The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between foodservice and tourism both in destination choice and in the vacation experience. In particular, it studies how different cultures value food when on vacation. A survey of 1300 visitors to the state of Hawaii from Japan, Canada and the U.S. mainland found that only 18% said foodservice played a role in their destination choice. Japanese visitors, however, rated foodservice higher than did the other two nationalities. The quality of foodservice and the availability of a range of prices were found to be the most important aspects of foodservice for tourists when on vacation. The study found that at dinner-time, tourists' major concern is with the quality of the cuisine, whereas at lunch and breakfast time they are more concerned with getting the best value for their dollar.

The military operational ration, designated as Meal, Ready‐to‐Eat (MRE) has been developed to furnish combat troops with a higher quality food product in a logistically more suitable container than its predecessor, Meal, Combat, Individual (MCI). A study was conducted to determine the acceptability of feeding the MRE ration for a 34‐day test period. Two combat support companies from the 25th Infantry Division participated in this study at the Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii. One company subsisted solely on MRE rations (experimental group), while the other company was fed an A ration breakfast and dinner and a MRE lunch (control group). The MRE items were well received, with average acceptability scores of 7.05 for the experimental group and 6.48 for the control group on a 9‐point hedonic scale. Nevertheless, the MRE ration was not consumed in sufficient quantity by the experimental group, resulting in significant body weight loss and some vitamin and mineral intakes that were below recommended levels (Wenkam et al. 1989). However, physiological evaluations did not reveal significant differences between the two companies or values that were outside of the normal range, thus indicating that nutritional status was not compromised by subsisting solely on the MRE ration for 34 days (Lichton et al. 1988).

No abstract

Students graduating from an accredited school in travel industry management or hotel, restaurant and institutional management should have an appreciation of quality assurance and sensory evaluation in foodservice. This type of information cannot be acquired strictly through lectures; it also requires laboratory sessions where objective quality assurance procedures are taught along with subjective sensory evaluation procedures.In the School of Travel Industry Management at the University of Hawaii, a course was developed for hotel and restaurant management majors to give them an appreciation of this subject. Morton Fox, associate professoroffoodservice systems whose background is in food science and food engineering, designedthe laboratory for this course and subsequently developed the course.This three-credit course consists of two 50-minute lectures and one three-hour laboratory session per week. Two textbooks plus numerous outside references are used for the course. A majority of the lecture material comes from Quality Control in Foodservice, Revised Edition (1983) by Thorner and Manning, with the sensory evaluation information coming from Basic Principles of Sensory Evaluation, STP433 (1968) published by the American Society for Testing Materials. The laboratory experiments were developedforstudents with a limited scientific background, since the School of Travel Industry Management is in the College of Business Administration. The first two weeks are devoted to familiarization with laboratory equipment as most of the students had not been exposed to this type of equipmentbefore. Relativelysimple experiments were developedforusing different types of thermometers and scales, volumetric measures, gauges, hydrometers, refractometers, pH meter, viscosimeter, fat analyzer, spectrophotometer, and microscope. At first, the students were overwhelmed, butquicklyfoundouthoweasy these instruments were to use andbecame quite confident in theirabilityto use them. The next experiment dealt with calibrating the instruments and equipment in the main kitchen. They learned how to calibrate thermostats on ovens, timers on cooking equipment, and thermometers. Otherexperiments included performing cutting tests and writing specifications based on recipe requirements; precooking, cooking, and

No abstract