Restoring historic buildings in large cities across the world requires a significant amount of money. Some people believe that this funding should instead be used for building new houses and improving road infrastructure. I partly agree that governments should invest more money in housing and roads; however, preserving historic buildings is also important for cultural and economic reasons.
On the one hand, restoring historic buildings represents a country’s culture and history. Historical landmarks attract a significant number of tourists; therefore, they can also affect the local economy. For example, cities such as Samarkand and Bukhara preserve many historic buildings such as such as Registan, Gur-e-Amir Mausoleum and Poi Kalyan Complex, that attract millions of visitors every year. As a result, tourism generates income for hotels, traditional restaurants, and other commercial places. Therefore, investing in the restoration of historic places can bring long-term economic advantages.
On the other hand, many large cities are experiencing rapid population growth and urbanization, which creates a strong demand for housing and transportation infrastructure. In densely populated cities such as Mumbai, people suffer from a lack of affordable housing, and this has become a serious issue among the local population. If the government allocates more funds to road infrastructure and housing, it can improve living standards and solve problems related to traffic congestion. Consequently, prioritizing urban development is also necessary.
Overall, if governments divide funds between preserving historical buildings and developing urban infrastructure, it can be beneficial for both local residents and the economy.