Nuske offers a crucial corrective to solutionist versions of transdisciplinarity. Her concept of critical capacity addresses the risk that intensified societal engagement can erode disciplinary autonomy, instrumentalise participation or subordinate research to externally defined agendas. Rather than defending separation, she proposes a situated epistemology based on process-oriented engagement and reflexive boundary work. The central idea is precise: worlds should be bridged without pretending their epistemic, normative and political differences have disappeared. Situated intervention becomes a way to engage practical problems while retaining the capacity to analyse how those problems are framed, whose values dominate and how power enters the research process. Methodologically, reflexive boundary work protects the possibility of critique inside collaboration. The paper bridges STS, sociology of science and transdisciplinary methodology by refusing the false choice between autonomy and engagement. Its strongest contribution is to define critical distance not as withdrawal but as a relational capacity exercised from within entangled research situations.
