoregressive emulators and hybrid physics-AI models, we identify development and coupling challenges. Comparing the reported throughput of these models with that of GPU-ported dynamical models highlights how AI can reduce time-to-solution by advancing only the target variables at the required resolution and using longer time steps, rather than integrating a full high-frequency, multivariate state. Diverse AI downscaling strategies can partially substitute for explicit fine-scale resolution, paving the way toward inexpensive local hazard assessment across prediction horizons.
Tom Beucler, J. David Neelin, Hui Su +10
University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. · University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. · Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong SAR, China. +6
Among the many challenges hindering the responsible development and deployment of AI, arguably none has faced more intense scrutiny than bias in its various forms. This underscores the widespread concerns across AI researchers that model outputs, e.g., from generative AI, may encode structural distributional imbalances (stemming from training data or model design) that may amplify social inequality or introduce systemic distortions across application domains ranging from biodiversity to disaster mitigation. Yet, relatively little work has investigated the geographical nature of bias or developed measurable benchmarks for what it means for (generative) AI to be unbiased. In this chapter, we investigate this issue through a literature review. As foundation models are reshaping the landscape of bias research, we examine work spanning both the pre-generative AI and generative AI periods. First, we identify a range of geographic biases. These biases span from representation bias in the training data and regional disparities in the factual recall of language models to the tendency of generative AI to over-proportionally favor prototypical places (called defaults). Then, we showcase how recent studies address the latter bias by evaluating geographic diversity in the outputs of generative AI across various cognitive levels, parameter settings, and output modalities.
Zilong Liu, Krzysztof Janowicz, Gengchen Mai +2
University of Vienna, Austria · University of Texas at Austin, USA · University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA +1
Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform healthcare, education, governance and socioeconomic equity, but its benefits remain concentrated in a small number of languages (Bender, 2019; Blasi et al., 2022; Joshi et al., 2020; Ranathunga and de Silva, 2022; Young, 2015). Language AI - the technologies that underpin widely-used conversational systems such as ChatGPT - could provide major benefits if available in people's native languages, yet most of the world's 7,000+ linguistic communities currently lack access and face persistent digital marginalization. Here we present a global longitudinal analysis of social, economic and infrastructural conditions across languages to assess systemic inequalities in language AI. We first analyze the existence of AI resources for 6003 languages. We find that despite efforts of the community to broaden the reach of language technologies (Bapna et al., 2022; Costa-Jussà et al., 2022), the dominance of a handful of languages is exacerbating disparities on an unprecedented scale, with divides widening exponentially rather than narrowing. Further, we contrast the longitudinal diffusion of AI with that of earlier IT technologies, revealing a distinctive hype-driven pattern of spread. To translate our findings into practical insights and guide prioritization efforts, we introduce the Language AI Readiness Index (EQUATE), which maps the state of technological, socio-economic, and infrastructural prerequisites for AI deployment across languages. The index highlights communities where capacity exists but remains underutilized, and provides a framework for accelerating more equitable diffusion of language AI. Our work contributes to setting the baseline for a transition towards more sustainable and equitable language technologies.
Giulia Occhini, Kumiko Tanaka-Ishii, Anna Barford +10
University of Cambridge, UK. · Waseda University, Japan. · University College London, UK. +1