The first essay examines cross-sectional differences between money market mutual funds (MMMFs), in the context of the sponsoring fund family. While extant studies have shown that fund family characteristics impact the management of open-end equity mutual funds, results of this study’s analysis find that fund family characteristics also affect the management of MMMF assets, contributing to differences in the maturity of the fund’s holdings, expenses, and realized returns. I find that an MMMF is not simply a transitional account with a short-term low-risk investment objective, but rather, a critical role player within the fund family. Differences in maturity, yield, and expenses in MMMFs can be explained by family-specific characteristics, including diversification and cash management strategies at the family level. The second essay examines implications of substitutability of two similar financial assets: conventional index mutual funds and exchange traded funds (ETFs). I seek to explain the coexistence of these fund types, since both offer a claim on the same underlying index return process, but have different organizational structures. This study compares conventional open-end index funds with matched ETFs on various underlying indexes. Aggregate flows are used to detect substitution and clientele effects. I show that conventional funds and ETFs are substitutes, while ETFs have smaller tracking errors and lower fund expenses. However, I find that these fund types are not perfect substitutes, and their coexistence can be explained by a clientele effect that segregates them into different market niches.

Dans le contexte français d'ouverture du monde pénitentiaire et de développement des partenariats associatifs, les premiers « accueils des familles » voient le jour au cours des années 1980. Des bénévoles prennent l'initiative d'améliorer les conditions de visite au parloir en proposant un accueil pour les proches des personnes détenues. Depuis 2010, sollicitée par le principe d'« humanisation » des prisons prôné par les Règles Pénitentiaires Européennes, l'administration prend ce service d'accueil à sa charge en le délégant à des sociétés prestataires dans les établissements à « gestion mixte », publique et privée, sans pour autant exclure les associations.À la croisée de l'anthropologie et de la sociologie, à travers une ethnographie de longue durée menée au sein de lieux périphériques du domaine carcéral, la thèse interroge les politiques institutionnelles et les pratiques participatives des associations. Au prisme de leurs différentes matrices - compassionnelle, gestionnaire et sécuritaire - cette recherche analyse les processus de politisation et de fabrication symbolique des divers sujets (collectifs et individuels) impliqués. Elle étudie également les enjeux sociaux relevant de la « carcéralisation » d'espaces publics et de la « publicisation » d'espaces carcéraux. / In the French context of prison's opening up and developing partnerships with associations, first “Families Welcome” began in the 1980's. Volunteers take the initiative to create reception facilities for inmates' relatives when they come to the prison visiting room. Since 2010, in order to respect European Prison Rules, penitentiary administration handed over this service to the joint management of private and public companies, without excluding associations.Between anthropology and sociology, through long-term ethnography within this prison's periphery, this thesis raises questions about institutional practices and participatory dimension of associations. Through several models – compassion, management, and security – this research analyses the politicisation process and symbolic construction of the different subjects implicated (collective and individual). It also studies social issues relevant to the “carceralisation”, of public places and the publicity of prison facilities.