1. Recent research signals direction—not certification
The Department of Agriculture's 19 August 2026 notice refers to assigning evaluators for a prototype low-carbon crop learning centre and considering an extension of research on greenhouse-gas reduction processes for economic crops, including durian, mango, sugarcane, oil palm, cassava and rubber, alongside carbon-credit and assessor-development objectives. It indicates that low-carbon production is being built as a system capability for Thai agriculture.
The notice does not publish a universal durian footprint, verified reductions for every orchard, or any Siam Diamond certification. Operators should treat it as a signal to prepare reliable data—not as marketing evidence in place of their own calculation and verification.
2. Separate footprint, label and credit
A product carbon footprint quantifies greenhouse-gas emissions per product unit within a defined boundary and method. A carbon label is permission to use a certification mark after the applicable documents and verification process. A carbon credit arises from a reduction or removal project that follows an approved methodology and programme process.
A footprint number does not automatically become a credit, and improving one orchard activity does not automatically earn a product label. Safe communication states the actual stage—for example, baseline data collection, a resource-efficiency pilot or verification in progress—together with its boundary and period.
3. A data map for the durian value chain
The following is an implementation checklist derived from TGO's life-cycle framing. It is not a durian-specific product rule or ready-made calculation. The unit, boundary, allocation method and emission factors must be set for the real purpose with qualified support.
- Orchard: fertiliser and soil inputs, fuel, electricity, water, residue management, machinery, yield and loss by area, season and lot
- Packhouse: electricity, water, cleaning materials, rejects, storage and the mass link between incoming fruit and export output
- Packaging: material type, weight, supplier evidence, recycled content and packing waste
- Logistics: distance, mode, load, transfer points and temperature-control energy where relevant
- Destination and waste: use-stage boundary, fruit loss, husk and packaging treatment, and evidence behind assumptions
4. Data governance matters as much as the formula
Good evidence identifies who collected each value, which meter, invoice or system produced it, the covered period, the linked area or lot, and any later change. Store activity value, unit, source document, data owner and emission-factor version together. TGO announced updated product-footprint emission factors in May 2026, so values copied from an old workbook should not be reused without checking version and suitability.
Before building a dashboard, define a data dictionary and Evidence ID for every record, connect source data to calculations and retain change history. This makes verification faster and helps management distinguish a real reduction from yield variation or a boundary change.
5. A 90-day pilot from baseline to reduction project
First assign data owners, define the product unit and boundary, and select a pilot lot. Collect real activity data with source documents, identify gaps and produce the first baseline. Then rank material emission sources, select measures that do not compromise quality or safety, test at small scale and compare under explainable conditions.
Before any public claim, require four gates: reviewed boundary and method, complete evidence, current emission factors and wording aligned with verification status. Internal KPIs can track data completeness, evidence close-out time, primary-data coverage and measures with demonstrated results—without publishing a reduction until the comparison base is credible.
