Borlaug Scholar · Kerim Demirkol · Field Notes, Decoders, and the Path to a December 2026 Revision
Scholar-athlete  ·  Borlaug Scholar through the World Food Prize and Wageningen Youth Institute  ·  Recognised 26 January 2023

Borlaug Scholar.
The essay that started everything.

A Borlaug Scholar through the inaugural World Food Prize and Wageningen Youth Institute. Recognised in January 2023 for a research paper on obesity and food hunger in the Philippines, submitted the previous month. This page is the honest record, namely the original paper, the reviewer letter, the four Field Notes the recognition set in motion, the operational decoders that read every can, and the December 2026 revision still being written.

Why This Matters

The argument that earned the recognition

Most people treat obesity and food hunger as separate problems, namely one a crisis of excess and the other a crisis of scarcity. The 2022 paper argued they are the same problem in the Philippines. They are produced by the same broken food environment, driven by the same income inequality, and profited from by the same ultra-processed food economy. Any intervention has to be structural, not a consumer-side label-reading exercise.

The paper was named a Borlaug Scholar work. It also began the pathway toward medicine, because understanding how food systems fail people is not separate from understanding how to heal them.

The thesis, in its original wording
“The term ‘Food Literacy’ should go beyond food labels but a systemic governance measure to take corporations and individuals accountable for their routine decisions they make.”
Paper at a Glance
Author
Kerim Demirkol
Submitted to
Inaugural World Food Prize and Wageningen Youth Institute
Date
25 December 2022 (recognition: 26 January 2023)
Country study
Philippines (population 113 million; 54% urban, 46% rural)
Length
~3,300 words across biography, research materials, formal essay, and bibliography
Sources
9 references (Harvard, World Bank, UNICEF, WHO, Inquirer, ILO, others)
Recognition
Inaugural Borlaug Scholar designation, 2023
Read the Documents

The original paper, the summary, the reviewer letter

The Paradox

Two crises. One system. One country.

The Philippines is not a country with hunger in one neighbourhood and obesity in another. The two crises sit on the same retail shelves, in the same households, sometimes in the same body. The technical name is the triple burden of malnutrition: a body can be technically overweight while still missing iron, vitamin A, zinc. Cheap calories fill the stomach but starve the cell. The numbers below are from the 2023 National Nutrition Survey, presented by DOST-FNRI in June 2025.

Crisis One · Food Insecurity
31.4% of households
Filipino households experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity. Low income in cities prices families out of nutrition by the cost of quality.
Crisis Two · Adult Obesity
39.8% of adults
Adult obesity prevalence. Cheap, shelf-stable, ultra-processed food fills the calorie gap that fresh food cannot, at a long-term cardiovascular cost.
produced by the same food system
Sources · DOST-FNRI 2025 National Nutrition Summit, presenting 2023 NNS results · FIES food-insecurity module

The same corporations that profit from food insecurity sell ultra-processed food back into the affected households. The block with the obesity epidemic and the block with the food-hunger crisis are not two different blocks. They are the same block, with extreme income inequality as the engine driving both.

The Proposed System

From essay to policy architecture

The paper proposed a ten-point solution, organised around three forms of access. The recommendations were anchored in machinery that already existed in the Philippines, namely the Barangay Nutrition Scholars, the Interagency Task Force on Zero Hunger, and the National Nutrition Council, instead of imagining new institutions.

A · Access to Food
1
Municipal food banks managed by Barangay Nutrition Scholars
Plug into the existing Barangay Nutrition Scholar network rather than building a parallel institution.
2
Incentives for cultivating uncultivated farmland
Move idle land into food production with structured agricultural incentives.
3
Restrict ultra-processed overproduction
Limit the supply of cheap, shelf-stable processed product that crowds out fresh food in low-income markets.
B · Access to Health Education
4
Awareness campaigns on the double burden
Make obesity and food hunger legible as one problem rather than two separate moral framings.
5
Food Literacy as systemic governance
Redefine food literacy beyond food labels, namely as a governance measure that holds corporations and individuals accountable for routine food decisions.
6
Curriculum integration in public schools
Embed nutrition and food-system literacy in basic education so the next generation arrives knowing what is being sold to them.
C · Access to Opportunities
7
Rural water and farmland infrastructure
Treat rural infrastructure as the precondition for fresh-food economics, not as an afterthought.
8
Profitable food-bank business models
Design food banks that generate revenue rather than depending on indefinite charity, so the institution survives political cycles.
9
Tie-up with the Interagency Task Force on Zero Hunger
Connect the proposal to the existing inter-agency machinery rather than competing with it.
10
Coordination with the National Nutrition Council
Make the National Nutrition Council the policy home of the framework, so the work survives any single administration.
An Honest Reckoning

