IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i6p2687-d1614899.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global Warming Assessment of Dairy Farms: A Case Study of Organic and Conventional Fluid Milk in Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • Dussadee Rattanaphra

    (Nuclear Technology Research and Development Center, Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology, Nakorn Nayok 26120, Thailand)

  • Sittinun Tawkaew

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Srinakharinwirot University, Nakorn Nayok 26120, Thailand)

  • Wilasinee Kingkam

    (Nuclear Technology Research and Development Center, Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology, Nakorn Nayok 26120, Thailand)

  • Sasikarn Nuchdang

    (Nuclear Technology Research and Development Center, Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology, Nakorn Nayok 26120, Thailand)

  • Kittiwan Kitpakornsanti

    (Climate Change and Environment Research Center, Department of Climate Change and Environment, Technopolis, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand)

  • Unchalee Suwanmanee

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Srinakharinwirot University, Nakorn Nayok 26120, Thailand)

Abstract

The international trade in organic food has obviously increased potential in the past decade. The present study was conducted to assess and compare the first global warming impact of fluid milk production in Thailand associated to two systems, namely organic and conventional farms, by applying LCA for a case study approach. The assessment was based on a cradle-to-farm gate, with 1 kg of fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM) as a functional unit (FU). The environmental impact was evaluated according to International Dairy Federation or biological allocation. The results showed that the global warming values of organic farms (2.366–2.783 kg CO 2 equivalent/kg FPCM) were 47% moderately higher than those of conventional farms (1.253–1.474 kg CO 2 equivalent/kg FPCM). The main contributors to the global warming impact were feed consumption and CH 4 emission, accounting for 33.41% and 33.19%, respectively. The highest global warming impact was found in the stages of lactating cow. Another interesting finding was lack of local organic feed with a relatively high impact on transportation stage. Based on biological allocation, the global warming impact was increased over 12.652–13.107% by the mass allocation method, whereas economic allocation exhibited no effect on the global warming impact. A sensitivity analysis result indicated that the organic farm was economically feasible as an alternative to conventional farm. The substitution of conventional farming with organic farming of 10–50% led to an annual global warming impact in Thailand of 8–30% higher than that of conventional farms.

