As population levels increase in many cities, some argue that parks should be transformed into houses in order to mitigate the housing problem. This may solve the issue for a short time; however, I am more inclined to believe that the downsides outweigh the advantages.
There are several benefits of having parks in big and overcrowded urban areas. First, these places are perfect for the people who want to get away from the noise and hassle of the city. Just sitting in a place with lots of trees and lush greenery after work can reduce the stress levels. The research from the University of Munich, for example, showed that individuals who walked in a park for at least 15-20 minutes a day saw a significant boost in their mood and felt more energetic during work hours. Also, many metropolitan cities around the world have polluted air due to the increasing number of private vehicles and heavy manufacturing. The trees inside parks can help to clean the air by removing some carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. From this standpoint, I believe that parks play a crucial role in our lives and bring many benefits for cities.
To address the housing problem, governments can take some measures so that urban areas will not become overcrowded. The first step would be to develop more sophisticated methods of building apartments. Many cities have 10-15-floor-high buildings that may shelter a few hundred people, but this process can be improved further. For instance, China, with the second-biggest population in the world, has apartment complexes that are built on top of each other. Each set of buildings has its own roads and supermarkets, and with that, one town can hold two or three times more people than regular towns in other countries. Moreover, governments should provide better opportunities for the people in the countryside. Building better educational institutions and improving health systems would encourage people to stay in these places. When citizens receive enough attention and support in the countryside and suburbs, they are unlikely to migrate to cities in pursuit of better education or high-paying jobs. However, critics may argue that it is still better to demolish parks and use the space to build houses. They might say that, during the holidays, people can go outside of the city and enjoy the environment in other places. Nevertheless, not many individuals want to spend their precious time on the road, and they might prefer to use that time in city parks with their family.
In conclusion, it is true that the housing problem is becoming more severe over time, but this does not mean we should destroy parks in cities and use that space to build houses. These places provide relaxation for people and clean the polluted air. A better solution would be to improve the infrastructure in the countryside and construct bigger apartment complexes.