Despite the fact that public parks are valuable, there is a popular idea that such green spaces can be used to house a growing population, create areas for business offices, and boost economies. Although the number of dwellers is increasing consistently, such parks should not be used for other purposes, as there are important environmental implications that need to be taken into consideration.
On the one hand, building residential areas and business buildings in the place of public green spaces seems sensible in several ways. As the number of people increases, the demand for housing does rise. This, in turn, usually becomes an urgent issue in many countries, especially developing countries. For example, India is highly populated, with over a billion citizens. Many destitute people in India do not have their own houses, forcing them to live on the streets or in shared areas with many individuals. In this case, there should be more housing complexes to provide such people with good living conditions. Otherwise, potential problems associated with this situation can be much more detrimental, including the increased number of homeless people and the exorbitantly high prices of housing. This figure also contributes to the widespread criminal activities, such as fraud. Regarding the economic implications, open green areas can effectively be business places. To be precise, if there are many developing business companies and brands, many investors are likely to have an interest in these local businesses of any type. As an outcome, the country’s economy can be boosted, with many business people investing in supporting and developing local businesses internationally, which results in an increased government budget. This budget can be channelled to some fields and areas where there is a high monetary demand.
On the other hand, I think this trend could be seen as negative because of mainly environmental aspects. Having a basic function of filtering air, many trees in public parks can improve air quality, one of the most common problems in many countries, by removing carbon dioxide in the air and giving oxygen back. In my country, Uzbekistan, air pollution has already become the most common issue thanks to the lack of green spaces, trees in particular. This problem emerged as a result of the construction of apartments. In addition to this, The parks always contribute to biodiversity providing habitats for wildlife, and promoting ecological balance within urban settings. Moreover, green areas are helpful for people’s health. Put simply, parks usually promote physical activity, encouraging residents to engage in different sports and activities, such as walking and cycling, a noticeable factor that leads to improved community health, reducing healthcare costs significantly. Along with these benefits of public parks, such green spaces serve as venues for social interaction and offer cultural value. This means people of different age groups, ranging from family members to friends, can come together and enjoy leisure time, resulting in reducing feelings of isolation, and the parks often host cultural events, festivals and educational programs that promote cultural diversity and enrich community life.
In conclusion, while the idea of building residential houses for a growing number of people and business places instead of public parks could be reasonable in some aspects, I contend that not only can people enjoy the green areas because of health benefits, but there are also environmental factors that are more significant than housing.