  We study the problem of estimating the average causal effect of treating
every member of a population, as opposed to none, using an experiment that
treats only some. This is the policy-relevant estimand when deciding whether to
scale up an intervention based on the results of an RCT, for example, but
differs from the usual average treatment effect in the presence of spillovers.
We consider both estimation and experimental design given a bound (parametrized
by $\eta > 0$) on the rate at which spillovers decay with the ``distance''
between units, defined in a generalized way to encompass spatial and
quasi-spatial settings, e.g. where the economically relevant concept of
distance is a gravity equation. Over all estimators linear in the outcomes and
all cluster-randomized designs the optimal geometric rate of convergence is
$n^{-\frac{1}{2+\frac{1}{\eta}}}$, and this rate can be achieved using a
generalized ``Scaling Clusters'' design that we provide. We then introduce the
additional assumption, implicit in the OLS estimators used in recent applied
studies, that potential outcomes are linear in population treatment
assignments. These estimators are inconsistent for our estimand, but a refined
OLS estimator is consistent and rate optimal, and performs better than IPW
estimators when clusters must be small. Its finite-sample performance can be
improved by incorporating prior information about the structure of spillovers.
As a robust alternative to the linear approach we also provide a method to
select estimator-design pairs that minimize a notion of worst-case risk when
the data generating process is unknown. Finally, we provide asymptotically
valid inference methods.
