Interactions between governments and information suppliers: beyond the two communities metaphor

Since the 1970s, research and policy have often been described as residing in distinct communities, separated by differences in language, priorities, scheduling, incentives and rewards, and pressure from the public. In this narrative, academics, who generate knowledge that could be useful for informing public policy, are supposed to work slowly, producing dense jargon-filled theses that are inaccessible to the uninitiated; policymakers, who could do with some better information on which to base policy decision-making, scramble around under tremendous public and political pressure to solve problems within tight deadlines. Academics and policymakers, therefore, have no choice but to circulate only within their respective communities, talking to each other but rarely across the divide. Although the term "two communities" has perhaps fallen out of fashion in recent years, this depiction of research and policy continues to be the most popular way of explaining difficulties in getting the latest scientific research to inform public policy decision-making. This chapter explores the two communities metaphor, considers its enduring popularity, and elaborates on some of its flaws. In many ways, the two communities metaphor is problematic for describing the relationship between research and policy. Despite its popularity over the years, it may be time for it to be re-evaluated.