At the least, we buy more time to develop more sustainable technologies and/or implement humane population control to arrest and break world population growth,

At the least, we buy more time to develop more sustainable technologies and/or implement humane population control to arrest and break world population growth, because: - the possibility still exists that we can have these things and a soft landing, - the alternative was millions of people starving to death in the short term - a natural course correction, but still a horrific one. That being said, realistic (technical, political, etc) proposals for humanely arresting population growth are few and far between. China is pilloried for its (often monstrous) population control policy, but the Chinese population has stabilized. What sort of policy are we proposing for the countries with the greatest population growth, those with few economic resources, rather weak governments, and reluctant, justifiably suspicious populations? Look at global warming - how effective has the "you'll have to suffer slower economic growth, but it's for the sake of the entire world" argument been in the eyes of developing countries? Why would it be any different here?