I'm glad you raised this point because it's a common misconception. Food production around the world has been rising non-stop since the beginning of human civilization. Food production in the last century has growth faster than population. Let me say that again: food production has increased faster than population around the world. It is no surprise then that per capita income around the world has also increased more or less non-stop for the last fifty years. The empirical record has directly refuted Thomas Malthus and the other neo-Malthusians like Paul Ehrlich who brainwashed the UN and many governments including India and China.The other side of the coin is how do you think China will sustain a higher population growth while issue's like arable land and water is already becoming serious issue's in China. Where are the jobs, the food, the resources going to come from to sustain them ? How do you think that China and the rest of the world can sustain ever growing numbers of human beings demanding ever more resources from the planet ?
This was all achieved by improved technology and economic systems that more efficiently allocated resources. Huge increases in per-acre yield and per-capita yield have come from widespread use of fertilizers, modern irrigation systems, pesticides, tractors, crop rotation, and genetically-modified crops.
Where are the resources for future global population growth? Everywhere! World trade has enabled China and India to buy what they cannot produce locally. When you consider how inefficient agriculture is practiced in India, Africa, and Latin America, you realize how much room for growth there is in simply modernizing existing farms and ranches. If global warming opens up vast expanses of Canada and Russia to agriculture, that is another way to provide for population growth.
Where are the jobs going to come from? From a dynamic market economy! A market economy expands and contracts according supply and demand pressures. Labor is a commodity, and if there is a surplus of labor that will push down wages and increase of the number companies willing to hire. I can predict the neo-Malthusians' response: So population growth will depress global wages? In the medium and long-run, absolutely not. The empirical record is very clear that global wages and standards of living have increased around the world simultaneously with rapid population growth.
But what about the Earth running out of resources? This is the last card neo-Malthusians play. The fact is, commodity prices world wide have decreased with adjusted for inflation over the last fifty years. If there was an imminent shortage of commodities, then current prices would be driven sky high by speculators. But other than short spikes due to geopolitical risks, there is not long-term hoarding of commodities.
Let's suppose there is an imminent shortage of commodities. In that case, speculators would hoard commodities and drive the price up. When the price rises, it encourages conservation and exploration. Such was the case for oil in the 1970s. Oil prices rose when Arab producers embargoed oil. Americans responded by purchasing more fuel-efficient cars while oil companies got busy exploring for oil in the North Sea and other places. A commodity shortage would be rectified by market forces.