Many methodologies have been developed to assess the management effectiveness of PAs (Hockings 2003). They range from expert interviews ignoring ecological integrity (Bruner et al. 2001, WWF 2004) to pure satellite image analyses focusing solely on ecological integrity (Curran et al. 2004, Joppa et al. 2008, Nagendra 2008). To date, there are only few studies combining both remote sensing to analyze ecological integrity and intensive field surveys to consider institutional factors (e.g., Nagendra et al. 2005, Ostrom and Nagendra 2006). Conclusions of these studies range from “PAs are ineffective” (Curran et al. 2004), to “PAs are effective” (Joppa et al. 2008), and “PAs are effective, but not in general” (Nagendra 2008). The variety of answers indicates that PA effectiveness is complex and depends on a combination of drivers from different political levels underlining the need for integrated research approaches to understand social-ecological systems in their local, sub-national, and national context (Folke et al. 2007, Joppa et al. 2008, Hummel et al. 2011). In the case of forest PAs, measuring the impact of PAs on forest cover clearing can help assess the effectiveness of their management. Remote sensing provides a particularly effective tool and satellite image analysis is the most frequently used technique for mapping land cover change (Nagendra 2008). In order to assess the impact of a given PA on forest cover, changes within its area need to be compared to a standard area without legal protection (Nagendra 2008). Measuring the effectiveness of these areas is difficult because the amount of deforestation that would have occurred in the absence of legal protection cannot be directly observed (Andam et al. 2008). Two kinds of comparison can provide useful indicators in this regard. First, one can compare deforestation rates of areas inside and outside PAs using satellite data (e.g., Curran et al. 2004). However, these analyses can be biased because areas inside and outside the PA can differ in many characteristics, which in turn influence deforestation (Joppa et al. 2008). This is the case in situations where the PA is located in remote areas that are less accessible than the surroundings. These areas may show low rates of deforestation due to remote location rather than PA existence. Second, rates of deforestation before and after management establishment can be compared to see if creation of the PA has slowed down deforestation. This approach provides a different perspective but is limited by the general trend that deforestation is increasing over time in some areas. Thus, a combination of both approaches (i.e., deforestation rates inside and outside boundary as well as before and after management establishment) supports triangulation of the findings. Furthermore, to adequately address the multi-faceted issue of PA effectiveness, satellite image analysis should be complemented by detailed field research to provide insights into social and institutional processes that impact PA management (Southworth et al. 2006, Elmqvist et al. 2007). To date, studies focusing on South-East Asia (DeFries et al. 2005, Nagendra 2008) or Indonesia conclude that conservation endeavors, including PAs, have been unsuccessful (Curran et al. 2004, Linkie et al. 2008).