1. Heterogeneity Any kind of heterogeneity studied herein seemed to be beneficial. Heterogeneity distinguishes people from one another, which makes them interesting to each another over the long haul and which offers complementary experiences and skills in order to allow the group to arrive at useful, innovative solutions during the expedition or mission. This most likely extends to other kinds of heterogeneity beyond the demographic sort (e.g., sex, nationality, and age). There is evidence that psychological heterogeneity is beneficial to the extreme environment crew as well (Weed, 2001). This finding implies that extreme environment facilities be designed to accommodate a heterogeneous group of users.
2. Time Subjectivization and Shift in Situation Reality From Baseline The issues of distance from rescue, proximity to the unknown, reliance on a limited contained environment, difficulties in communication, microsociety formation, increasing autonomy, and diminishing resources will be the greatest challenges that designers face for extreme environments, especially for a Mars mission. However, innovations in habitat and workplace design can reduce the differentials that emerge between crews and baseline. Many of these innovations can find their inspiration by looking to what has already been learned from the expeditionary experience on the seas, at the poles, and in space (Stuster, 1996).
3. The distance between the field crew and baseline can be perceptually minimized by providing in situ reminders of the baseline environment. Little things count for much. For example, Russian designers used wood trimmings in their prototypical Mars habitat based on experiences of cosmonauts who delighted in things that reminded them of terrestrial life - the taste of a fresh onion or watching a plant grow. Many of the other challenges can be met by designing for ease of engagement of the field environment that will allow "unknowns" to become known and make a limited contained environment seem less confining. The Fram, an Arctic expeditionary ship of the late 1800s, was highly successful as an extreme environment habitat and workspace because its designer, Fridtjof Nansen, addressed the seven factors discussed here. He studied the accounts of previous expeditions, and he specially designed the Fram from the ground up using what information he could glean on the movement of polar pack ice, a little-known phenomenon at the time (Stuster, 1996, pp. 300-301). The way the ship responded to being frozen into the polar pack and its course in the northern polar regions confirmed the movements of the permanent pack. As a result, the Fram was much more than a utilitarian component of exploration, it was the hub of a thriving microsociety, autonomous from the rest of the world, with its crew returning relatively unscathed after more than three years in the Arctic.