Yes, that's my understanding as well based on testimony from Professor McDorman of the Faculty of Law at the University of Victoria. It's also in the South Pacific convention.
Is it fair to say that this kind of approach is somehow reflective of a growing sense that global fish stocks are at risk, that the status quo is not leading us where we want to go, and that we need to be taking a new approach to international management of fish stocks? Is this kind of clause part of that or is it from some other motivation?