both under the aegis of 'pathways to impact'. both thus implying two sides of the same coin. both forming two halves of the same overall element: 'research impact'. you're right, it's not rocket science. it's primary school cognition. it's reading a graph that an 8 year old could explain. something you are evidently struggling with. let's be thankful it's not rocket science.
again:
The Research Councils recognise that the research we fund has both academic, and economic and societal impacts. We also recognise that impacts from research can be generated through a range of diverse pathways, take many forms, become manifest at different stages in the research lifecycle and beyond, and can be promoted in many different ways. This, and the potential complexity and diversity of impacts from research, is reflected within the Research Council assessment and reporting process.
how you can read that and see the graphic and then say "i know that research councils normally fund based only on academic merit". LOL. every single piece of research has to justify itself beyond pure academic self-indulgence. i have said this all along.
it's not rocket science dilderp. you can stop being so stubborn for once and admit you made a boo-boo.