Building amenities for the public in cities has been a persistent concern in recent years. Opinions are divided on whether the government should build shopping malls, or whether it is better to construct parks and sports facilities. Hence, this essay will provide the reasons why I remain neutral on this problem.
On the one hand, parks and sports infrastructure involve several advantages for citizens. The foremost one is that these facilities can immensely encourage people to exercise. With greater access to green spaces and high-quality sports facilities, individuals can be motivated to take part in physical activities. For example, the Vietnamese government’s decisions to build stadiums and community parks led to an increase in the average amount of time their citizens allocated to exercise. As a result, these parks and sports amenities allow people to form workout routines, leading to the improvement of personal well-being and overall health.
On the other hand, building shopping malls also has some benefits, contributing to the balance of the issue mentioned at the start of the essay. The main one is that retail malls can boost the local economies of cities. Specifically, if many shopping centers are constructed, a metropolitan area can attract more customers, increase sales and create more lucrative jobs for residents. For instance, in the USA, when a shopping mall was built in the center of New York City, the economy experienced significant growth in the past 10 years. Consequently, shopping malls can not only provide cities with many opportunities to grow, but also enhance the living standards of local people.
In conclusion, both parks, sports amenities and retail centers have their own unique merits, creating a balanced debate. Therefore, the government should consider carefully between these two approaches to improve citizens’ lives.