Suggested Citation

  • Dussadee Rattanaphra & Sittinun Tawkaew & Wilasinee Kingkam & Sasikarn Nuchdang & Kittiwan Kitpakornsanti & Unchalee Suwanmanee, 2025. "Global Warming Assessment of Dairy Farms: A Case Study of Organic and Conventional Fluid Milk in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-20, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:6:p:2687-:d:1614899
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/6/2687/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/6/2687/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nijdam, Durk & Rood, Trudy & Westhoek, Henk, 2012. "The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 760-770.
    2. Maria Baldini & Lorenzo Dal Maso & Giovanni Liberatore & Francesco Mazzi & Simone Terzani, 2018. "Role of Country- and Firm-Level Determinants in Environmental, Social, and Governance Disclosure," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 79-98, June.
    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. Emmanuel Wabanhu & Prof. Baltazar Namwata & Dr. Faustine Panga, 2025. "The Moderating Role of Customer Green Interest in the Relationship between Legal Framework and Green Supply Chain Management of Restaurants in Tanzania," International Journal of Supply Chain and Logistics, CARI Journals Limited, vol. 9(7), pages 1-18.
    2. Fengxue Yin & Yanling Xiao & Rui Cao & Jianhua Zhang, 2023. "Impacts of ESG Disclosure on Corporate Carbon Performance: Empirical Evidence from Listed Companies in Heavy Pollution Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-19, October.
    3. Claudia Arena & Saverio Bozzolan & Claudia Imperatore, 2024. "Enhancing environmental reporting: A study on the role of narrative disclosure, firm‐ and country‐level incentives," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 3414-3428, July.
    4. Nusirat Ojuolape Gold & Fauziah Md. Taib & Yaxin Ma, 2022. "Firm-Level Attributes, Industry-Specific Factors, Stakeholder Pressure, and Country-Level Attributes: Global Evidence of What Inspires Corporate Sustainability Practices and Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-28, October.
    5. Hanen Khemakhem & Paulina Arroyo & Julio Montecinos, 2023. "Gender diversity on board committees and ESG disclosure: evidence from Canada," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(4), pages 1397-1422, December.
    6. Huangling Gu & Yan Liu & Hao Xia & Zilong Li & Liyuan Huang & Yanjia Zeng, 2023. "Temporal and Spatial Differences in CO 2 Equivalent Emissions and Carbon Compensation Caused by Land Use Changes and Industrial Development in Hunan Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, May.
    7. Shang, Hua & Jiang, Li & Kumar Mangla, Sachin & Pan, Xiongfeng & Song, Malin, 2024. "Examining the role of national governance capacity in building the global low-carbon agricultural supply chains," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    8. Adam Arian & John Sands & Stuart Tooley, 2023. "Industry and Stakeholder Impacts on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Financial Performance: Consumer vs. Industrial Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-21, August.
    9. Angelo Leogrande & Domenico Leogrande & Alberto Costantiello, 2023. "The Role of Unemployment in the ESG Model at World Level," Working Papers hal-04154793, HAL.
    10. Kaouther Chebbi & Mohammed Abdullah Ammer, 2022. "Board Composition and ESG Disclosure in Saudi Arabia: The Moderating Role of Corporate Governance Reforms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.
    11. Wu, Shilei & Zhou, Fu-You & Si, Deng-Kui & Hao, Jiawei, 2025. "Does ESG rating policy reduce corporate risk-taking? Evidence from China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    12. Helen Harwatt & Joan Sabaté & Gidon Eshel & Sam Soret & William Ripple, 2017. "Substituting beans for beef as a contribution toward US climate change targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 261-270, July.
    13. Dominic Lemken & Mandy Knigge & Stephan Meyerding & Achim Spiller, 2017. "The Value of Environmental and Health Claims on New Legume Products: A Non-Hypothetical Online Auction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, July.
    14. Peter Scarborough & Paul Appleby & Anja Mizdrak & Adam Briggs & Ruth Travis & Kathryn Bradbury & Timothy Key, 2014. "Dietary greenhouse gas emissions of meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 179-192, July.
    15. Changlin Ji & Yuwei Feng, 2025. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: Evaluating the Innovation-Boosting Potential of Low-Carbon Pilot Policies: A Multi-Subject Co-Governance Perspective," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 16(2), pages 6033-6072, June.
    16. Thorn, Alexandra M. & Baker, Michael J. & Peters, Christian J., 2021. "Estimating biological capacity for grass-finished ruminant meat production in New England and New York," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    17. Chantal Le Mouël & Anna Birgit Milford & Benjamin L. Bodirsky & Susanne Rolinski, 2019. "Drivers of meat consumption," Post-Print hal-02175593, HAL.
    18. Dorfleitner, Gregor & Kreuzer, Christian & Sparrer, Christian, 2022. "To sin in secret is no sin at all: On the linkage of policy, society, culture, and firm characteristics with corporate scandals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 762-784.
    19. Renate Boronowsky & Kevin Lin-Yang & Lucretia Natanson & Kira Presley & Yashvi Reddy & Alexis Shenkiryk & May Wang & Wendelin Slusser & Pamela A. Koch & David A. Cleveland & Shannon Roback & Deborah O, 2025. "The Carbon Footprint of School Lunch: Moving Toward a Healthy and Sustainable Future for the Next Generation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-21, March.
    20. Jennifer A. Jay & Raffaella D’Auria & J. Cully Nordby & David Andy Rice & David A. Cleveland & Anthony Friscia & Sophie Kissinger & Marc Levis & Hannah Malan & Deepak Rajagopal & Joel R. Reynolds & We, 2019. "Reduction of the carbon footprint of college freshman diets after a food-based environmental science course," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 547-564, 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:2025:i:6:p:2687-:d:1614899. 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.