Godwin’s chapter considers the experience to date of convergence in the area of financial law and, specifically, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (‘Model Law’). In particular, the chapter examines the factors that prevent convergence in the area of financial law or, to put it differently, the factors behind divergence. It is suggested that through an examination of these factors, it is possible to assess the practicalities – and the relative merits - of convergence. Such an examination also offers insights into the appropriateness of mechanisms that might be used to achieve convergence and the extent to which the mechanisms need to be tailored to the particular circumstances or legal terrain. The experience of the Model Law shows that full convergence in law (in terms of absolute uniformity) is neither realistic nor practicable and that there is a need to accept a degree of divergence in law between jurisdictions. It also suggests that divergence in law is not a negative as it often leads to convergence in outcomes. Further, divergence – or diversity - is positive if it achieves convergence in outcomes that could not otherwise be achieved as a result of fundamental differences between national legal systems.

As the Global Financial Crisis has demonstrated, any complex system is vulnerable to fragility without purpose and vigilance. The tentacles of the finance industry traverse state boundaries. They create moral and economic hazards as well as opportunities. Each poses legitimacy and authority implications. Failure to address those threats have contributed to a populist turn, which poses the risk of further policy uncertainty and instability. Responding to this crisis through resilience as either metaphor or organising framework is, however, problematic. This chapter argues that notwithstanding its increasing usage by international bodies such as the G20, resilience is not a neutral concept. Privileging resilience as an end in itself may prove counterproductive unless underpinned by a normative reset of the purpose of the corporation and the market, and the duties and responsibilities each owe to society. It concludes that without clear definition of purpose, and accountability, regulatory structural form is irrelevant, as demonstrated by the failure and ineffectiveness of the Twin Peaks model in Australia.

Over the past two decades, an increasing number of jurisdictions have moved towards a model – or family – of financial regulation that is known as Twin Peaks. This model was pioneered in Australia following recommendations by the Wallis Inquiry, which was established in 1996 to review the financial system.The model separates financial regulation into two broad functions: market conduct regulation (which includes consumer protection) and prudential regulation. Each of these functions is vested in a separate ‘peak’ regulator. The Twin Peaks model has subsequently been adopted by the Netherlands, Belgium, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and South Africa. The model has also been considered in the United States. This chapter outlines the design of the Twin Peaks model and the following chapters in the book.

This chapter explores the Twin Peaks legal and regulatory framework in Australia, the challenges that have arisen in areas such as coordination and functional separation between the Twin Peaks regulators and the outcomes from numerous reviews in which the model has been subject to scrutiny. It explores the evolution of the Twin Peaks model in Australia and certain challenges that have arisen in governance, information-sharing and coordination, and funding arrangements. It then surveys the terrain in Australia by outlining the recommendations from a review of the financial system in 2014, the Financial System Inquiry (FSI), and subsequent recommendations and reforms, including those proposed by or arising out of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry.

Parasitism can affect every aspect of wildlife ecology, from predator avoidance and competition for food to migrations and reproduction. In the wild, these ecological effects can have implications for host fitness and parasite dynamics. In contrast, domestic environments are typically characterised by high host densities, low host diversity, and veterinary interventions, and are not subject to processes like predation, competition, and migration. When wild and domesticated hosts interact via shared parasite populations, understanding and predicting the outcomes of parasite ecology and evolution for wildlife conservation and sustainable farming can be a challenge. We describe the ecology and evolution of ectoparasitic sea lice that are shared by farmed and wild salmon and the insights that experiments, fieldwork, and mathematical modelling have generated for theory and applied problems of host–parasite interactions over the course of a long-term study in Pacific Canada. The salmon–sea lice host–parasite system provides a rich case study to examine the ecological context of host–parasite interactions and to shed light on the principal challenges of parasite management for wildlife health and conservation.