IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2024i1p222-d1557581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Mitigation in Durian Cultivation in Thailand Using the House of Risk (HOR) Method: A Case Study of Pak Chong GI Durian

Author

Listed:
  • Phongchai Jittamai

    (School of Industrial Engineering, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand)

  • Sovann Toek

    (School of Industrial Engineering, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand)

  • Phumrapee Sathaporn

    (School of Industrial Engineering, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand)

  • Kingkan Kongkanjana

    (School of Industrial Engineering, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand)

  • Natdanai Chanlawong

    (School of Industrial Engineering, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand)

Abstract

Durian, often regarded as the “king of fruits”, plays a significant role in Thailand’s economy, with durian production expanding rapidly due to its profitability and high demand in both domestic and international markets. This growth has introduced challenges, particularly for geographic indication (GI)-certified durians like those from Pak Chong, where the unique soil, climate, and cultivation practices contribute to the fruit’s distinctive quality. Maintaining these standards is crucial to preserving GI certification, but farmers face increasing risks related to pests, diseases, climate variability, and cultivation practices. Effective risk management is essential to ensure the quality and sustainability of GI-certified durian production. This study analyzes risks in Pak Chong GI durian cultivation and proposes strategies to mitigate these risks. The House of Risk (HOR) method was used to identify potential risks at various stages of durian cultivation, including planting, maintenance, pre-harvest, harvest, and postharvest, and to recommend proactive mitigation strategies. This case study focuses on Pak Chong GI durian farmers. Thirty-one risk events driven by 17 risk agents were identified throughout the durian cultivation process. Key risk agents included observation of durian tree behavior, physical characteristics of the planting area, irrigation quantity, understanding of nutrient management, soil nutrients, and soil pH. The three most significant mitigation strategies identified were the implementation of targeted training and learning programs, improved data collection and plating progress tracking ability, and investment in advanced cultivation technology. This study analyzes the critical risks in Pak Chong GI-certified durian cultivation and proposes targeted mitigation strategies using the House of Risk (HOR) method. By identifying risks (HOR1) and developing proactive solutions (HOR2) across key cultivation stages, this research offers practical insights to enhance the quality and sustainability of GI-certified durian production. The findings aim to support farmers, policymakers, and stakeholders in preserving the economic and cultural value of Pak Chong durians.

