The barriers and tensions between the world of academic research and the policy world have been a recurrent theme in policy research since the 1970s and has gained renewed interest in the light of the evidence-based policymaking movement. Although there seem to be many good arguments to not exaggerate the gulf between what has been called ‘the two communities’, we will in this article demonstrate the persistence of the model from an inductive, bottom-up perspective. Based on an empirical and bottom-up qualitative study with various organised interests (both inside and outside the government) involved in New Zealand housing policy, we demonstrate that although the two-community model prevails, the actual relationship between academia and policy professionals is more complex once you begin to probe into the minds of the policy professionals and cannot be reduced to two separate tribes. The study is based on focus groups with 15 different organisations representing both central and local government organisations, housing associations, and professional associations within the policy field of housing in New Zealand.

中文翻译：

---

新西兰住房政策社区的两社区模式——自下而上的视角

自 1970 年代以来，学术研究界与政策界之间的障碍和紧张关系一直是政策研究中反复出现的主题，并且在循证决策运动的背景下重新引起了人们的兴趣。尽管似乎有很多很好的论据可以不夸大所谓的“两个社区”之间的鸿沟，但我们将在本文中从归纳的、自下而上的角度展示该模型的持久性。基于对参与新西兰住房政策的各种有组织利益（政府内外）进行的实证和自下而上的定性研究，我们证明，尽管两社区模式盛行，一旦你开始探究政策专业人士的思想，学术界和政策专业人士之间的实际关系就更加复杂，不能被简化为两个独立的部落。该研究基于与代表新西兰住房政策领域的中央和地方政府组织、住房协会和专业协会的 15 个不同组织的焦点小组。