Many believe that traditional buildings and houses in cities should be replaced with newer buildings, while others argue that old heritage should be protected. As far as I am concerned, the development of modern infrastructure should be encouraged but not at the expense of older heritage, as older buildings form the identity of the specific city.
The idea of replacing the traditional sites with the newer buildings originated mainly because of the modern appearance of newer constructions. Buildings like skyscrapers, look attractive and futuristic. These buildings portray the economic advancements of the city with technological orientation of its residents. Due to this reason, some people think of replacing older buildings with the new ones. For example, in China, a large number of skyscrapers have been built in past 30 years, replacing their older building to show their recent economic progress.
While modern buildings seem more eye-catching, the older buildings are equally important. The older heritage of a certain city forms the identity of it. It depicts the culture, traditions and history of the city and its residents. By maintaining these older constructions, many cities become famous globally and attract tourists from all around the world. These buildings become a source of goodwill for the particular city and its citizens take pride of them. For instance, when majority of the Middle Eastern countries were building tall skyscrapers, Oman was investing a large amount of money in maintaining and renovating its older building. This made Oman a distinct country among the other Middle Eastern states, that eventually increased tourism there.
In conclusion, although construction of modern buildings is significant for modernization, preserving the older heritage helps a nation to keep its identity and attracts other to learn about their culture and history.