What the recognition came with, and what it didn’t

The paper had real diagnostic insight. It named the food environment as a single system, refused the consumer-blame framing, and grounded its solutions in existing institutions. That structural clarity is the part the World Food Prize Board of Reviewers responded to.

It also had the limitations of a first formal research paper. The reviewers caught them and named them, in writing, in 2023.

The five flaws the reviewers named, 2023
  • Solutions lacked detail. Big proposals; thin operational specifics.
  • The corporatised food-pantry proposal contradicted the paper’s own diagnosis. Asking the corporations to fund the fix while accusing them of profiting from the problem.
  • The research-materials section was decorative rather than analytical. Sources cited but not interrogated.
  • 49% of the paper consisted of quoted or copied source text without proper in-text citation. A discipline-of-attribution failure that has to be fixed before any medical-school admissions reader sees the work.
  • Two questions were left unanswered. One on government barriers; one on citizen levers. Both were structural, both deserved a real answer, neither got one.

For three years, that feedback was set aside. This page exists because hiding the critique alongside the recognition would betray the entire premise of being a Borlaug Scholar in the first place. Naming the flaws alongside the strengths is the point.

The full revision is targeted for completion by end of 2026, namely costed solutions, named stakeholders, geographic and cultural specificity, citation discipline at a medical-school admissions standard, and the system named as transnational rather than domestic.

The Borlaug Scholar Field Notes

Four Field Notes building toward the revision

The work between recognition and revision is not silent. The Borlaug Scholar Field Notes are an essay series that uses the global canned-sardine industry as a lens for examining food marketing, nutrition literacy, and economic inequality, namely the same diagnostic frame the revised paper has to inherit. Each Field Note is paired with an operational decoder that lets a reader audit one can on their own counter.

Field Note I  ·  The Borlaug Scholar Field Notes
The Same Can, Three Stories
The American price-premium case. Wild Planet, Fishwife, supermarket Bumble Bee, and what the gap between them reveals about who can afford honest food in the United States. The opening Field Note of the series.
Read Field Note I →
Field Note II  ·  The Borlaug Scholar Field Notes
The Charity Can
The Philippine health-washing case. In June 2025 a Texas wellness body declared a Filipino canned-fish brand a superfood. By January 2026 the Manila Times had filed it under “Filipino Champions.” A long-form investigation, namely ten-year fisheries data, regulatory sodium thresholds across three continents, and the corporate timeline.
Read Field Note II →
Field Note III  ·  The Borlaug Scholar Field Notes
The Listed Can, the Quiet Owners
The equity-register essay. Across the twenty mapped countries of the global sardine industry, only four publicly listed companies surface as clean public-company proxies, namely Thai Union, Century Pacific, Oceana, and Unimer. Beyond those four, the private layer is, by several measures, larger than the public one. Field Note III names the structure.
Read Field Note III →
Field Note IV  ·  The Borlaug Scholar Field Notes
The Fish That Solved Distance
The preservation-history essay. Roman fish-salting ran from roughly 200 BCE through 400 CE. Industrial canning was invented at Massy in 1810. The first sardine cannery opened at Nantes in 1824. The last American cannery closed in Maine in 2010. Field Note IV reads the centuries in which a single can sits.
Read Field Note IV →
The Toolkit

The decoders that let a reader audit one can

Each Field Note is paired with an operational decoder. A reader who finishes a Field Note can immediately audit the can in their hand. The five tools sit in the same evidence-disciplined frame as the original paper, namely structural rather than consumer-blame, with explicit evidence-confidence levels stated throughout.

Explore More
Calculate · Commit · Continue