When it comes to preserving untouched wilderness areas, some environmentalists have proposed that preserving these areas is more beneficial than investing in urban green spaces. On the other hand, some people feel that urban greening is more practical for improving city residents’ mental health and reducing heat islands.
At the heart of modern enviromental problems, is that there are more and more untouched wilderness areas being built upon. This leads to more and more habitats being destroyed and resulting in the wild animals being displaced. On top of that, building upon untouched wilderness also worsens air pollution. To combat this problem, governments should launch policies to avoid certain areas from being built upon.
On the flip side, urban greening can make a world of difference. A prime example of this is having rooftop gardens or vertical forests instead of traditional ones. Ultimately, this can save a lot of space. By using these methods, residents can truly make the best out of their land. Additionally, their carbon footprint can also be significantly decreased by utilizing urban greening. With a view to improving our air pollution problem, and also slowing global warming down, urban greening could be a viable option.
As far as I am concerned, while striking a balance between investing in urban green spaces and preserving untouched wilderness areas, the city council should help rectifing this situation by distributing the grants wisely. It is possible to have the best of both worlds where wilderness areas are protected and urban areas developed their green spaces.