Suggested Citation

  • Phongchai Jittamai & Sovann Toek & Phumrapee Sathaporn & Kingkan Kongkanjana & Natdanai Chanlawong, 2024. "Risk Mitigation in Durian Cultivation in Thailand Using the House of Risk (HOR) Method: A Case Study of Pak Chong GI Durian," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2024:i:1:p:222-:d:1557581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/1/222/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/1/222/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nadezda JANKELOVA & Dusan MASAR & Stefania MORICOVA, 2017. "Risk factors in the agriculture sector," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 63(6), pages 247-258.
    2. Tran Trong Phuong & Tran Duc Vien & Cao Truong Son & Doan Thanh Thuy & Stefan Greiving, 2024. "Impact of Climate Change on Agricultural Production and Food Security: A Case Study in the Mekong River Delta of Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Bingxia Wang & Mohd Azmi Haron & Zailan Siri, 2024. "The Impact of Air Pollution Risk on the Sustainability of Crop Insurance Losses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Mao, Hui & Zhou, Li & Ifft, Jennifer & Ying, RuiYao, 2019. "Risk preferences, production contracts and technology adoption by broiler farmers in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 147-159.
    5. Angelos Prentzas & Thomas Bournaris & Stefanos Nastis & Christina Moulogianni & George Vlontzos, 2024. "Enhancing Sustainability through Weather Derivative Option Contracts: A Risk Management Tool in Greek Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-18, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shufen Tang & Yuqing Zheng & Taiping Li & Li Zhou, 2021. "The hold‐up problem in China's broiler industry: Empirical evidence from Jiangsu Province," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 69(4), pages 539-554, December.
    2. Niles, Meredith T. & Stahlmann-Brown, Philip & Wesselbaum, Dennis, 2025. "Risk tolerance and climate concerns predict transformative agricultural land use change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    3. Agata Malak-Rawlikowska & Monika Gębska & Robert Hoste & Christine Leeb & Claudio Montanari & Michael Wallace & Kees de Roest, 2021. "Developing a Methodology for Aggregated Assessment of the Economic Sustainability of Pig Farms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-25, March.
    4. Peng Peng & Zhigang Xu, 2022. "Price expectations, risk aversion, and choice of sales methods for large‐scale farmers under incomplete market conditions," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 1012-1031, October.
    5. Wicki, Ludwik & Wicka, Aleksandra, 2024. "Changes in the Macroenvironment and New Threats to Farms," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2024(2).
    6. Bingxia Wang & Zailan Siri & Mohd Azmi Haron, 2025. "Threshold Effects of PM 2.5 on Pension Contributions: A Fuzzy Regression Discontinuity Design and Machine Learning Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-27, September.
    7. Chowdhury, Shyamal & Satish, Varun & Sulaiman, Munshi & Sun, Yi, 2022. "Sooner rather than later: Social networks and technology adoption," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 466-482.
    8. Tomas MACAK & Jan HRON, 2017. "The cybernetic stability of microeconomic variables in the agricultural sector: A case study from the agritourism field," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 63(12), pages 531-538.
    9. Xiaojing Li & Yanhua Li & Zhe Chen, 2024. "Impact of Rural E-Commerce Participation on Farmers’ Household Development Resilience: Evidence from 1229 Farmers in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-21, April.
    10. Chowdhury, Shyamal & Satish, Varun & Sulaiman, Munshi & Sun, Yi, 2021. "Sooner Rather Than Later: Social Networks and Technology Adoption," IZA Discussion Papers 14307, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Haolong Liu, 2022. "The Tripartite Evolutionary Game of Green Agro-Product Supply in an Agricultural Industrialization Consortium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    12. Mao, Hui & Zhou, Li & Ying, RuiYao & Pan, Dan, 2021. "Time Preferences and green agricultural technology adoption: Field evidence from rice farmers in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    13. Medvediev, Ievgen & Muzylyov, Dmitriy & Montewka, Jakub, 2024. "A model for agribusiness supply chain risk management using fuzzy logic. Case study: Grain route from Ukraine to Poland," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    14. Mirela Cristea & Gratiela Georgiana Noja, 2019. "European agriculture under immigration effects: New empirical evidence," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 65(3), pages 112-122.
    15. Lu, Qihui & Liao, Changhua & Chen, Meilan & Shi, Victor & Hu, Xiangling & Hu, Weiwei, 2024. "Platform financing or bank financing in agricultural supply chains: The impact of platform digital empowerment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(3), pages 952-964.
    16. Xinyan Hu & Xiangpo Chen & Siqi Yao & Gaiqing Zhang, 2022. "The Great Chinese Famine (1959–1961) and farm households’ adoption of technology: evidence from China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(1), pages 93-117, January.
    17. Huseyin Tayyar Guldal & Ozdal Koksal & Osman Orkan Ozer & Onur Terzi & Erdogan Gunes & Aysegul Selisik, 2024. "Unravelling risk factors in Turkish wheat in a changing global landscape," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 70(11), pages 527-540.
    18. Mishal Trevor Morepje & Isaac Azikiwe Agholor & Moses Zakhele Sithole & Lethu Inneth Mgwenya & Nomzamo Sharon Msweli & Variety Nkateko Thabane, 2024. "An Analysis of the Acceptance of Water Management Systems among Smallholder Farmers in Numbi, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-18, February.
    19. Mao, Hui & Fu, Yong, 2024. "Risk preference and relative poverty: An analysis based on the data of China Family Panel Studies," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 220-232.
    20. Tuoyuan Cheng & Saikiran Reddy Poreddy & Kan Chen, 2025. "Tail Risk in Weather Derivatives," Commodities, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-17, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2024:i:1:p:222-:d:1557581. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.