Résumé
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are a cornerstone of global marine biodiversity conservation strategies, yet their effectiveness remains highly variable, context-dependent, and often contested. While various methods can be used to assess the effectiveness of MPA management, they are heterogeneous in their scopes, objectives, and analytical models, each having respective strengths and limitations. Despite the common use of those methods, few studies have systematically identified and compared them, limiting our understanding of their relative suitability in a given context. This study addressed this gap by comparing the methods used to evaluate MPA management effectiveness, highlighting their advantages and limitations. Three approaches were combined: (1) an analysis of the global database on protected area management effectiveness -PAME, (2) a systematic literature review following the PRISMA protocol (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews), and (3) an expert consultation. We identified 33 methods that differ according to their geographic scale of application (global, regional, national/local), targeted protection status (e.g., all MPA sites, World Heritage Site), and management theme (e.g., governance, biological). Key differences among methods emerged in the indicators used, their implementation processes, and the tool used to conduct the actual evaluation. Findings underscore the importance of aligning method selection with evaluation objectives, the desired level of analysis, and specific evaluation requirements, thereby strengthening the robustness of MPA effectiveness assessment.