Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as

The conservation of environment is one of the hottest debated topics in the modern times, and the argument about what position should the corporations and large organizations take in this situation has divided the masses. Some people are of the opinion that the corporations should work on humanitarian principals and put the well being of society first, whereas the other group argues that unless they're actually causing any harm to the environment and are well within the laws, the corporations should be allowed to work as they will. Personally, I stand somewhere closer to the former side of argument and I present two reasons for the same. I will conclude with analyzing the opposite end of the spectrum as well.

We all share the environment and it is no secret that its condition is worsening day by day, and the major reason behind this is the human exploitation of nature for development. In my opinion, not only the corporations, but each and everyone of us should take the responsibility to help save the environment by doing whatever is in our power. Now as it happens, the corporations have more power, money as well as resources to make a significant effect on the environment for the better, which is why I believe that they should do whatever they can to help the society. We can learn from Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft. With the revenue from his company, he was able to fund polio vaccination drives throughout the world which has almost eradicated the disease from the world. Another example would be that of Leonardo DiCaprio, the famous actor who is known for contributing significantly towards the preservation of wildlife. Therefore, if the companies decide, they could have major impact on the well being of society.

Furthermore, we know that corporations use up a lot of resources from the environment for all sorts of purposes - setting up of power plants, using natural resources for production or for making buildings and offices. Even though this is not against the law, it takes a heavy toll on the environment. It has been estimated that a Nuclear Power Plant might have effects as adverse as making miles of surrounding land barren and unfit for agriculture or wildlife. A large steel industry causes a lot of noise which causes inconvenience for the surrounding population. Therefore, as a way of giving back, corporations should participate in humanitarian causes and work towards the betterment of society and preservation of the environment.

However, to counter the points, one could say that diverting a company's goals will prove detrimental to its performance. According to various economic theories, the economy works best in the free market condition, i.e. all the firms are using the resources that they want to participate in a fair competition. The free market only works when all the companies are trying to maximize their profits. If the company's are to lose this direction, it may result in weakening the economy of a country. In one of the countries, in mid 20th century, the government asked its citizens to farm fruits and vegetables in proportion to their income in order to fight the food crisis. The big corporations were asked to make larger contributions. The plan which appears ingenious had the complete opposite effect. In the short term, the food supply increased, however slowly, the average salaries started to fall and the money became stagnant which caused its currency to fall. This example shows how harmful can it be to change the direction of the corporations.

Therefore, as we can see that there is merit in both sides of the argument. In my opinion, giving back to the society and altruism shouldn't be enforced on the companies. However, if a company can manage it properly, it should definitely try to help the society as we have seen its effectiveness from several examples.