This map is one of the clearest I have ever seen on the long-term consequences of a labor-intensive Malthusian agricultural system (Asia), as compared to the land-abundant New World system. Also reflected in higher urbanization in Latin America than in comparable regions.

Source: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/12/124010… Samberg, L. H., Gerber, J. S., Ramankutty, N., Herrero, M., & West, P. C. (2016). Subnational distribution of average farm size and smallholder contributions to global food production. Environmental Research Letters, 11(12), 124010.

Related companion map, on land owned by family farms. (I was surprised by France and Sweden) Source: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.012…

More generally, I do think that long-term Malthusian pressures are undervalued as a long-term structural determinant on agricultural (and even societal) organization. I think farm size, crop choice, and human labor input, in the long run, all are shaped by Malthusian pressures.

Of course, some patterns (e.g. highland South East Asia) do reflect the raw potential/constraints of the land, and geographical and climate constraints.

The large plot sizes in the New World thus arose in a unique historical quite distinct process. Also other areas that are only more recently more heavily farmed for various reasons (central asian steppe, Borneo, etc), show the same pattern.

In such a system you are often close to the kind of equilibrium you describe, where exogenous increase in population size, will lead to negative population growth.