Troubling Taxonomies: How to Standardize Sustainability Reporting for Commercial Property in Thailand

Chakrapan Pawangkarat

Head of Property and Asset Management, JLL Thailand

Board member, Property Management Association of Thailand

25 March 2025

Thailand’s commercial property sector is thriving, with gleaming malls, towering offices in Bangkok, luxurious resorts in Phuket, and sprawling industrial estates in the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC). Yet, as sustainability gains traction—spurred by climate threats like flooding and heatwaves, alongside growing demands from investors and tenants—the absence of standardized sustainability reporting creates a significant roadblock. Developers wrestle with Thailand’s TREES (Thai Rating of Energy and Environmental Sustainability), global certifications like LEED, and inconsistent local metrics, resulting in a disjointed system. How can Thailand streamline these troubling taxonomies to provide clear, comparable sustainability data for its commercial properties? Let’s dive in, with concrete examples of what a standardized report might entail.

The Disarray in Thailand’s Reporting Landscape

Sustainability reporting for Thai commercial properties is a cluttered field. Some developers highlight energy-efficient designs under TREES, while others focus on waste management with custom metrics. Smaller operators in Chiang Mai or Pattaya often bypass reporting entirely, lacking the means or motivation.

Multinational tenants—like global coffee chains or hotel brands—push for LEED compliance, which clashes with local standards. Thailand’s Energy Conservation Promotion Act mandates energy audits for large buildings, but this adds yet another layer of complexity without unifying the approach.

This lack of cohesion undermines progress. An office building in Bangkok might advertise “sustainability” with rooftop solar panels, sidestepping the high embodied carbon from its concrete structure.

Investors, including Thai pension funds and foreign REITs, find it tough to evaluate portfolios. Greenwashing flourishes—picture eco-friendly claims that gloss over poor water management in drought-hit areas. Without a standardized framework, Thailand’s property sector risks losing ground in the global push for sustainability.

Why Standardization Is Critical for Thailand

A unified reporting standard could revolutionize Thailand’s commercial property market. It would enable comparability—crucial as Bangkok vies with regional peers like Singapore. If two major shopping malls report energy use consistently, tenants and investors can make apples-to-apples comparisons. It would also ease the burden on developers who currently juggle multiple frameworks, cutting compliance costs. Above all, it would address Thailand’s climate vulnerabilities—flood-prone urban centers and a tourism industry sensitive to environmental decline require transparent ESG data to drive action.

The economic implications are substantial. Commercial property underpins Thailand’s economy, from retail hubs to EEC logistics centers, and sustainability increasingly influences property values. Standardized reporting could attract green financing—say, from the Asian Development Bank—while outdated buildings face obsolescence as Thailand pursues its Paris Agreement goals.

Taxonomy Challenges in Thailand

The crux of the problem is Thailand’s lack of a unified sustainability taxonomy. TREES, crafted by the Thai Green Building Institute (TGBI), emphasizes energy efficiency and tropical architecture—like shaded facades and natural ventilation—but neglects embodied carbon or social factors such as construction worker conditions. LEED, popular with international firms, prioritizes global benchmarks that don’t fully account for Thailand’s humid climate or flood risks. A Phuket resort might excel under TREES for water recycling but falter under LEED due to energy-heavy luxury features. This mismatch confuses stakeholders and weakens impact.

Steps Toward a Thai Framework—with Concrete Examples

Standardizing sustainability reporting for Thai commercial properties calls for a tailored, enforceable system. Here’s how it could take shape, with sample report excerpts:

1. A National Standard with Global Alignment

   
   

   Thailand could bolster TREES into a mandatory standard, weaving in global metrics (e.g., from the ISSB) while addressing local priorities like flood resilience. Key indicators might include energy intensity, water use, waste diversion, and embodied carbon.

   Sample Report Snippet (Bangkok Shopping Mall):  

   • Energy Intensity: 180 kWh/m²/year (target: <150 kWh/m²)

   • Water Use: 0.8 m³/m²/year (target: <1 m³/m²)

   • Waste Diversion: 65% recycled (target: 70%)

   • Embodied Carbon: 500 kg CO₂e/m² from construction (benchmark: 450 kg CO₂e/m²)

   
   

2. A Thai Taxonomy

   
   

   A national taxonomy could define “sustainable” properties—e.g., operational emissions under 50 kg CO₂e/m²/year, flood-resistant design (elevated bases), and at least 20% renewable energy. Regional adjustments could prioritize water efficiency in dry Isaan.

   Sample Taxonomy Checklist (EEC Industrial Warehouse):  

   • Solar panels supply 25% of energy

   • Flood elevation >1.5m above historical high-water mark

   • Embodied carbon <450 kg CO₂e/m²

   • Rainwater harvesting meets 30% of demand

     
     

3. Mandatory Reporting with Incentives

   
   

   Expand the Energy Conservation Promotion Act to require annual ESG reports for properties over 10,000 m², offering tax incentives for compliance. TGBI-led audits could verify data.

   Sample Report Snippet (Phuket Resort):  

   • Renewable Energy: 30% from solar (target: 20%)

   • Water Recycling: 40% of usage (target: 30%)

   • Flood Resilience: Elevated 2m (meets standard)

   • Audit Note: “Compliant, eligible for 5% property tax reduction”

     
     

4. Technology for Accountability

   
   

   Smart meters, increasingly used in Bangkok’s high-rises, could stream real-time data into reports. Blockchain might trace sustainable materials—like bamboo from Chiang Rai versus imported steel.

   Sample Data Feed (Bangkok Office Tower):  

   • Live Energy Use: 15 kWh/m²/month (updated hourly)

   • Supply Chain Verification: 80% local materials, CO₂e tracked via blockchain

   • Tenant Feedback: 85% satisfaction with air quality (WELL-aligned)

     
     

5. Stakeholder Engagement

   
   

   Involve developers, the Tourism Authority of Thailand, and local communities. Retail tenants seek energy savings, tourists want eco-conscious resorts, and flood-affected residents near EEC projects demand safeguards.

   
   

The Path Forward in Thailand

Obstacles abound. Large developers can adapt, but smaller operators in Pattaya may resist costs. Bureaucratic delays or corruption could hinder enforcement. Still, Thailand’s climate stakes—Bangkok’s subsidence, Phuket’s coastal erosion—and tourism-driven economy necessitate action. By March 25, 2025, pilot efforts (e.g., EEC green warehouses) and investor pressure from banks could gain traction.

Standardized reporting isn’t mere bureaucracy—it’s Thailand’s pathway to a sustainable property sector. A clear taxonomy, with tangible metrics like those above, can align urban malls and coastal resorts with global goals, turning taxonomic troubles into a foundation for resilience.

Acknowledgement:

"This article was generated with the assistance of Grok, an AI tool, and subsequently reviewed and edited by the author."