The Harvard Food Services is "inefficient and inequitable," a survey conducted this fall by an experimental sophomore economics tutorial discloses.
Eric J. Seiler '78, spokesman for tutor David I. Landauer's tutorial, said, the food services system is inequitable because women eat substantially less than men do. Since women pay the same amount for as men do, women end up subsidizing men, Seiler said.
The food service is inefficient from the consumer's point of view, Seiler, said, because students pay for more meals than they would buy "on the free market."
A food services statement describing the food services says that by maximizing the number of students eating on campus, the present system is "the best way to maintain the House system and preserve the unique Harvard atmosphere."
But Seiler maintained that less than ten per cent of the 60 students surveyed realize that the goal of the board contract is to preserve the House system. "This indicates that the House system ambience is not a crucial thing to most people," he said.
The tutorial recommends the "pay-as-you-go" and partial board system as alternatives to the current system, Seiler said.
Seiler said he doubted the food services would accept the tutorial's suggestion.
The survey was not commissioned by the food services, but was instead merely an effort by the economics department to acquaint its students with "real-world economic problems," Seiler explained.