Joxe Mikel Garmendia
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Joxe Mikel Garmendia has a total of 191 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Angel Borja
AZTI, Marine Research, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA)
19 shared publications Javier Franco
11 shared publications- José Germán Rodríguez
AZTI, Marine Research, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Herrera Kaia, Portualdea z/g, Pasaia 20110, Spain
11 shared publications - Mireia Valle
National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America
9 shared publications - Guillem Chust
Marine Research Division, AZTI, Sukarrieta, Spain
8 shared publications - Iñigo Muxika
AZTI
8 shared publications
Latest Publications
- 9 October 2026
- Published by Elsevier in Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science
- Vol. 344
Automated detection and counting of 12 macrobenthic taxa on the Basque coast using computer vision on ROV videos
- 9 October 2026
- Published by Elsevier in Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science
- Vol. 344
Automated detection and counting of 12 macrobenthic taxa on the Basque coast using computer vision on ROV videos
- 19 December 2025
- Published by The R Foundation
ambiR: Calculate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index
Calculate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index - AMBI. The included list of benthic fauna species according to their sensitivity to pollution. Matching species in sample data to the list allows the calculation of fractions of individuals in the different sensitivity categories and thereafter the AMBI index. The Shannon Diversity Index H' and the Danish benthic fauna quality index DKI (Dansk Kvalitetsindeks) can also be calculated, as well as the multivariate M-AMBI index. Borja, A., Franco, J. ,Pérez, V. (2000) "A marine biotic index to establish the ecological quality of soft bottom benthos within European estuarine and coastal environments" .
- 19 December 2025
- Published by The R Foundation
ambiR: Calculate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index
Calculate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index - AMBI. The included list of benthic fauna species according to their sensitivity to pollution. Matching species in sample data to the list allows the calculation of fractions of individuals in the different sensitivity categories and thereafter the AMBI index. The Shannon Diversity Index H' and the Danish benthic fauna quality index DKI (Dansk Kvalitetsindeks) can also be calculated, as well as the multivariate M-AMBI index. Borja, A., Franco, J. ,Pérez, V. (2000) "A marine biotic index to establish the ecological quality of soft bottom benthos within European estuarine and coastal environments" .
- Open Access
- 13 December 2024
- Published by Elsevier in Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science
- Vol. 313
Projections of intertidal estuarine seagrass distribution under climate change scenarios using a Bayesian network approach
- 13 December 2024
- Published by Elsevier in Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science
- Vol. 313
Open AccessProjections of intertidal estuarine seagrass distribution under climate change scenarios using a Bayesian network approach
- Open Access
- 8 February 2024
- Published by Wiley in Plants, People, Planet
- Vol. 6 (3) , 587-603
One hundred priority questions for advancing seagrass conservation in Europe
Societal Impact Statement: Seagrass ecosystems are of fundamental importance to our planet and wellbeing. Seagrasses are marine flowering plants, which engineer ecosystems that provide a multitude of ecosystem services, for example, blue foods and carbon sequestration. Seagrass ecosystems have largely been degraded across much of their global range. There is now increasing interest in the conservation and restoration of these systems, particularly in the context of the climate emergency and the biodiversity crisis. The collation of 100 questions from experts across Europe could, if answered, improve our ability to conserve and restore these systems by facilitating a fundamental shift in the success of such work.Summary: Seagrass meadows provide numerous ecosystem services including biodiversity, coastal protection, and carbon sequestration. In Europe, seagrasses can be found in shallow sheltered waters along coastlines, in estuaries & lagoons, and around islands, but their distribution has declined. Factors such as poor water quality, coastal modification, mechanical damage, overfishing, land‐sea interactions, climate change and disease have reduced the coverage of Europe’s seagrasses necessitating their recovery. Research, monitoring and conservation efforts on seagrass ecosystems in Europe are mostly uncoordinated and biased towards certain species and regions, resulting in inadequate delivery of critical information for their management. Here, we aim to identify the 100 priority questions, that if addressed would strongly advance seagrass monitoring, research and conservation in Europe. Using a Delphi method, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with seagrass experience from across Europe and with diverse seagrass expertise participated in the process that involved the formulation of research questions, a voting process and an online workshop to identify the final list of the 100 questions. The final list of questions covers areas across nine themes: Biodiversity & Ecology; Ecosystem services; Blue carbon; Fishery support; Drivers, Threats, Resilience & Response; Monitoring & Assessment; Conservation & Restoration; Governance, Policy & Management; and Communication. Answering these questions will fill current knowledge gaps and place European seagrass onto a positive trajectory of recovery.
