The Royal Meteorological Society must step forward to demonstrate the leadership that the profession so badly needs

Climate researchers have suffered from a very severe loss of public confidence and trust in their competence and integrity over the last three years. Meteorologists now have an opportunity to repair the damage and to restore the role of the profession in the democratic processes of public debate and policy-making.

A YouGov poll carried out on 3-4 December 2009 (a couple of weeks after the "climategate" emails first appeared online) found that only 41% of the public agreed that, in general, they trust climate scientists to tell the truth about global warming. Recent surveys have found no significant improvement in public trust. A poll carried out in 2011 showed that only 38% of the public trusted climate scientists to tell the truth about climate change.

It has been the accusations of incompetence, misconduct and a lack of transparency that have probably dealt the biggest blows to public trust in climate researchers. They have been matched by a decline in the quantity and quality of UK national media coverage of climate change.

So if meteorologists wish to serve the public interest by playing a more integral role in the process of debate and policymaking, they need to:

• Engage the public more effectively through direct and indirect methods

• Learn more about the information needs of the public (ie through two-way communication)

• Improve the explanation and presentation to public audiences of challenging concepts such as risk and uncertainty

• Implement a strategy for improving the reputation of the meteorology profession for trustworthiness, particularly in terms of transparency

• Increase efforts to influence the narratives on climate change that are being promoted by the media

• Deal more effectively with criticisms of, and attacks on, mainstream climate research

• Engage policy-makers at international, national and local levels more effectively through direct and indirect methods

The first step is for the meteorology profession to draw a line under "climategate". Rather than responding robustly to the allegations of incompetence and misconduct by strenuously defending the integrity of the profession, many meteorologists have apparently decided to withdraw from the public debate, perhaps understandably fearful of becoming targets of "sceptic" attacks. Instead they have hoped a series of official inquiries would set the record straight.

But even though a number of separate reviews cleared the scientists at the centre of the "climategate" scandal of fiddling their results, they also criticised standards of transparency.

This will require greater leadership than has so far been shown by and within the key meteorological institutions, with the major public funder of climate researchers in the UK, the Natural Environment Research Council, having been largely silent and invisible on these crucial matters. So there is now an opportunity for the Royal Meteorological Society to step forward, and demonstrate the leadership that the profession so badly needs.

Largely as a response to "climategate, the Royal Society launched an initiative on "science as an open enterprise". The primary recommendation of its report, published in June 2012, was:

"Scientists should communicate the data they collect and the models they create, to allow free and open access, and in ways that are intelligible, assessable and usable for other specialists in the same or linked fields wherever they are in the world. Where data justify it, scientists should make them available in an appropriate data repository. Where possible, communication with a wider public audience should be made a priority, and particularly so in areas where openness is in the public interest."

So there is now an opportunity for the Royal Meteorological Society to initiate a debate among its members about how the Royal Society's report can be taken forward, seeking to make the meteorology profession a beacon of best practice in openness and transparency.

Not only could the society become the catalyst for transforming the meteorology profession from laggards into leaders on transparency, but it could also promote an increase in the quality and quantity of proactive engagement with the public, directly and through the media.

Public engagement can seem a time-consuming process, and understandably is regarded by many meteorologists as difficult, messy, and largely unrewarded by their employers and funders. It can seem far safer to reach out through one-way communication activities, such as newspaper articles, websites and public lectures. But the society could champion the benefits of developing a sustained two-way dialogue, which will not only facilitate the exchange of views and information between the public and meteorologists, but will also build greater confidence and trust.

The meteorology profession desperately needs bold and decisive leadership to help it to earn public trust and confidence and to face up to the many challenges arising from its high public profile. Surely it is time for the Royal Meteorological Society to step forward and take on this role?

• Bob Ward is policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at London School of Economics and Political Science. This is an abridged version of an article that appears in the January 2013 issue of Weather, the official magazine of the Royal Meteorological Society.