...
Some are harmful; some may help to solve the problem of overfishing. In view of this, WTO agreed on restricting subsidies designed to promote export and establish controls over other form of subsidies. However, certain countries, such as Canada, favors Canada,Japan, and other countries with large fishery industry, endorses the "no-need approach" in which no restriction of subsidies should be imposed as they dispute the casual link between subsidies and overexploitation of fish resources. They propose fisheries management regimes deal with catch controls (quotas), effort controls (restrictions on boat size, engine power and days at sea, etc.) and right-based structures (permits, individual transferable quotas, etc.). Therefore, in Japan's view, it would be unfair if these varying situations are ignored and certain fisheries subsidies automatically prohibited.
Other countries propose the Traffic Light approach: red (forbidden subsidies), green (permitted subsidies), amber (slow down, which means that subsidies may be subjected to a complaint on the basis of their adverse trade effects). By this approach, desirable subsidies will be maintained while direct payment to promote export would be banned or discouraged.
This measure has been supported by countries like Norway.
Sources used in my research:
...