Person:
Jolliffe, Dean

Development Economics Data Group, The World Bank
Profile Picture
Author Name Variants
Fields of Specialization
Food security, Education economics, Health economics, Data collection methods, Measuring Poverty
Degrees
Departments
Development Economics Data Group, The World Bank
Externally Hosted Work
Contact Information
Last updated August 29, 2023
Biography
Dean Jolliffe is a lead economist in the Development Data Group at the World Bank. He is a member of the Living Standards Measurement Study team and co-lead of the team that works on global poverty measurement (PovcalNet). Previously, he worked in the Research Group and the South Asia region of the World Bank. Prior to joining the World Bank, he was a research economist with the Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, an assistant professor at Charles University Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education in Prague, an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University Public Policy Institute, and a postdoctoral fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute. Dean holds appointments as a research fellow with the Institute for the Study of Labor, as a co-opted council member of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, and as a fellow of the Global Labor Organization. He received his PhD in economics from Princeton University.
Citations 324 Scopus

Publication Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Data Gaps, Data Incomparability, and Data Imputation: A Review of Poverty Measurement Methods for Data-Scarce Environments
    (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2017-12) Dang, Hai-Anh ; Jolliffe, Dean ; Carletto, Calogero
    This paper reviews methods that have been employed to estimate poverty in contexts where household consumption data are unavailable or missing. These contexts range from completely missing and partially missing consumption data in cross-sectional household surveys, to missing panel household data. The paper focuses on methods that aim to compare trends and dynamic patterns of poverty outcomes over time. It presents the various methods under a common framework, with pedagogical discussion on the intuition. Empirical illustrations are provided using several rounds of household survey data from Vietnam. Furthermore, the paper provides a practical guide with detailed instructions on computer programs that can be used to implement the reviewed techniques.