Blum, Douglas W. The Social Process of Globalization: Return Migration and Cultural Change in Kazakhstan Molchanov, Mikhail A Eurasian Regionalisms and Russian Foreign Policy (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
SEER, 94, 3, july 2016 584 Blum, Douglas W. The Social Process of Globalization: Return Migration and Cultural Change in Kazakhstan. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, 2016. vii + 214 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. £64.99: $99.99. Molchanov, Mikhail A. Eurasian Regionalisms and Russian Foreign Policy. The International Political Economy of New Regionalisms Series. Ashgate, Farnham and Burlington, VT, 2015. xiii + 190. Map. Tables. Bibliography. Index. £60.00. These authors share a geographical focus on Russia’s main neighbours and partners in the post-Soviet region (Kazakhstan and for Molchanov also Ukraine and Belarus) and a thematic focus on the process of transnational integration. That said, it is remarkable that there should be no perceptible links between their analyses. In large part, of course, that is because Douglas Blum (Providence College, RI) is concerned with the diffusion of cultural values while Mikhail Molchanov (St Thomas University, Canada) writes about political economy and geopolitics. But there is more to it than that. What Blum has produced is an account of the experience of young Kazakhs who study in the United States, are influenced to a greater or lesser extent by American cultural values and practices such as self-sufficiency and informality, and then have to ‘negotiate cultural difference’ after returning home. This is a worthy and interesting topic in its own right. What I would question is how much it really tells us about ‘the social process of globalization’ (which is, after all, the title of the book). Nowhere does the author assess the importance of returning students relative to other carriers of cultural change. And by listening exclusively to people who studied in the United States while ignoring those who studied in Russia, Turkey and especially China, he equates globalization with Americanization. (A rapidly increasing proportion of the members of Kazakh and other Central Asian elites obtained their higher education in China.) ‘Globalization’ here is no more than a fashionable label attached to a study of cultural contact between two national societies. Kazakhstan,astheEurasianstateparexcellence(Molchanov,p.85),isapivotal and committed participant in efforts at Eurasian integration. Molchanov has provided a useful and balanced assessment of the various evolving and overlapping regional integration projects in Eurasia (defined as the former Soviet Union plus China). His approach is refreshing in several respects. First, he differs from many commentators in not viewing these projects solely or primarily as vehicles of Russian (or Chinese) hegemonic ambitions, although he acknowledges the centrality of Russian (and Chinese) foreign and energy policies. ‘The regionalist turn in Russia’s foreign policy’, he concludes, ‘suggests flexibility and adaptation, not neoimperialism, hegemonism or reassertion of spheres of influence’ (p. 157). REVIEWS 585 Second, he does not, as do many Eurocentric theorists of regional integration, adopt the model of the European Union as a universal benchmark for comparison. Finally, he is to be commended simply for taking Eurasian integration projects seriously and not assuming that they are impractical and doomed to failure. Molchanov’s analysis of Ukraine’s ‘multivectorism’, although already overtaken by events, remains essentially relevant. He attributes the tragedy in Ukraine not to regionalism as such but to ‘the contamination of [regional] economics by geopolitics’ (p. 157) — a distortion for which the West bears much of the responsibility. Where then does this leave ‘globalization’? Is it just a fancy and misleading name for a specific class of regional integration processes — those centred in Europe, the United States and Japan? Would it not then be more honest to make regionalism our central concept and recognize that we still live in a divided world? Providence, RI Stephen D. Shenfield Wilson, Andrew. Ukraine Crisis: What It Means for the West. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT and London, 2014. ix + 236 pp. Maps. Tables. Notes. Index. £12.99 (paperback). One of the first of many books to come off the presses following the tumultuous events in Ukraine that began in early 2014 was Andrew Wilson’s latest study of a country he has written on extensively and about which he is a respected expert. The book can be divided into three parts. The first three chapters provide context and background to the crisis. The following four lay out a chronology...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».