- 8 February 2024
- Published by Wiley in Plants, People, Planet
- Vol. 6 (3) , 587-603
Open AccessOne hundred priority questions for advancing seagrass conservation in Europe
Societal Impact Statement: Seagrass ecosystems are of fundamental importance to our planet and wellbeing. Seagrasses are marine flowering plants, which engineer ecosystems that provide a multitude of ecosystem services, for example, blue foods and carbon sequestration. Seagrass ecosystems have largely been degraded across much of their global range. There is now increasing interest in the conservation and restoration of these systems, particularly in the context of the climate emergency and the biodiversity crisis. The collation of 100 questions from experts across Europe could, if answered, improve our ability to conserve and restore these systems by facilitating a fundamental shift in the success of such work.Summary: Seagrass meadows provide numerous ecosystem services including biodiversity, coastal protection, and carbon sequestration. In Europe, seagrasses can be found in shallow sheltered waters along coastlines, in estuaries & lagoons, and around islands, but their distribution has declined. Factors such as poor water quality, coastal modification, mechanical damage, overfishing, land‐sea interactions, climate change and disease have reduced the coverage of Europe’s seagrasses necessitating their recovery. Research, monitoring and conservation efforts on seagrass ecosystems in Europe are mostly uncoordinated and biased towards certain species and regions, resulting in inadequate delivery of critical information for their management. Here, we aim to identify the 100 priority questions, that if addressed would strongly advance seagrass monitoring, research and conservation in Europe. Using a Delphi method, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with seagrass experience from across Europe and with diverse seagrass expertise participated in the process that involved the formulation of research questions, a voting process and an online workshop to identify the final list of the 100 questions. The final list of questions covers areas across nine themes: Biodiversity & Ecology; Ecosystem services; Blue carbon; Fishery support; Drivers, Threats, Resilience & Response; Monitoring & Assessment; Conservation & Restoration; Governance, Policy & Management; and Communication. Answering these questions will fill current knowledge gaps and place European seagrass onto a positive trajectory of recovery.
- Open Access
- 9 December 2023
- Published by Elsevier in Continental Shelf Research
- Vol. 272
Benthic macroinfaunal communities of the pockmark fields in the south-eastern Bay of Biscay
- 9 December 2023
- Published by Elsevier in Continental Shelf Research
- Vol. 272
Open AccessBenthic macroinfaunal communities of the pockmark fields in the south-eastern Bay of Biscay
- Open Access
- 9 August 2023
- Published by Elsevier in Nature-Based Solutions
- Vol. 4
Restoring seagrass meadows in Basque estuaries: nature-based solution for successful management
- 9 August 2023
- Published by Elsevier in Nature-Based Solutions
- Vol. 4
Open AccessRestoring seagrass meadows in Basque estuaries: nature-based solution for successful management
- Open Access
- 20 September 2022
- Published by Elsevier in Data in Brief
- Vol. 45, 108627
Data on growth performance and survival of black scallops (Mimachlamys varia (Linnaeus, 1758)) reared under suspended conditions in waters of the Basque coast (SE Bay of Biscay)
- 20 September 2022
- Published by Elsevier in Data in Brief
- Vol. 45, 108627
Open AccessData on growth performance and survival of black scallops (Mimachlamys varia (Linnaeus, 1758)) reared under suspended conditions in waters of the Basque coast (SE Bay of Biscay)
- Open Access
- 9 October 2021
- Published by Elsevier in Data in Brief
- Vol. 39, 107464
Dataset of macrobenthic species, organic matter content and grain-size distribution in surficial seafloor sediments in outer continental shelf, pockmark fields and Capbreton Canyon tributaries in the southeastern Bay of Biscay
- 9 October 2021
- Published by Elsevier in Data in Brief
- Vol. 39, 107464
Open AccessDataset of macrobenthic species, organic matter content and grain-size distribution in surficial seafloor sediments in outer continental shelf, pockmark fields and Capbreton Canyon tributaries in the southeastern Bay of Biscay
- Open Access
- 17 August 2021
- Published by Springer Nature in AMBIO
- Vol. 51 (3) , 652-665
Establishing a governance threshold in small-scale fisheries to achieve sustainability
The lack of effective governance is a major concern in small-scale fisheries. The implementation of governance that encompasses the three pillars of sustainability (social, economic, and ecological) is still a worldwide challenge. We examined nine stalked barnacle fisheries (Pollicipes pollicipes) across Southwest Europe to better understand the relationship between governance elements and sustainability. Our results show that nested spatial scales of management, the access structure, co-management, and fisher’s participation in monitoring and surveillance promote sustainability. However, it is not the mere presence of these elements but their level of implementation that drives sustainability. Efforts should be placed in the accomplishment of a minimum combination of local scales of management, access rights through individual quotas, instructive-consultative co-management and functional participation. Surpassing this threshold in future governance structures will start to adequately promote social, economic and ecologically sustainability in small-scale fisheries.
