text: (b) Gan the Sub-Commission or other human rights bodies offer constructive ideas concerning statements such as that made by the World Commission on Environment and Development in Our Common Future, that "When half or more of a city's workforce has no chance of obtaining a legal plot on which a house can be built, let alone of affording to buy or rent a house legally, the balance between private landownership rights and the public good must be quickly rethought"; 17/ (c) Does the right to land or property necessarily imply the right to ownership thereof? Would it not be more efficient if, for instance in the context of the right to housing, "the right to a place to live in peace and dignity" were to become the accepted norm and ideal end? Such a perspective would include the right to own property, but a superseding right to a secure place which is not necessarily owned by the occupant; (d) Can or should the human rights organs of the United Nations either encourage or persuade States to make more effective use of their existing legal powers to guarantee a more equitable distribution of land in the social interest?; (e) Is it necessary or would it be worthwhile to adopt further standards concerned specifically with land issues? Would it perhaps be more advantageous to include land rights issues in standards concerning other rights, such as the right to housing? Or would it be more feasible to expend greater energy in implementing those principles already in place? 138. Consideration of the questions listed above could help in further analysis of the scope of future standards-setting in the field of economic, social and cultural rights. While it is clear that standard-setting is more 
analysis: The text discusses the relationship between human rights, land ownership, and the distribution of land in the social interest. It raises questions about the interpretation of the right to land or property and whether it implies the right to ownership. The text also touches on the idea of rethinking the balance between private landownership rights and the public good. These themes suggest that the text is more concerned with the social and economic aspects of land ownership rather than its environmental or industrial aspects.