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

For centuries, corporations have been thought to be only responsible for their stakeholders, who invest their money into corporations and hope the corporations can earn more money with their investment. However, having witnessed an array of hazards induced by profit-oriented activities, some people recently allege that corporations should have an obligation to promote the well-being of societies and environments. This claim does appear to be appealing at the first glance, but it has omitted an important assumption—the existence of laws.

Indeed, without properly enacted laws, profit-oriented businesses do bring about serious problems. For example, in order to diminish the cost of human labor, some corporations in the areas where the labor laws are not mature enough or executed completely, such as Ethiopia and South Africa, will hire children labor, delegating them to intensive work while offering them little pay. Such issue of child labor, without doubt, violently threatens the well-being of local societies. Similarly, in some fast-developing countries whose awareness of protecting their environments has not been well established yet, such as India and China, profit-oriented activities exhaust natural resources, and factories pump tons of noxious fumes into the atmosphere every year, leading to severe deforestation and wide-spread haze. Obviously, their environments suffer as well from profit-oriented activities.

However, the situations mentioned above only happen without mature and well-executed laws! As is universally acknowledged, laws are regulations enacted based on social ethnics and morals and imposed on businesses and individuals in the country. People make laws only aiming to promote their aggregate well-being. Hence, if with the laws serving as the safeguard of the interests of environments and societies, the hazard of profit-oriented activities will be stifled well since the national authority will enforce the corporations to temper their fever in pursuit of interest, and regulate them under the framework of the laws. As a result, corporations operating within the framework of laws will not only make us richer (since they still try their best to make profits, even under the regulation of laws), but the well-being of environments and societies will also be well maintained. A compelling example is the United Kingdom, who has been devoting itself to the promotion of the // legislation of environmental and social well-being defense. Its effort appears to be successful: from the 19th century to the middle of 20th century, London had been well known as the City of Fog, where the noxious haze prevailed all year around, and citizens were forced to live in extremely messy conditions. The corporations’ zealous pursuit of profits was thought to be the main trigger to the dilemma of London. In order to cope with the dilemma, the British government enacted strict laws to regulate business with a fever of money. The effort soon went into effect: Factories started to invest money in researching processes that could utilize raw materials at a higher efficiency and searching for fuels that appeared to be more environmentally friendly. Moreover, under the pressure of the laws, altruistic departments and agents were established to promote living standards of the workers hired by the corporations and the local environments. After years of regulation, now London is famous for being one of the most favorable cities for people to live in, and still maintains its high economic production.
As is stated above, as long as regulated within the framework of properly enacted laws, the hazard of profit-oriented corporations can be well eliminated. Therefore, as long as operating within the regulations of laws, the only responsibility corporations have is to make money as much as possible.