In recent years, large outdoor places like squares and parks have become an inescapable part of modern life. This development has prompted many individuals to believe that all towns and cities should have these kinds of facilities. I partly agree with this statement, and this essay will discuss both sides of the issue.
To begin with, building more squares and parks is highly beneficial for the citizens’ psychological and physical health. In today’s world, a considerable number of people tend to work or study remotely while children enjoy spending time in front of their digital gadgets, which is harmful to their development and health. Consequently, amenities like squares and parks enable people to spend more time outdoors rather than at home. This development helps individuals preserve their health and avoid severe diseases, such as burnout, eyestrain, or even depression, as the fresh air and new places allow individuals to take their minds of the stress. For instance, it is often observed that in countries like Japan and South Korea citizens tend to overwork. This poses a threat to their mental and physical health, as they are continuously in stress and cannot sleep normally. In this case, new facilities help individuals enjoy their lives. Additionally, large public outdoor places, such as squares and parks, are advantageous for the environemnt. Trees and greenary that parks and squares usually contain can make a significant dent in air pollution, as trees usually absorb CO2 emissions. For example, in cities with a lot of trees, such as in Moscow or Istanbul, the level of CO2 is significantly lower than in cities without trees like Dubai. These examples show that amenities, such as squares and parks, are extremely beneficial for the environemnt and the individuals.
On the other hand, some individuals believe that having these kinds of outdoor facilites is not useful for large corporations, companies, and the country’s economic development. Places like parks and squares tend to occupy a vast territory that could otherwise be used for housing or infrastructure. For instance, many countries develop more effectively and quickly, as they devote a lot of space in the city to build skyscrapers, which businesses frequently use in order to locate their offices. As a result, for many governments, it is essential to allocate space for skyscrapers rather than squares and parks to attract more international companies and corporations.
In conclusion, building more outdoor places like squares and parks are extremely advantageous for individuals’ health. Furthermore, more trees can significantly curb carbon emissions, which is beneficial for the enviornment. Nevertheless, the governments frequently need to attract investors and a large number of corporations in order to develop more efficiently. In this case, skyscrapers play a pivotal role, as they allow businesses to build their offices. Therefore, I parlty agree with the statement that all towns and cities should have squares and parks, and I think that governments should strike a balance between citizens’ health and country’s development.