Corporate carbon performance (CCP) has become a central topic in political, financial, and academic domains. At the same time, several characteristics of CCP data, including comparability and consistency, remain unresolved. The literature has extensively covered issues regarding the comparability of CCP data from a firm-internal perspective. However, it has not yet examined the consistency of CCP data between third-party data providers. This article investigates the degree of CCP data consistency between third-party providers according to three dimensions: scope (i.e., direct and indirect emissions), scheme (i.e., mandatory and voluntary reporting schemes), and source (i.e., data stemming from corporate reports and from third-party estimation methods). The results reveal that data on direct emissions are more consistent than data on indirect emissions, and they are especially inconsistent for Scope 3. Second, mandatory and voluntary reporting schemes do not substantially improve the consistency of CCP data, which is surprising. Third, third-party estimations are less consistent as compared to data stemming directly from corporate reports; however, the combination of Scopes 1 and 2 third-party estimated data raises consistency levels. On the basis of these results, we conclude the following key implications: academic researchers must be mindful of the consistency of CCP data, because it can significantly affect empirical results, corporate management should avoid situations where different CCP data are communicated externally, investors should engage firms to follow a standardized approach, data providers should increase the transparency about their estimation methods, and policy makers need to be aware of the importance of a sound and standardized methodology to determine CCP.

中文翻译：

---

企业碳绩效数据：还有什么？

企业碳绩效 (CCP) 已成为政治、金融和学术领域的中心话题。同时，CCP数据的几个特征，包括可比性和一致性，仍然没有得到解决。文献从公司内部的角度广泛涵盖了有关 CCP 数据可比性的问题。但是，它尚未检查第三方数据提供者之间 CCP 数据的一致性。本文从三个维度考察第三方供应商之间 CCP 数据的一致性程度：范围（即直接和间接排放）、方案（即强制和自愿报告方案）和来源（即来自企业报告的数据）并来自第三方估计方法）。结果表明，直接排放数据比间接排放数据更一致，尤其是范围 3 的不一致。第二，强制性和自愿报告方案并没有显着提高 CCP 数据的一致性，这令人惊讶。第三，与直接来自公司报告的数据相比，第三方估计的一致性较差；但是，范围 1 和范围 2 第三方估计数据的组合提高了一致性水平。基于这些结果，我们得出以下关键启示：学术研究人员必须注意 CCP 数据的一致性，因为它会显着影响实证结果，企业管理层应避免与外部交流不同 CCP 数据的情况，投资者应参与公司遵循标准化方法，