Case study Low versus high intensity approaches to interpretive tourism planning: The case of the Cliffs of Moher, Ireland Noel Healy a, * , Carena J. van Riper b , Stephen W. Boyd c a Department of Geography, Salem State University, MA, USA b Department of Recreation, Sport, and Tourism, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA c Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Ulster University, UK highlights  Visitors' preferences for the intensity of interpretive facilities are examined.  Evaluations of low-tech and high-tech visitor facilities are compared.  Low-intensity interpretation was preferred to technologically-driven displays.  Visitors need greater recognition as stakeholders in tourism planning. article info Article history: Received 18 May 2014 Received in revised form 10 August 2015 Accepted 22 August 2015 Available online xxx Keywords: Interpretation Visitor centers Nature-based experiences Visitor management abstract In recent decades, investments in tourism capital and the advancement of media technologies have transformed the construction and consumption of tourism destinations. Using the $45 million Cliffs of Moher (CoM) visitor center in the west of Ireland as a case study, this paper investigates a central debate in interpretive planning: how the intensity of multimedia applications and onsite facilities shapes visitor experiences in natural area destinations. Drawing from onsite surveys, semi-structured interviews and participant observations, as well as comparative evaluations of the former and current visitor centers, results indicated that low-intensity interpretation was preferred to high-intensity, technologically driven displays. This paper challenges the dominant producer-oriented development paradigm for visitor centers where the architectural design is often the focus of attention. Instead, the authors argue for greater emphasis to be placed on interpretation that incorporates the perspectives of visitors and resi- dents throughout all phases of the planning process. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction In recent years, scholarly attention toward nature-based tourism and sustainable development has been interwoven with wider discourses of neoliberalism and ecological modernization. This dialogue has helped shape the debate on use and management of publicly owned goods and spaces (Jamal, Everett, & Dann, 2003). To some, global rationalization has transformed tourism destina- tions into an increasingly commodified resource. Consequently, important natural and cultural resources within these destinations have been managed and even valorized by governmental authorities and international agencies in the name of economic development (Baram & Rowan, 2004; Silberman, 2007). Amenity- rich environments that provide outstanding examples of unique heritage and culture, symbolized, for example, by their designation as national parks or World Heritage Sites, are increasingly subject to commodification (Frost & Hall, 2009; Leask & Fyall, 2006). Tourism planners and managers seek to provide memorable experiences for visitors, offering a setting or “experiencescape” to achieve their goals. O'Dell and Billing (2005) argue that experiences are co-created between what the industry provides and how that is consumed. Visitor centers play a central role in shaping experi- ences. Therefore, public sector monies are often invested in the construction of centers to enhance experiences and attraction to destinations (Fyall, Garrod, Leask, & Wanhill, 2008). This commit- ment to a “build it and they will come” scenario has drawn * Corresponding author. Department of Geography, Salem State University, 352 Lafayette St, Salem, MA, USA. E-mail address: nhealy@salemstate.edu (N. Healy). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Tourism Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.08.009 0261-5177/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Tourism Management 52 (2016) 574e583