- 17 August 2021
- Published by Springer Nature in AMBIO
- Vol. 51 (3) , 652-665
Open AccessEstablishing a governance threshold in small-scale fisheries to achieve sustainability
The lack of effective governance is a major concern in small-scale fisheries. The implementation of governance that encompasses the three pillars of sustainability (social, economic, and ecological) is still a worldwide challenge. We examined nine stalked barnacle fisheries (Pollicipes pollicipes) across Southwest Europe to better understand the relationship between governance elements and sustainability. Our results show that nested spatial scales of management, the access structure, co-management, and fisher’s participation in monitoring and surveillance promote sustainability. However, it is not the mere presence of these elements but their level of implementation that drives sustainability. Efforts should be placed in the accomplishment of a minimum combination of local scales of management, access rights through individual quotas, instructive-consultative co-management and functional participation. Surpassing this threshold in future governance structures will start to adequately promote social, economic and ecologically sustainability in small-scale fisheries.
- Open Access
- 13 April 2021
- Published by Frontiers Media SA in Frontiers in Marine Science
- Vol. 8
Big Insights From a Small Country: The Added Value of Integrated Assessment in the Marine Environmental Status Evaluation of Malta
In the last few years, the concept of ecosystem-based approach has led to the need for developing integrative assessments that consider the different ecosystem components all together. In Europe, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) aims at achieving the Good Environmental Status for all regional seas. This requires Member States (MS) to implement monitoring networks and assess the status in 6-years management cycles, based on 11 qualitative descriptors, ranging from biodiversity to noise. For that assessment MS must apply criteria and methodological standards, following certain specifications. However, the number of MS which have undertaken quantitative assessments, or aggregated the different criteria and/or descriptors in holistic assessments, remains low. This is probably due to the few available tools that enable the aggregation of information at different scales (spatial and temporal) and the integration of a diverse range of indicators. In order to identify the main constraints tied to the integration of data from different indicators, criteria and descriptors, this study involved a comparative analysis of a national assessment of official marine data reported by Malta with the integrative Nested Environmental status Assessment Tool (NEAT). In total, we have used 282 indicators, 24 criteria, seven descriptors, and 12 ecosystem components. The results showed a good agreement in the assessment at the indicator level (as applied in the national assessment) and threw light on the advantages of integrating the information at criteria, descriptor or ecosystem component levels, when using NEAT. Such integration allows for a global assessment of status of Malta’s marine waters whilst allowing for the identification of management measures at different spatial levels and for different ecosystem components. Lessons learnt from this case study are applicable to remaining assessments for other European MS.
- 13 April 2021
- Published by Frontiers Media SA in Frontiers in Marine Science
- Vol. 8
Open AccessBig Insights From a Small Country: The Added Value of Integrated Assessment in the Marine Environmental Status Evaluation of Malta
In the last few years, the concept of ecosystem-based approach has led to the need for developing integrative assessments that consider the different ecosystem components all together. In Europe, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) aims at achieving the Good Environmental Status for all regional seas. This requires Member States (MS) to implement monitoring networks and assess the status in 6-years management cycles, based on 11 qualitative descriptors, ranging from biodiversity to noise. For that assessment MS must apply criteria and methodological standards, following certain specifications. However, the number of MS which have undertaken quantitative assessments, or aggregated the different criteria and/or descriptors in holistic assessments, remains low. This is probably due to the few available tools that enable the aggregation of information at different scales (spatial and temporal) and the integration of a diverse range of indicators. In order to identify the main constraints tied to the integration of data from different indicators, criteria and descriptors, this study involved a comparative analysis of a national assessment of official marine data reported by Malta with the integrative Nested Environmental status Assessment Tool (NEAT). In total, we have used 282 indicators, 24 criteria, seven descriptors, and 12 ecosystem components. The results showed a good agreement in the assessment at the indicator level (as applied in the national assessment) and threw light on the advantages of integrating the information at criteria, descriptor or ecosystem component levels, when using NEAT. Such integration allows for a global assessment of status of Malta’s marine waters whilst allowing for the identification of management measures at different spatial levels and for different ecosystem components. Lessons learnt from this case study are applicable to remaining assessments for other European MS.