It is often argued that the government ought to persuade companies to relocate to the countryside as the issues of traffic congestion and housing are on the rise in urban areas. In my firm conviction, the advantages associated with the above are much stronger than the disadvantages because it promotes rural development of a country to a greater extent.
One of the disadvantages of the above is the high employee turnover due to the inability of integrating into the countryside. In other words, many employees already well settled in urban areas with their families and they would reluctant to move from their comfort zone. As a result, the firm may lose key players, which is largely detrimental to its progress. According to a study conducted in the UK, many firms consider relocation as challenging because it causes many capable employees to resign. Thus, it is evident companies would not be able to harness the benefits in the regional areas since a smooth integration is questionable.
On the other hand, it is observed that rural areas in many countries are underdeveloped due to lack of attention of the government. By encouraging city firms to relocate, infrastructure improvements and increased job opportunities for local community can be attained, which inevitably foster the economic growth of a country. This is illustrated by the remarkable economic progression attained by Vietnam in 2015, with the government's decision to shift the apparel industry in cities to a regional zone. They could also solve the traffic congestion in cities to a great extent. Therefore, it is apparent that shifting of businesses to the regional areas brings stronger benefits, although is quite challenging for many firms.
To conclude, although there are contradicting views on moving businesses to the rural areas, I strongly believe that nations are able to achieve a higher progress as it enhances the underdeveloped regions of the country. Therefore, advantages associated with this decision are outweighing the disadvantages.
It is
often
argued that the
government
ought to persuade
companies
to relocate to the countryside as the issues of traffic congestion and housing are on the rise in urban
areas
. In my
firm
conviction, the advantages associated with the above are much stronger than the disadvantages
because
it promotes rural development of a
country
to a greater extent.
One of the disadvantages of the above is the high employee turnover due to the inability of integrating into the countryside.
In other words
,
many
employees already well settled in urban
areas
with their
families and
they
would reluctant
to
move
from their comfort zone.
As a result
, the
firm
may lose key players, which is
largely
detrimental to its progress. According to a study conducted in the UK,
many
firms
consider relocation as challenging
because
it causes
many
capable employees to resign.
Thus
, it is evident
companies
would not be able to harness the benefits in the regional
areas
since a smooth integration is questionable.
On the other hand
, it
is observed
that rural
areas
in
many
countries
are underdeveloped
due to lack of attention of the
government
. By encouraging city
firms
to relocate, infrastructure improvements and increased job opportunities for local community can
be attained
, which
inevitably
foster the economic growth of a
country
. This
is illustrated
by the remarkable economic progression attained by Vietnam in 2015, with the
government
's decision to shift the apparel industry in cities to a regional zone. They could
also
solve the traffic congestion in cities to a great extent.
Therefore
, it is apparent that shifting of businesses to the regional
areas
brings stronger benefits, although is quite challenging for
many
firms.
To conclude
, although there are contradicting views on moving businesses to the rural
areas
, I
strongly
believe that nations are able to achieve a higher progress as it enhances the underdeveloped regions of the
country
.
Therefore
, advantages associated with this decision are outweighing the disadvantages.