IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Le Portugal menacé d’insolvabilité


  • Eric Dor

    () (IESEG School of Management (LEM-CNRS))


Le ratio de surplus primaire qui est exigé pour stabiliser le ratio de dette publique dépend du taux de croissance nominal futur du PIB et des taux d’intérêts implicites. Le tableau suivant montre les ratios de surplus primaires qui sont exigés pour le Portugal pour différentes combinaisons de taux de croissance nominale et de taux d’intérêt implicite sur la dette.Avec le scénario officiel, qui est beaucoup trop optimiste, d’une forte croissance nominale à long terme et d’un taux d’intérêt implicite inchangé sur la dette, le Portugal peut même avoir un très faible déficit primaire du budget. Toutefois, sous des hypothèses réalistes de croissance nominale et taux d’intérêt implicite , stabiliser le ratio de dette exige que le Portugal ait un grand surplus primaire. Pour le scénario officiel qui est beaucoup trop optimiste, le solde primaire du Portugal devrait être légèrement supérieur à la moyenne historique. Un tel effort pourrait peut-être être accepté sur une période longue. Toutefois, sous des hypothèses réalistes, le solde primaire du Portugal devrait excéder énormément la moyenne historique. Il est très irréaliste de supposer que cela puisse être accepté politiquement et socialement.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Dor, 2013. "Le Portugal menacé d’insolvabilité," Working Papers 2013-ECO-15, IESEG School of Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:ies:wpaper:e201315

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Kimball, Miles S, 1990. "Precautionary Saving in the Small and in the Large," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 53-73, January.
    2. Modica, Salvatore & Scarsini, Marco, 2005. "A note on comparative downside risk aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 267-271, June.
    3. Amy Finkelstein & Erzo F. P. Luttmer & Matthew J. Notowidigdo, 2013. "What Good Is Wealth Without Health? The Effect Of Health On The Marginal Utility Of Consumption," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11, pages 221-258, January.
    4. Eeckhoudt, Louis & Schlesinger, Harris & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2009. "Apportioning of risks via stochastic dominance," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 994-1003, May.
    5. Sloan, Frank A. & Kip Viscusi, W. & Chesson, Harrell W. & Conover, Christopher J. & Whetten-Goldstein, Kathryn, 1998. "Alternative approaches to valuing intangible health losses: the evidence for multiple sclerosis1," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 475-497, August.
    6. Eeckhoudt, Louis R. & Hammitt, James K., 2004. "Does risk aversion increase the value of mortality risk?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 13-29, January.
    7. Kaïs Dachraoui & Georges Dionne & Louis Eeckhoudt & Philippe Godfroid, 2004. "Comparative Mixed Risk Aversion: Definition and Application to Self-Protection and Willingness to Pay," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 261-276, December.
    8. Louis Eeckhoudt & Béatrice Rey & Harris Schlesinger, 2007. "A Good Sign for Multivariate Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 117-124, January.
    9. Eeckhoudt, Louis R & Hammitt, James K, 2001. "Background Risks and the Value of a Statistical Life," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 261-279, November.
    10. Caballe, Jordi & Pomansky, Alexey, 1996. "Mixed Risk Aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 485-513, November.
    11. Dionne, Georges & Eeckhoudt, Louis, 1985. "Self-insurance, self-protection and increased risk aversion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 17(1-2), pages 39-42.
    12. Menezes, C & Geiss, C & Tressler, J, 1980. "Increasing Downside Risk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 921-932, December.
    13. Viscusi, W Kip & Evans, William N, 1990. "Utility Functions That Depend on Health Status: Estimates and Economic Implications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 353-374, June.
    14. Jytte Nielsen & Susan Chilton & Michael Jones-Lee & Hugh Metcalf, 2010. "How would you like your gain in life expectancy to be provided? An experimental approach," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 195-218, December.
    15. Ehrlich, Isaac & Becker, Gary S, 1972. "Market Insurance, Self-Insurance, and Self-Protection," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(4), pages 623-648, July-Aug..
    16. David Crainich & Louis Eeckhoudt, 2008. "On the intensity of downside risk aversion," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 267-276, June.
    17. Dionne, Georges & Li, Jingyuan, 2011. "The impact of prudence on optimal prevention revisited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 147-149.
    18. Jones-Lee, Michael W, 1974. "The Value of Changes in the Probability of Death or Injury," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(4), pages 835-849, July/Aug..
    19. Evans, William N & Viscusi, W Kip, 1991. "Estimation of State-Dependent Utility Functions Using Survey Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(1), pages 94-104, February.
    20. Domeij David & Johannesson Magnus, 2006. "Consumption and Health," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-30, May.
    21. Louis Eeckhoudt & Christian Gollier, 2005. "The impact of prudence on optimal prevention," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(4), pages 989-994, November.
    22. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56, pages 279-279.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ies:wpaper:e201315. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Monika Marin). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.