<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|>You are an expert on climate change, human mobility and migration. Answer the question truthfully.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|>Here are the title and abstract of a scientific paper probably related to climate change, human mobility and migration..
Title:"To work or not? Wages or subsidies?: Copula-based evidence of subsidized refugees' negative selection into employment."
Abstract:"Despite increasing interest in topics related to refugees, economic literature has remained mostly silent on how refugees make labor supply decisions in their initial resettlement period, during which their host government provides various care and financial assistance. This paper fills that void by applying the copula-based selection model, which is free from the restrictive joint normality assumption, to a unique, high-dimensional data set of refugees who resettled in the US. Its selection parameter estimates suggest that subsidized refugees negatively select themselves into employment in terms of unobserved wage potential, which, according to the theoretical model, should be attributed primarily to the fact that (i) their reservation wages are rigid due to host-provided, non-labor income and (ii) host country employers discount refugees' unobserved human capital components substantially. As a result, employed refugees' wages, all observable factors held constant, are lower than the counterfactual wages of non-employed refugees, which contradicts what is usual in conventional labor markets. This devaluation-based skill paradox is more pronounced in regions unfriendly to refugees, and the negative pattern temporarily reversed immediately after the 9/11 attacks, which represented a huge adverse shock to non-natives in the US labor market, suggesting that subsidized refugees' labor supply decisions are influenced greatly by their expectations regarding future labor market outcomes. Possible explanations are discussed based on a simple theoretical model in the context of the US refugee resettlement system.."
I have six questions you need to answer.
Q1: Is this article is about 'human migration mobility': 1 = yes; 0 = no. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q2: What drivers of migration and mobility does the article study? 0 = 'other', 1 = 'climate', 2 = 'environment', 3 = 'economic', 4 = 'conflict', 5 = 'political', 6 = 'social', 7 = 'family'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q3: What is the overall sentiment of the article?:0 = 'neutral', 1 = 'negative', 2 = 'positive'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q4: What type of climate or environmental keywords are explicitly mentioned?:  0 = 'none', 1 = 'algal blooms', 2 = 'infestation', 3 = 'infectious diseases', 4 = 'ocean acidification', 5 = 'sea ice', 6 = 'acid rain', 7 = 'drought', 8 = 'cold wave', 9 = 'heat wave', 10 = 'glacial', 11 = 'wildfire', 12 = 'air pollution', 13 = 'biodiversity loss', 14 = 'coastal erosion', 15 = 'land degradation', 16 = 'deforestation', 17 = 'desertification', 18 = 'water pollution', 19 = 'diebacks', 20 = 'permafrost loss', 21 = 'sand mining', 22 = 'sea level rise', 23 = 'earthquake', 24 = 'tsunami', 25 = 'volcanic', 26 = 'flood', 27 = 'avalanche', 28 = 'landslide', 29 = 'downburst', 30 = 'thunderstorm', 31 = 'sandstorm', 32 = 'haze', 33 = 'storm', 34 = 'cyclone', 35 = 'blizzard', 36 = 'hail', 37 = 'snow', 38 = 'tornado', 39 = 'wind', 40 = 'hurricane', 41 = 'typhoon', 42 = 'other'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q5: What discipline does the article belong to?: 0 = 'other', 1 = 'social science', 2 = 'natural science', 3 = 'arts and humanities', 4 = 'multidiscipline and interdiscipline'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q6: Does the article apply quantitative and/or statistical analysis?: 0 = 'no', 1 = 'yes'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Use the following template: 

Q1 = [];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [].<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|>Answer:

To work or not? Wages or subsidies?: Copula-based evidence of subsidized refugees' negative selection into employment
Despite increasing interest in topics related to refugees, economic literature has remained mostly silent on how refugees make labor supply decisions in their initial resettlement period, during which their host government provides various care and financial assistance. This paper fills that void by applying the copula-based selection model, which is free from the restrictive joint normality assumption, to a unique, high-dimensional data set of refugees who resettled in the US. Its selection parameter estimates suggest that subsidized refugees negatively select themselves into employment in terms of unobserved wage potential, which, according to the theoretical model, should be attributed primarily to the fact that (i) their reservation wages are rigid due to host-provided, non-labor income and (ii) host country employers discount refugees' unobserved human capital components substantially. As a result, employed refugees' wages, all observable factors held constant, are lower than the counterfactual wages of non-employed refugees, which contradicts what is usual in conventional labor markets. This devaluation-based skill paradox is more pronounced in regions unfriendly to refugees, and the negative pattern temporarily reversed immediately after the 9/11 attacks, which represented a huge adverse shock to non-natives in the US labor market, suggesting that subsidized refugees' labor supply decisions are influenced greatly by their expectations regarding future labor market outcomes. Possible explanations are discussed based on a simple theoretical model in the context of the US refugee resettlement system.