Given the substantial role that states play in steering multiple spheres of life, the state-society-environment relationship emerges as an important arena to be theorized and researched. Most studies of states’ transformation of the society-environment landscape, however, either keep a macro-level analytical focus, or counterpose state to society/community; consequently, they pay little attention to the fragmentations within, as well as the interlinks between, these spheres. This paper, in contrast, adopts an understanding of the state that emanates from below and reproduced at the level of the local. It formulates a framework that analytically conveys state-society-environment links at the local level by deploying a Gramscian political ecology approach, and situates states’ transformation of the environment within their broader practices to establish and justify their existence. This framework is mobilized to analyze two local environments in Turkey, Sultan Sazl??? (Sultan Marshes) and Köprülü Kanyon (Köprülü Canyon), building on an extensive field study conducted in two sites in Turkey in 2008-2009 during which 98 in-depth interviews and four focus groups were held, and a survey was administered to a representative sample of 778 individuals. The paper provides a reading of these two localities from the lens of Gramscian political ecology and illustrates the manifestations of the Turkish state’s hegemonic project through them. It demonstrates that the Turkish state’s hegemonic project is manifested differently, and set off different processes, across local contexts. It illustrates the crucial role played by local political-economy dynamics in mediating state behavior and shaping its local crystallizations, and reveals that states can pursue multiple, at times contradicting, motivations and thus cannot be understood as monolithic entities. In a similar vein, the paper highlights the asymmetries in how different local actors contribute to, and affected by, environmental processes, as well as in the types of interlinks established with the state. By underlining the fragmented nature of the society both in terms of the distribution of environmental costs and benefits, and their relationships with the state, the paper moves beyond simplistic juxtapositions of the “evil” state versus the society as the “site of autonomy”. Building on this, the paper underlines the importance of looking at the local, as it would not only contribute to more nuanced theorizations of the state and enrich our understanding of state-society interlinks, but also help us push towards a socially just and environmentally sustainable future by unveiling how state-society relationships are realized everyday in local contexts.