On June 6, 2026, the CCPIT, together with the culture and tourism authorities, issued the "Evaluation Specification for Green and Low-Carbon Cultural and Tourism Service Exports (Trial)", incorporating carbon footprint accounting, the proportion of new energy vehicles used, the coverage rate of paperless services, and the sustainability of materials used in intangible cultural heritage handicrafts into the certification framework for cultural and tourism service exports. For local destination management companies, inbound tourism service providers, purchasers, and supporting certification service institutions, this is not only the addition of a new certification dimension, but also a signal that cultural and tourism service exports are beginning to align with overseas ESG disclosure and procurement access requirements, and is therefore worth the industry's continued attention.

Clear messages released by the first batch of pilot programs

Confirmed information shows that this "Evaluation Specification for Green and Low-Carbon Cultural and Tourism Service Exports (Trial)" was issued by the CCPIT and the culture and tourism authorities on June 6, 2026, and is an evaluation specification for cultural and tourism service exports.

For the first time, the specification includes carbon footprint accounting, the proportion of new energy vehicles used, the coverage rate of paperless services, and the sustainability of materials used in intangible cultural heritage handicrafts in the export service certification system. A total of 12 local destination management companies in Luoyang, Henan, were selected as the first batch of certification pilot units, including Letrip Travel Agency.

According to the information currently provided, these pilot units are expected to be awarded the "China Green Tourism Service" label starting in July; the summary also notes that this label can meet the EU CSRD, the U.S. SEC climate disclosure, and ESG procurement whitelist access requirements.

Which business links are beginning to be affected by the rule changes

Local destination services are extending from delivery capability to verifiable low-carbon performance

From an analysis perspective, the first businesses affected by this change are local destination management companies that provide reception, itinerary execution, and resource integration services for overseas clients. The reason is that the certification indicators no longer remain only at the service experience level, but turn such items as vehicle structure, paperless processes, and material sustainability into assessable matters. The corresponding impact will fall on reception vehicle arrangements, itinerary document processing, procurement of特色 experience programs, and external service descriptions, among other links.

For such companies, what is more worth attention is how the subsequent certification criteria will define supporting materials for "proportion", "coverage rate", and "sustainability", and whether it will be necessary to simultaneously submit certification labels or supporting explanations in external quotations, bidding, or client access communications.

Cooperation alignment for overseas procurement may add green review requirements

From an industry perspective, overseas purchasers, channel partners, or corporate clients may pay more attention to whether service suppliers possess recognizable green and low-carbon certification. This is because the summary has clearly mentioned that this label is connected with the EU CSRD, the U.S. SEC climate disclosure, and ESG procurement whitelist access requirements.

This means the impact may be reflected in supplier screening, procurement whitelist access, tender document requirements, and cooperation renewal reviews. Although it cannot yet be concluded from this that all procurement projects will immediately set this label as a mandatory condition, relevant companies need to watch for whether expressions regarding ESG, climate disclosure, and green procurement in client documents begin to change.

Certification and supporting service chains will also be driven simultaneously

Observation shows that companies related to certification, as well as testing and consulting supporting service institutions, will also be affected. The reason is not that complete implementation rules have already been made public at this stage, but that the evaluation specification has already incorporated several quantifiable and provable low-carbon elements into the certification system, and companies are therefore very likely to need to prepare materials for matters such as carbon footprint accounting, proof of material sustainability, and process traceability.

Therefore, the impact will mainly fall on document organization, internal review, client responses, guidance for certification applications, and the retention of compliance records. What needs more attention at present is whether clearer application document lists, review methods, and ongoing maintenance requirements will subsequently take shape.

Which practical changes companies should currently watch more closely

First look at the certification criteria, rather than only the label name

From an analytical perspective, companies should currently prioritize attention to the specific determination methods in the evaluation specification for carbon footprint accounting, the proportion of new energy vehicles used, the coverage rate of paperless services, and the sustainability of materials used in intangible cultural heritage handicrafts. In particular, which content needs to form written records, which content requires third-party supporting evidence, and which content is only used as a reference for pilot evaluation remain key to subsequent implementation.

Simultaneously check whether procurement and delivery documents need to be redone

For service providers that have already undertaken or are preparing to undertake overseas business, attention needs to be paid to whether existing contract appendices, service descriptions, supplier files, vehicle arrangement records, and proof of paperless processes are sufficient to support subsequent certification or client audits. If client procurement documents begin to add ESG or climate disclosure-related wording, delivery documents and bidding texts may also need corresponding adjustments.

Sort out the supplier proof chain in advance

If the business involves intangible cultural heritage handicrafts,特色 souvenirs, or related experience programs, companies need to pay special attention to the source of proof for material sustainability. The currently input information does not provide a unified proof template, so it is more appropriate to understand this work as a preparatory step: first sort out procurement sources and retain basic supporting documents, then observe whether the subsequent certification implementation criteria put forward more detailed requirements.

Pay attention to market feedback after the July pilot implementation

From a practical perspective, after the pilot units are expected to receive the label starting in July, how the market uses this label in tendering, cooperation access, and client inquiries will be an important window for judging its actual scope of influence. Companies may focus on whether clients write it into qualification conditions, bonus items, or supplier whitelist requirements, but at the current stage these changes should not be regarded as unified rules that have already been comprehensively implemented.

This is more like an implementation signal, rather than a final rule

Observation suggests that this piece of information is more appropriately understood as a clear signal that cultural and tourism service exports are beginning to introduce a green and low-carbon evaluation framework, and that it has already entered the first batch pilot stage, so it is not merely staying at the conceptual level. At the same time, the existing information is mainly concentrated on the issuance of the specification, evaluation dimensions, and pilot arrangements, and is still insufficient to support a definite judgment on the nationwide scope of application, the depth of review, or the strength of market adoption.

From an industry perspective, what is truly worth continuous observation is not only whether there is a certification label, but whether this label will further enter overseas procurement lists, tender documents, cooperation reviews, and continuous disclosure chains. If these links subsequently show unified or high-frequency use, the rule impact will gradually shift from a pilot signal to a more stable market requirement.

How to understand the practical significance of this pilot

Overall, this pilot indicates that the competitive factors in cultural and tourism service exports are extending from traditional reception capabilities to green and low-carbon performance that can be evaluated and explained. For relevant companies, it is currently inadvisable to simply understand it as a short-term marketing label, nor is it advisable to conclude too early that it has already become a comprehensive mandatory threshold.

A more rational way to understand it is: this is a certification change that has already begun to be implemented, and it is also a regulatory development that still requires observation of detailed implementation rules, the degree of client acceptance, and market feedback. Whoever first prepares document retention, supplier proof, and client communication well will be more composed when subsequent rules continue to be refined.

Basis of this article and subsequent verification directions

This article is generated based on the information title, event occurrence time, and event summary provided by the user. The information used is limited to the relevant title, the time point of June 6, 2026, and the description of the "Evaluation Specification for Green and Low-Carbon Cultural and Tourism Service Exports (Trial)", the pilot program involving 12 local destination management companies in Luoyang, Henan, the expected issuance of the "China Green Tourism Service" label in July, and its connection with the EU CSRD, the U.S. SEC climate disclosure, and ESG procurement whitelist access requirements.

According to the common verification path for such matters, follow-up usually still requires continuous comparison with official announcements, releases by competent authorities, industry association information, standard documents, and authoritative media reports. Since the input does not provide specific official source links, the relevant original documents, certification implementation criteria, and subsequent market usage still need continuous verification, with particular attention to policy details, certification review methods, tender document changes, industry feedback, and companies' actual implementation situations.