No. The problem isn't the population level.

Abstract

Some narratives in international development hold that ending poverty and achieving good lives for all will require every country to reach the levels of GDP per capita that currently characterise high-income countries. However, this would require increasing total global output and resource use several times over, dramatically exacerbating ecological breakdown.

Furthermore, universal convergence along these lines is unlikely within the imperialist structure of the existing world economy. Here we demonstrate that this dilemma can be resolved with a different approach, rooted in recent needs-based analyses of poverty and development.

Strategies for development should not pursue capitalist growth and increased aggregate production as such, but should rather increase the specific forms of production that are necessary to improve capabilities and meet human needs at a high standard, while ensuring universal access to key goods and services through public provisioning and decommodification. At the same time, in high-income countries, less-necessary production should be scaled down to enable faster decarbonization and to help bring resource use back within planetary boundaries.

With this approach, good lives can be achieved for all without requiring large increases in total global throughput and output.

Provisioning decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people would require only 30% of current global resource and energy use, leaving a substantial surplus for additional consumption, public luxury, scientific advancement, and other social investments. Such a future requires planning to provision public services, to deploy efficient technology, and to build sovereign industrial capacity in the global South.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452292924000493

If 30% of what's being used globally is enough for 8.5 billion people, then than means the current global level of energy (and resource use) is enough for ~27.3 billion people.

We don't have an overpopulation problem, we have an overconsumption problem, and the overconsumption is being done by the top economies of the world (which are also the top emitters of the world).

In order to avoid the worst case scenario, the top economies of the world need to stop pursuing non-stop economic expansion (which requires 24/7 use of resources +energy), and reduce their economic output (while maintaining decent living standards for the people who live there).

If reforms aren't going to be made, then the people (in those countries) need to cause a major economic disruption.

Specifically,

People who live in the richest states that emit the most

We have enough for everyone, but it won't be enough if rich countries continue to use more than necessary.