<|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:"Addressing the Legal Quagmire of Complementary Legal Pathways."
Abstract:"Complementary pathways have been offered as a possible solution for facilitating legal admission of people in need of international protection. The current debates about these pathways are characterised by a conceptual and legal quagmire since various issues are invoked and conflated. The objective of this article is to dissect the relevant issues in light of the existing relevant legal frameworks to achieve better clarity. For this purpose, the pathways are compared with resettlement and territorial asylum, to demonstrate their distinctiveness. This possible distinctiveness (i.e., the combination of protection-related and not protection-related considerations) disrupts the existing legal categories for regulating migration. The article shows how the European Convention on Human Rights, EU law and domestic law might respond to this disruption, by examining the granting of visas, the right to leave any country, the right to non-refoulement, the right to family life and relevant procedural rights.."
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:

Addressing the Legal Quagmire of Complementary Legal Pathways
Complementary pathways have been offered as a possible solution for facilitating legal admission of people in need of international protection. The current debates about these pathways are characterised by a conceptual and legal quagmire since various issues are invoked and conflated. The objective of this article is to dissect the relevant issues in light of the existing relevant legal frameworks to achieve better clarity. For this purpose, the pathways are compared with resettlement and territorial asylum, to demonstrate their distinctiveness. This possible distinctiveness (i.e., the combination of protection-related and not protection-related considerations) disrupts the existing legal categories for regulating migration. The article shows how the European Convention on Human Rights, EU law and domestic law might respond to this disruption, by examining the granting of visas, the right to leave any country, the right to non-refoulement, the right to family life and relevant procedural rights.