In this thesis I investigate gender in environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGOs) in the United Kingdom (UK) and Turkey. ENGOs play an increasingly important role as lobbyists on environmental policy making at national and international scales. There is large literature dealing with gender inequalities in governing bodies, and in organisations. However, gender structures of ENGOs and their implications for campaigns have been under-researched. I therefore examined the structure and composition of ENGOs in the UK and Turkey, how far they include women in decision-making process and the implications for their campaigns. To this end, I undertook cross-national comparative research applying feminist research methodology to explore differences and similarities and underlying factors for gender inequalities in organisational settings in two different societies. The research methods included 38 interviews and one focus group interview in 9 ENGOs in the UK and 40 interviews in 10 ENGOs in Turkey. These were conducted mainly with senior managers, but also with junior managers and staff. Furthermore, I placed myself as a volunteer and researcher in two ENGOs, one in the UK and one in Turkey in order to observe the organisational practices directly and to enable triangulation of data. In addition, I collected secondary data from annual reports, staff charts, publications and websites of the organisations to collect data on gender compositions as well as campaigns of the ENGOs. In order to explore and provide sufficient explanation for the under-representation of female senior managers and gender inequalities in ENGOs settings, theoretical approaches were looked into in order to find the most appropriate feminist theories that explain the gendered nature of ENGOs. I found that while the ENGO sectors in both countries are dominated by female employees, white, middle class men are in charge of the decision-making in the ENGOs. Moreover, in the ENGOs I found that there seemed to be resistance to integrate gender related perspectives when deciding environmental campaigns. Since there is no research on ENGOs that makes gender blindness visible, this thesis is an attempt to fill that gap. I argue that neglecting gender relations in environmental decision-making and campaigns reinforces the current gendered practices and imbalances in ENGOs that fail to integrate women’s perspectives in environmental policies.

<p> Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) are rapidly expanding in rural Illinois. This research explores the political power linkages between county boards and corporate entities in four Illinois counties. The hypothesis is that collusion and impropriety within county board politics and CAFO expansion in rural Illinois are attributed to stakeholder influence and power at the local county government level. My research revealed a connection between ownership of CAFOs, county board political power, and endorsement of expansion. Utilizing Walter Goldschmidt&rsquo;s method of a controlled comparison, the research analyzes two CAFO inundated counties (Pike and Adams) with two less affected counties (LaSalle and Peoria). </p><p> Considering the political nature of the research, data collection was forced into engaging secondary text sources to study up, down, and sideways on local government officials. The documents analyzed were public information meeting transcripts, county board meeting transcripts, municipal meeting transcripts, plat maps, public websites, and Freedom of Information Act requests (FOIAs). FOIAs were obtained through government entities and other confidential sources. Citizens are distressed by the proliferation of CAFOs. Through interviews, participant observation, field notes, and archival work, the research indicates that people have knowledge that social stratification is much greater in counties with CAFO proliferation. Citizens that have CAFOs built in close proximity to their property are angered by the permitting system. Considering the amount of pollution and social degradation connected to rapid expansion from livestock farming in Illinois, this research on the linkages between corporate agribusiness and county board politics fills a gap previously overlooked by anthropologists. </p>

<p> The municipal and public officials in Beaufort/Jasper, South Carolina (SC) and Effingham/Chatham, Georgia (GA) counties in the lower Savannah River Basin (LSRB) are faced with a dilemma of supplying potable water on an equitable basis to their communities from the surface and groundwater that has been partially polluted and/or is not sustainable. State regulatory agencies have implemented strategies to protect the regional water resources from further degradation of ecosystems, but these remedies are not addressing a crucial issue. The potable water issue is more critical than simply affecting to protect the local ecosystem. Hence, the thesis question is: </p><p> <b>Can current strategies, by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) and the Georgia Environmental Division (GAEPD), secure potable water sources from the lower Savannah River Basin in the region, potentially provide effective, efficient, and equitable results? </b> </p><p> Economic development and demographic changes have equally impacted the surface and groundwater. Groundwater was the primary source of potable water in predevelopment (prior to industrial revolution) and even post development era, but gradually became unsustainable. The alternative surface water source has also been polluted by the industrial and domestic wastewater treatment plant discharges. Surface water contains natural organic compounds, and even that has been overwhelmed by the added pollutants in wastewater treatment plant effluent. This has further increased formation of potential carcinogenic disinfection and disinfection byproducts in potable water. The carcinogen removal process has become expensive, but the potential risk for contamination remains problematic. </p><p> To answer the research question, interviews and surveys were conducted. The population for this research consists of municipal and public officials and water treatment professionals. The samples were selected due to their expertise and responsibility to supply safe drinking water to their communities. Collected data analyzed using Microsfot Excel to arrange in matrixes, and explained in simple narratives. The results were summarized and recommendations were made. </p><p> Most of the subjects agreed that water resources are not sustainable at current usage rate in the region. Groundwater is not sustainable and surface water quality has deteriorated due to organic pollutants in the industrial and domestic wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) effluents. The cost of producing safe drinking water from partially or potentially polluted surface water is higher than the cost of processing groundwater. The cost of desalination of seawater or brackish well water is even higher than ground or surface water treatment. </p><p> Seawater desalination is not a cost effective option now. However, conflicting interests regarding the switch over to seawater desalination as long as surface water treatment operating cost remains lower than the seawater desalination, surface water will remain a sustainable source. </p><p> Although seawater desalination is a more sustainable strategy to produce potable water in the Low Country Region. Surface water treatment is less expensive and in turn, local professionals view it as the best option. This I believe is a limited short term viewpoint, which does not address longterm sustainability issues. Efforts regulatory agencies and utilities, to produce safe drinking water from surface water will continue in the Lower Savannah River Basin (LSRB). </p>