The responsibilities of corporations towards society and the environment has

become a heated topic in the United States today. Some argue that corporations
have a duty to ensure their practices are environmentally-friendly and in service
to their respective communities, and
others assert that corporations are not obligated to strive after other goals
besides their own, individually-assessed pursuits. While it is true that
corporations, as privately-run organizations, should have the right to create their
own ends, the means by which they pursue these ends should play a factor in their
day-to-day decisions, which will benefit society and the environment, as well as
lead to the betterment of their business as a whole.
Large corporations tend to be major hubs within communities, and thus have
an important role for the economy. These corporations tend not only to be a large
source of employment, but also, depending on the type of business, can bolster
the economy through their products or services. As such, while most corporations
invariably seek to be as productive as possible, increasing their profits to their
highest potentials, it is also in their best interest to consider the well-being of the
people around them and the effect their products may have on the environment.
For example, if a chemical engineering firm that manufactures cleaning products
only sought their own gain, they may fail to allocate funds for the safest disposal
of chemical by-products. Though the company by save money for itself in the
short-term, in the long-run, it may face severe consequences as the water supply
of the community is tainted, affecting not only the corporation’s products and
business strategies, but also affecting the employees’ and employees’ families
health.
Similarly, the healthcare industry provides a solid example of the need for
corporations to consider the well-being of those outside their immediate business
sphere. While many healthcare centers are for-profit, caring for those in need who
cannot afford expensive medical bills lies in the best interest of corporate-level
hospitals and care facilities. Ultimately, the goal of any healthcare provider should
be to help patients maintain a level of health and safety that will allow them to
function and contribute to society as a whole. Consequently, if healthcare
corporations were solely to operate on the basis of making the highest profits
possible, they would fail to provide adequate care for those in lower
socioeconomic brackets, skewing the healthcare system in favor of the wealthy
and contributing to the gap in health-levels between the rich and the poor.
Opponents to this viewpoint may argue that helping their communities and
the environment may hinder corporations from pursuing their highest goals. For
example, a law corporation may ultimately have as its main goal helping a large
firm maintain profits and mitigate the number of lawsuits filed against it.
Obligating such a corporation to partake in promoting the well-being of society
and the environment might hold it back from fully engaging with this aim.
However, such a claim is faulty in that it fails to consider that a corporation can
simultaneously pursue its own ends while contributing to the betterment of its
community.
In sum, while corporations have a right to pursue their own goals, which in
many cases, may be to make as much money as possible, they should also
consider how their goals can be aligned with the improvement of society and the
proper care for the environment. By doing so, they will not only benefit their
surrounding communities, but also help their own businesses and the economy as
a whole.