Final answer:
The gas company was in defiance of the ethical dimension of corporate social responsibility by drilling without state approval. This decision reflects a neglect of the legal, environmental, and social impacts that resonate with broader ethical expectations of society and stakeholders.
Step-by-step explanation:
The gas company in question was in defiance of the ethical dimension of corporate social responsibility. Organizations have a duty to operate within the framework of ethical standards and legal requirements. Drilling without state approval disregards these principles and damages both public trust and the company's legitimacy.
This non-compliance not only raises important legal issues, but also invites public scrutiny and potential resistance. As part of corporate social responsibility, companies are expected to consider not just the economic benefits of their actions but also the social costs and environmental impacts. Environmental concerns, particularly in the energy sector, are paramount given that corporate decisions can have significant and lasting effects on natural ecosystems and public health.
While energy companies may deem unconventional methods such as fracking as profitably innovative, the social implications and questions surrounding the acceptability of such practices cannot be ignored. Different stakeholders including shareholders, employees, customers, and the wider community have varying perspectives on the acceptable balance between economic benefits and social responsibilities. Engaging in activities that are not environmentally sustainable or socially acceptable can lead to public backlash and tarnish a company's reputation.
The concept of social responsibility is intertwined with civil liberties and the rights of individuals, influencing corporate practices and the way governments seek to balance individual freedoms with community needs. The legal rights of corporations, exemplified by decisions such as the allowance of corporate contributions to political elections and exemptions from covering birth control on religious grounds, fuel the debate on the extent to which corporations are also morally responsible to their stakeholders and the community at large.