Abstract
One of tourism's most persistent paradoxes is that we harm places we love by visiting them. This contradiction is well illustrated by the case of Antarctic tour guides, who live with a moral dilemma around the conflicting nature of their work. Although they overwhelmingly report strong concern for Antarctica, they repeatedly engage in behaviour that harms it (i.e. travelling there). In this mixed-methods study, we aim to understand the psychological mechanisms (moral disengagement mechanisms) used to resolve the cognitive dissonance arising from this contradictory behaviour. We collect qualitative data (semi-structured interviews with Antarctic tour guides) and analyse it using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods (thematic analysis and co-occurrence analysis). We identify 13 novel mechanisms of moral disengagement and three overarching justification narratives that are constructed through complex combinations of mechanisms. Theoretically, the study contributes: (1) the first comprehensive mapping of moral disengagement mechanisms in tourism, (2) several novel mechanisms of moral disengagement, and (3) a deeper understanding of how mechanisms of moral disengagement interrelate. Our results can be used by tourists, practitioners, and policy-makers as a tool to identify disengagement from morals in tourism discourse, and to hold the tourism industry to account on ethical issues.