It's going to hurt, this century and even this half century.
The population is in massive overshoot beyond planetary carrying capacity (i.e., its resources that we find useful/necessary and their natural rate of self renewal) by anywhere from 8:1 to perhaps 10:1.
For anything even remotely resembling a smoother landing in the inevitable population decline (i.e., a slower and more just+equitable process involving more natural attrition and less war, murder, famine, and pestilence) the humans currently enjoying the highest levels of technology/development/lifestyle would need to cut their consumption by 80-90 percent -- they would need to start living as if it were (perhaps, approximately) the 1700s. This would need to be phased in both very soon and very rapidly.
Of course, those same population groups also have (for the time being, at least) the resources and might to resist that needed reduction by whatever means they can, including war and/or creation of closed enclaves that no longer allow immigration or participate in many forms of external trade. While blaming almost anything and anyone other than the real mechanics (simply massive and growing resource deficit relative to population) of what's going on.
It's just going to suck, this time ahead. We who are alive now have to bring this situation home and lay it to rest in the least awful ways we can, and we are rapidly growing very constrained in terms of remaining options.
There are at least two clear reasons why #Vienna is so often voted one of the most liveable cities in the world:
the defining logic of the city is: 'is this good for children' in stead of 'is this good for property developers'?
When awarding planning permission Vienna's planners requires 50% 'affordable housing' in all new urban developments, not the much lower ratios elsewhere.