L’objectif de cette thèse est de mieux appréhender les déterminants du risque souverain et de la soutenabilité budgétaire des pays émergents, afin d’identifier les éléments qui permettraient à ces pays de se protéger d’un tel risque. Nous mettons en place des outils économétriques et théoriques adaptés aux particularités de ces pays. Ces derniers sont ensuite déclinés pour tenter d’anticiper les épisodes de défaut souverain sévère via un modèle à changement de régime de type "early warning", pour effectuer des simulations stochastiques de ratio de dette souveraine à moyen-terme et évaluer les effets de politiques budgétaires définies à cet horizon et enfin, pour caractériser la distribution du ratio de dette externe de ces pays. Cette thèse entend ainsi identifier les pays qui semblent les plus exposés au risque souverain et définir des recommandations de politique économique qui prennent en compte l’hétérogénéité au sein du «bloc» des pays émergents et au cours du temps. / The objective of this thesis is to obtain a better understanding of the determinants of sovereign default and medium-term sustainability inemerging market countries, so as to define ways through which they may protect themselves from these sovereign risks. We provide econometric tools and a theoretical model that are adapted to these countries’ specific features. This aims to anticipate severe sovereign default episodes through a regime switching early-warning type model, to assess medium-term public debt prospects and the impact of defined fiscal policies through stochastic debt simulations and to characterize the distribution of the external debt ratio of emerging market countries. It eventually enables to identify the countries that are the most exposed to sovereign risk and to draw up a set of policy recommendations, allowing for a differentiation within this heterogeneous block of countries and through time.

La dernière crise financière et les crises des dettes souveraines successives ont mis en lumière l'enjeu majeur de l’encadrement du marché de la distribution du crédit bancaire. Le principal questionnement aura porté sur la nécessité, sinon l’opportunité, de sacrifier « un peu de liberté » pour un « peu de sécurité » dans le processus de distribution du crédit. À ce titre, deux voies ont fondamentalement cohabité dans la mise en place de limites à la une liberté totale. D’une part, les législateurs et organes réglementaires ont entrepris, du niveau interne au niveau international, en passant par l’incontournable niveau communautaire, d’encadrer les caractéristiques intrinsèques des acteurs du marché du crédit et leur environnement juridique. Cet encadrement a été impulsé par des instances internationales, plus promptes à réagir en cas de crise, mais a été progressivement adapté et intégré dans le droit positif. Cette intégration a justement eu pour effet premier de lui conférer un caractère normatif. Ainsi les dispositions normatives, légales ou réglementaires sont devenues un instrument majeur afin de cantonner les risques individuels et de prévenir le risque systémique. À ce titre, la norme, au sens extensif, est intervenue chaque fois qu’un risque était avéré, ou qu’il était soupçonné. L’écueil presque naturel a été une inflation quasi-exponentielle des normes et une juxtaposition des niveaux de normativité. La prise de conscience de cette situation a mené à faire cohabiter le « droit dur », contraignant et rigide, avec un droit plus souple et plus pragmatique. Dès lors, le droit positif a vu apparaître des obligations dites « professionnelles » qui viennent régir non pas la personne des dispensateurs de crédit, mais bien leur comportement lorsqu’ils établissement une relation contractuelle de crédit. Les obligations professionnelles ne visent pas à répondre à la même finalité que la norme au sens propre, elles ont une vocation d’indication, d’information afin d’établir des standards modulables, pragmatiques et flexible pour les contrats de crédit. Le contrat de crédit se complexifie, ce qui impose l’intervention d’un droit flexible, facilement adaptable, et dont la motivation première n’est pas la contrainte ou la sanction, mais l’accompagnement dans la vie du contrat. L’obligation professionnelle est à envisager comme une « norme de comportement ». Ainsi cette étude tente-t-elle de démontrer comment la dualité d’intervention entre norme prudentielle et obligation professionnelle permet sans aucun doute de préserver l’intégrité du marché de la distribution de crédit mais qu’elle risque également dans certaines situations de remettre en cause ses principes de fonctionnement. / The latest financial crisis and successive sovereign debt crises have highlighted the major challenge of framing the market for the distribution of bank credit. The main question was whether or not it would be appropriate to give up on a bit of freedom for more security in the credit distribution process. In this respect, two paths have basically cohabited in the establishment of limits to total freedom. On the one hand, legislators and regulatory bodies have undertaken, from the internal level to the international level, and also the Community level, to frame the intrinsic characteristics of the players in the credit market and their legal environment. This framework has been driven by international bodies, which are quicker to react in the event of a crisis, but has gradually been adapted and integrated into positive law. This integration has had the primary effect of giving it a normative character. Thus, normative, legal or regulatory provisions have become a major instrument to limit individual risks and prevent systemic risk. As such, the standard, in the broad sense of the term, has been applied whenever a risk has been proven or suspected. The almost natural pitfall has been a near-exponential inflation of standards and a juxtaposition of levels of normativity. Awareness of this situation has led to the coexistence of "hard law", which is both binding and rigid, with a more flexible and pragmatic law. As a result, positive law has seen the emergence of so-called "professional" obligations which govern not the person of the credit grantors, but their behaviour when they establish a contractual credit relationship. The almost natural pitfall has been a near-exponential inflation of norms and a juxtaposition of levels of normativity. The awareness of this situation has led to the coexistence of hard law, binding and rigid, with a more flexible and pragmatic law. Therefore, the positive law has seen the appearance of so-called "professional" obligations, which govern not the person of the credit providers, but their behavior when establishing a contractual credit relationship. Professional obligations are not intended to fulfill the same purpose as the norm in the literal sense, they are intended to provide guidance and information in order to establish flexible, pragmatic and flexible standards for credit agreements. The credit agreement is becoming more complex, requiring the intervention of a flexible and easily adaptable right, the primary motivation of which is not coercion or punishment, but support in the life of the contract. The professional obligation is to be seen as a "standard of behaviour".Thus, this study attempts to demonstrate how the duality of intervention between prudential standard and professional obligation undoubtedly preserves the integrity of the credit distribution market, but that this duality also risks, in certain situations, to call into question its operating principles.

This dissertation analyses the idea that parliament controls public money in parliamentary constitutional systems of government. That analysis proceeds through an historical and contemporary examination of the way legal practices distribute authority over public money between different institutions of government. The legislative and judicial practices concerning taxation, public expenditure, sovereign borrowing, and the government financing activities of central banks are selected for close attention. The contemporary analysis focuses on the design and operation of those legal practices in the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth of Australia, in the context of the boom-bust-recovery economic conditions experienced between 2005 and 2016. The dissertation's ultimate claims are explanatory: that "parliamentary control" is a poor explanation of the distribution of financial authority in parliamentary systems of government and should be jettisoned in favour of an idea of "parliamentary ratification". An empirically engaged methodology is adopted throughout the dissertation and (historical and contemporary) public sector financial data enrich the legal analysis. The dissertation acknowledges the impact of, but remains agnostic between, different economic and political perspectives on fiscal discipline and public financial administration. The dissertation makes a number of original contributions. It provides a detailed examination of the historical development, legal operation and constitutional significance of annual appropriation legislation, and the legal regimes governing sovereign borrowing and monetary finance. It also analyses the way that law interacts with government behaviour in situations of economic emergencies (focusing on the Bank of England's public financing activities since 2008), and the institutional and doctrinal obstacles facing judicial involvement in disputes concerning public finance (focusing on the Australian judiciary's recent engagements with public expenditure legislation).