The government is encouraged to allocate more open spaces for planting trees rather than constructing additional housing areas in cities. I fully agree with this perspective due to two main reasons.
One key reason for prioritizing trees in towns and cities in terms of environment is that these trees provide oxygen, which has a positive impact on our lives. That is to say, when trees are planted in open areas, they provide clean air and cool temperatures for relaxing or reading books with a sufficient supply of oxygen. For example, green parks, public gardens, and tree-lined streets significantly reduce pollution levels and enhance the quality of life for residents. As a result, citizens not only enjoy healthier living conditions but also become more active and socially engaged. If it were not for trees, towns would have too many housing areas with poor air quality, which would lead to shorter lives for citizens and more diseases. Therefore, allocating more space for planting trees plays a crucial role in creating sustainable urban areas.
Another reason is that trees contribute to long-term urban development more than extra housing does. In other words, while housing may help people with accommodation for a while, trees ensure continuous benefits in all walks of life. A good illustration of this would be Singapore and Switzerland, famous for their urban forests, which attract tourism and investment, thereby boosting the economy. Consequently, prioritizing trees over excessive housing leads to stronger cities in terms of health, economy, and population. Therefore, governments should focus on more environmental changes and take care of the air with the help of planting trees, giving enough oxygen for human health.
In conclusion, although building new houses seems essential for a growing population, planting trees in open city spaces brings far more advantages in terms of health, sustainability, and long-term development. Thus, I strongly agree that urban planning should emphasize trees over additional housing.