Nowadays, the problem of how to create housing is often discussed. Some communities build new homes by constructing taller buildings, while others use wider areas of land. From my perspective, first variant seems more useful than expanding living space.
To begin with, there are many advantages of creating taller buildings. Undoubtedly, they need less space, it can be very useful for cities and countries that do not have enough area or are overcrowded. For instance, Japan that does not have enough territory. However, infrastructure of Tokyo is designed in such a way that it is very compact, because of tall buildings. Consequently, small countries or cities can save territories and give place to live in for people even if they are overcrowded.
On the contrary, to maintain tall and complex structure city needs to be modern and have relevant technology. Moreover, some cities are located on tectonic plates and it can be dangerous to build skyscrapers without technology that prevents damage (similar technology is used in Japan).
Additionally, some cities have a specific type of architecture and it will look awful if a tall modern building stood near small houses. As an example, Italy that has its own architectural style that will look terrible near Japanese skyscrapers. Furthermore, Naples are experiencing many earthquakes over the past few years. It would be a catastrophe if it were city with tall constructions. Therefore, sometimes it is better to create housing by building houses on a wider area of land.
In summary, it is better to provide housing by building taller structures if a city is contemporary and safe from natural disasters. Otherwise, it is better to keep houses smaller.