If you don't have population growth you still need economic growth to provide upward mobility to people at the bottom. Without growth you have a zero-sum game which again can lead to war.
Ideally improvements in efficiency or a shift values/culture can create a world where we can have economic growth without increasing the burden on the planet.
OR you reset wealth upon death. You don't necessarily need unlimited growth if you prevent wealth from pooling at the top.
We are trending towards having a smaller population in 100 years.
EU Birth rate over time: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1251516/crude-birth-rate...
US Birth rate is 1.7 kids per female.
There are of course issues that a lot of the economy is predicated on growth, but again, I'm actually pretty optimistic that markets and humans are pretty resilient and adaptable given enough warning and time.
HA part of that could be easily solved if suicide weren't so stigmatized. If everyone could just agree that once you're past the age of 80, once you get to a point of being infirm you just take a magic pill and peace out on your own terms, we'd be far better off as a species.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility
From the article: "In a 1974 United Nations population conference in Bucharest, Karan Singh, a former minister of population in India, illustrated this trend by stating 'Development is the best contraceptive.'"
We probably could in the next 100 years through automation, massive reduction in population, and making things to last instead of making things to be replaced. Building a society whose values aren't based around never-ending growth.
We won't, but we could.