Conflicting policies across insolvency and other areas of law: squaring the circle?

In times of economic difficulty, insolvency law becomes increasingly important. The traditional policy motivation for insolvency law has been the protection of creditors. Yet insolvency scenarios can also involve other areas of law, such as protection of the environment, respect for human rights, reward of innovation and pensions; and these areas have goals other than the protection of creditors. Further, the practical tools which insolvency law makes available for creditors, and the power which insolvency law confers on the court in this respect, can lead to these other goals coming (indirectly) before insolvency courts.

Research aims (which could be pursued in respect of a range of countries) are:

(1) Changes in judicial approaches over time in decision making in insolvency to considering objectives other than the protection of creditors
(2) Should judges making decisions in insolvency should look to other policy goals, including considering the extent to which judges (and insolvency lawyers) are properly aware of these goals, and the impact of this approach on certainty and proportionality in decision making
(3) Would looking to other policy goals in insolvency decision making involve
unwarranted judicial activism?
(4) Should new approaches be taken to policymaking in insolvency legislation and regulation to enable clearer regard to other policy goals in some cases?