reducing "Crew-caused"
approach and landing

Pilot-in-charge Monitored Approach

In procedural terms, yes. The procedure is often referred to simply as "monitored approach".  It has also been referred to as "pilot-monitored"  "split", "delegated" and "delegated handling" approach or procedure.  In what seems to be the only research paper that has addressed general perceptions of what "monitored approach" means in the aviation community as a whole (FAA sponsored 2004), one finding was that the simple term "monitored approach" is ambiguous and was believed by some pilots to refer to approaches monitored by Air Traffic Control. 

It is also an almost universal SOP requirement that the "Pilot Not Flying (PNF)" monitors the "Pilot Flying (PF)".  Many pilots using "traditional" PF/PNF procedures where the PF flies both approach and landing are offended by the implication that their approaches are not being monitored: of course, they are. Some authorities get around this by referring to the procedure as the "pilot monitored approach" (PMA) as opposed to "co-pilot monitored".  Current thinking specifically replaces the negative term "pilot NOT flying" term with the positive term "pilot monitoring (PM)".
Because of these common misperceptions, I have used the term "Pilot-in-charge Monitored Approach", to encapusulate the basic philosophy: it is a procedure in which the second pilot or co-pilot handles the aircraft for the approach, being monitored by the pilot in charge, who will be doing the landing. lt is shortened to PicMA for simplicity in this website.