Institutions, Biophysical Factors and History: An Integrative Analysis of Private and Common Property Forests in Guatemala and Honduras C. M. Tucker & J. C. Randolph & E. J. Castellanos Published online: 10 January 2007 # Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2007 Abstract Attention to institutional arrangements has be- come integral to research on forest management and conservation. While strong institutions typically are associ- ated with better forest conditions, few institutional studies have evaluated the influence of underlying biophysical factors on forest conditions. Our research compared institutional arrangements and forest conditions across nine forests in Guatemala and Honduras while accounting for biophysical characteristics. Statistical analyses found that soil nitrogen concentration, annual temperature, and annual rainfall were positively correlated with better forest con- ditions. Better forest conditions were in turn associated with stronger institutions. In part, the results suggest that the biophysical characteristics most favorable for high produc- tivity, given the socioeconomic context, constitute an incentive for strong institutions. One common-property forest presented strong institutions with very good forest conditions, but stronger institutions and better forest conditions in this region typically occur with private property. The situation reflects historical contexts that have supported private property and undermined common property. The findings indicate that efforts to improve natural resource management should recognize the bio- physical factors and historical contexts that facilitate or constrain strong institutions. Key words Institutions . Biophysical factors . History . Forest conditions . Private property . Common property . Guatemala . Honduras Introduction Institutional arrangements have emerged as a major focus for research on conservation, environmental change, and natural resource management (e.g., Acheson, 2003; Blomquist et al., 1994; Kepe and Scoones, 1999; Tang and Tang, 2001; Young, 2002). The role of institutions for effective forest management has represented an especially strong area of interest (e.g., Gibson et al., 2000; Gibson, 2001; Martin and Lemon, 2001; McCarthy, 2005; Poteete and Welch, 2004). Theoretical perspectives and empirical studies of forest management have shown that certain sets of institutional arrangements appear to result in low rates of forest transformation and ostensibly better forest conditions. Yet while it has been noted that effective institutions relate to characteristics of the appropriators and the resource base (Dietz et al., 2003), institutional studies rarely address the broader contexts that may enhance or constrain outcomes (Agrawal, 2001). Unless contexts surrounding institutional arrangements are considered, researchers risk assigning institutions the credit (or blame) for forest conditions that relate to additional factors. We sought to reduce this risk by paying attention to two dimensions that institutional analyses tend to address inadequately: biophysical factors and historical contexts (Agrawal, 2001). We aimed to increase confidence that Hum Ecol (2007) 35:259–274 DOI 10.1007/s10745-006-9087-0 C. M. Tucker (*) Department of Anthropology and Center for the Study of Population, Institutions and Environmental Change (CIPEC), Indiana University, 701 E. Kirkwood, SB 130, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA e-mail: tuckerc@indiana.edu J. C. Randolph School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA E. J. Castellanos Centro de Estudios Ambientales, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City, Guatemala