iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
The 2025 National Academies report A Science Strategy for the Human Exploration of Mars makes a science case for sending people to Mars: a carefully designed human campaign could investigate whether the planet was or is habitable, search for signs of life, and study its geology, climate, resources, and effects on people. It does not announce an approved NASA mission, promise that life will be found, or set a landing date. Its four campaign concepts are options for organizing future exploration, not scheduled or funded flights.
What did the Mars report say?
Published in 2025 and sponsored by NASA, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report identifies 11 ranked science objectives for the first human missions to Mars. It considers how crews, robotic tools, drilling, laboratory work, and sample return could contribute to those goals across a multi-mission campaign. The report spans Mars geology, climate, water and carbon dioxide cycles, dust, resources, planetary protection, and the consequences of the environment for people and biological systems.
The report’s central argument is that human exploration should be designed around scientific questions, rather than treating science as an add-on to a landing. Its proposed campaign designs show ways to pursue those questions; they are not NASA flight plans. See the National Academies report catalog entry and the December 9, 2025 National Academies announcement.
Recommended Free Tools
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
The Exploration of Mars | $29.95 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
A Science Strategy for the Human Exploration of Mars | $40.00 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Red Mars (Mars Trilogy) | $12.70 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Green Mars (Mars Trilogy) | $12.90 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
The Last Dragon on Mars (The Dragonships Series) | $8.69 | Buy on Amazon |
What are the report’s 11 science priorities?
The National Academies ranks the objectives below in this order. “Search for Life” is first, but the objective is to investigate whether evidence exists—not a claim that life has been discovered.
- Search for Life: Determine whether Mars has evidence of current or extinct life, past or present habitability, or indigenous prebiotic chemistry.
- Water and CO₂ on Mars: Characterize the cycles of water and carbon dioxide and how they have changed over time.
- Mars Geology: Map the geological record to reveal how the planet evolved.
- Impact on Crew: Assess physiological, cognitive, emotional, and team effects of living and working on Mars.
- Dust Storms: Identify what drives major storms and other atmospheric variability.
- Explore Resources: Characterize the environment and the processing needed to use local resources, initially including water and propellants.
- Effect of Mars on Genomes and Reproduction: Test effects across generations in at least one plant and one animal species.
- Understanding Microbes: Assess microbial population dynamics and whether microbes could threaten astronaut health or performance.
- Martian Dust: Characterize how dust affects people and hardware.
- Plants and Animals in an Ecosystem: Assess effects on physiology and development across generations.
- Radiation Sampling: Characterize radiation around habitats and astrobiology sampling sites.
The ranking puts the search for life and conditions that could support it first, while also recognizing that a crewed mission must understand its own biological risks and the environment it will operate in. These are distinct questions: finding an environment compatible with life would not by itself prove life exists.
#1 Best Overall
Why is the search for life the top priority?
Evidence of life—or of conditions and chemistry relevant to life—could address one of the most consequential questions in planetary science. Mars preserves a geological record that can help scientists investigate its past environments, while a human campaign could combine field observations, drilling, analysis on the surface, and study of returned samples. Those methods could help distinguish among possible explanations for what instruments detect.
The report does not claim that Martian life exists or that a human mission will settle the question. The objective is explicitly to determine whether evidence of current or extinct life, habitability, or indigenous prebiotic chemistry is present. The committee’s co-chair Dava Newman put the uncertainty plainly in remarks quoted by Ars Technica’s coverage of the report: “The answer to the question ‘are we alone‘ is always going to be ‘maybe,’ unless it becomes yes.”
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
What would astronauts do on Mars?
The report’s highest-ranked campaign combines crewed fieldwork with an uncrewed cargo delivery and later surface operations. The committee’s concept uses one exploration zone approximately 100 kilometers across, with features including ancient lava flows and known dust storms. The work would draw on science instruments, drilling and meteorological equipment, investigations in a habitat laboratory, and sample study on Earth.
This is one studied campaign concept, not a commitment to a mission. Its 30-sol and 300-sol durations refer to proposed Martian surface stays; a sol is a Martian day, slightly longer than an Earth day. The report does not use these figures to predict launch, arrival, or landing dates.
Rank #3
How do the four campaign concepts compare?
The report evaluates four approaches. They differ in scientific breadth, site flexibility, emphasis on life-search drilling and sample return, and the number and duration of surface missions.
| Rank | Campaign concept | Science and mission approach |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Broad campaign in one exploration zone | A 30-sol crewed landing, an uncrewed cargo delivery, then a 300-sol crewed surface mission in a zone approximately 100 km across. Designed to address all 11 objectives, with fieldwork, drilling, meteorology, habitat-laboratory investigation, and sample study on Earth. |
| 2 | Measurements useful across objectives | Prioritizes measurements that support multiple objectives and allows greater flexibility in landing-site choice. |
| 3 | Life-search and deep-drilling campaign | Focuses on life-search science, including a site suitable for deep drilling to liquid water, core collection, analysis on Mars, and return of most samples to Earth. |
| 4 | Three short missions at different sites | Uses three brief missions to investigate different settings, potentially including igneous and impact-melt geology, sedimentary rocks, and glaciers in a region where dust storms form. |
The first concept ranks highest overall, while the life-search-focused option ranks third. They are not interchangeable versions of the same itinerary: a campaign that optimizes broad measurements and site flexibility makes different trade-offs from one built around deep drilling and sample return.
Rank #4
How does planetary protection affect the plan?
Planetary protection is the effort to prevent biological contamination from compromising investigations of other worlds, and to protect Earth from potential returned material. On Mars, terrestrial microbes carried by people or equipment could complicate interpretation of possible biosignatures, especially in environments that might support or preserve life. At the same time, restrictions affect where and how crews can investigate.
The report recommends that NASA continue collaborating on changes to planetary protection guidance so research in regions that could support or harbor life can be enabled while protecting the scientific integrity of results. It does not resolve the policy tension or authorize unrestricted access. Ars Technica’s December 2025 report coverage also discusses the debate over how planetary protection should apply to human exploration.
Best Value
What else does the report recommend?
- Plan for a surface laboratory: The committee calls for laboratory capability on Mars to support investigation of material collected in the field.
- Return samples from every human Mars mission: Sample return would allow detailed study on Earth, beyond what can be done with instruments at the landing site.
- Hold a recurring collaboration summit: The report recommends bringing together people working on human missions, robotic exploration tools, and artificial intelligence to improve how those capabilities work together.
- Continue work on planetary protection guidance: The goal is to enable research in potentially life-supporting regions without undermining the reliability of results.
Does the report mean NASA is sending people to Mars soon?
No. The report is a science strategy, not an approved mission plan or a schedule. Its campaign durations and sequences describe concepts evaluated by the committee. They do not establish funding, vehicle readiness, agency approval, or a launch and landing date. The report’s value is in spelling out the questions a future human exploration program could address and the capabilities needed to do so responsibly.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →
