Many assume that vegetation should be placed in the central regions of metropolises and rural areas, while others believe building services in the vacant habitats should be the major aim of the government. Personally, I completely agree with the former proposal because it has a huge contribution to improve public health and society as a whole.
First and foremost, planting trees in the centre of cities can benefit enhancing an average health rate there. Thanks to their participation in converting toxic gases into oxygen, plenty of trees are able to eliminate the rate of air pollution that is the main cause of several health-related issues, such as asthma and heart attacks, leading to increasing the overall health rate there. An illustration of this growth in public health is visible in the UK, where officials planted variety trees in the central locations of urban areas and towns. In contrast, the overall health level is much lower in Uzbekistan, where such parks are not available.
Moreover, creating such habitats in cities enhances society by providing unity among residents. These kinds of recreational areas are likely to foster community interaction among citizens and exchanging new ideas, resulting in peace in the community and development in domains. An illustration of this development is visible in Germany, where individuals spend their time in recreational habitats with their neighbors and non-acquaintances.
In conclusion, I believe authorities should plant trees in the vacant areas of cities to boost public health and improve society. Those who view planting trees in the central locations of regions negatively should consider these potential benefits.
