The author’s objective is to examine the social processes of globalization through the singular case of return migration and its relation to cultural change in Kazakhstan. At the same time, he seeks to enrich our understanding of cultural hybridity by providing a theoretically informed, yet empirically rich account of cultural change as a result of short-term migrants who then return to Kazakhstan. In so doing, the study brings meaning and substantive content through solid fieldwork to these two processes that are all too often applied in such a nebulous fashion that they are rendered meaningless. The author has clearly succeeded in this endeavor.

The book is divided into five main chapters and a short introductory chapter. The second chapter provides a general background to Kazakhstan and the cultural processes currently in train as a result of globalization. This is much needed given that most readers will not be area specialists. The third chapter provides the theoretical framework for the rest of the book. Given that most empirically rich research is quite weak in this area, this book stands out for its theoretical depth. It provides an excellent account of the work of Pierre Bourdieu, Margaret Archer and Dave Elder-Vass, providing an augmented synthesis of the latter two by differentiating between different modes of reflexivity. The book then moves on to the interviews that were undertaken, placing them in the overall schema derived from the theoretical approach adopted. The final substantive chapter then identifies the general patterns of social and cultural change experienced by those returning to Kazakhstan after their studies in the United States.

The book stands out as a result of its combined theoretical and empirical rigor. It is surprising to find such a detailed theoretical account that then builds upon existing approaches by identifying and resolving their nuanced differences. Moreover, the empirical work is excellent, with the author conducting ninety-two semi-structured interviews between 2011 and 2012. The author chose primarily students and interns because they were the most likely to be agents of cultural change (and as the author correctly points out his research seeks to study cultural transformation rather than cultural reproduction). My only reservation is that I would have liked to have seen the analysis of such interviewees in tabular form, identifying interviewees by class, gender, social/educational background, reasons for travelling and cross-comparing this with attitudinal/behavioral stasis/change. But this is a minor quibble in an otherwise excellent work which should be of interest to Central Asian specialists and cultural sociologists alike.