Low Sulphur by itself is not much "better for emissions". Low Sulphur fuel enables fitment of specific emissions equipment (specifically DPF), that fail with high sulphur fuel being used.My understanding is that the major difference between the old diesel and new ULSD is sulphur content. Is there any other change that makes it "better"? I understand that ULSD is better for the environment but I don't think it is any better for engines.
Countries that do not have Low Sulphur fuels typically also don't have the emissions requirements that need a DPF, and will have different engines fitted to them. I know new Fuso's sold in many parts of the world today have mechanical injected diesels with not even a Cat fitted.
As for the argument of better filtration - I don't follow it so much. Adding filters inline will drop fuel pressure, and may even result in fuel starvation - and given modern Common Rail injection pumps are lubricated off fuel, that will cause the problem you were trying to avoid anyway. It also gives you an additional thing that can fail in your fuel line and get sucked into your fuel pump and/or additional points for water/dust ingress. The factory filters for me are fine as long as:
a. You check/replace the standard filters regularly. Including draining water from the water separator each month.
b. Source good fuel to begin with. I also use these in all my vehicles: http://www.profill-australia.com/e-store/STORE.html