<|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:"Interpreting asylum, reinterpreting refugees: An Australian case-study."
Abstract:"Australian responses to Cambodian asylum-seekers have been characterised by a continuing history of conflict between the legislative, executive and judicial branches of Government. I argue that this conflict has worked to conceal Australian international and humanitarian obligations towards asylum-seekers and refugees. In addition to this, terms used to describe asylum-seekers and refugees as 'boat people' 'queue jumpers' 'economic refugees' etc, have operated as categories of bureaucratic control and political power which have also worked to conceal those obligations. Further to this, I explore the form and content of the relevant international instruments as these articulate the obligations upon states in the grant of asylum. I then examine Australian responses to Cambodian asylum-seekers and argue that the international instruments are no longer sufficient obligation upon signatory stales such as Australia, to entrench the rights of asylum-seekers. I therefore suggest an extension to the current theoretical debate as this might inform possible ways in which to reconceptualise both the rights of asylum-seekers and the international and humanitarian obligations upon those countries from which they seek asylum.."
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:

Interpreting asylum, reinterpreting refugees: An Australian case-study
Australian responses to Cambodian asylum-seekers have been characterised by a continuing history of conflict between the legislative, executive and judicial branches of Government. I argue that this conflict has worked to conceal Australian international and humanitarian obligations towards asylum-seekers and refugees. In addition to this, terms used to describe asylum-seekers and refugees as 'boat people' 'queue jumpers' 'economic refugees' etc, have operated as categories of bureaucratic control and political power which have also worked to conceal those obligations. Further to this, I explore the form and content of the relevant international instruments as these articulate the obligations upon states in the grant of asylum. I then examine Australian responses to Cambodian asylum-seekers and argue that the international instruments are no longer sufficient obligation upon signatory stales such as Australia, to entrench the rights of asylum-seekers. I therefore suggest an extension to the current theoretical debate as this might inform possible ways in which to reconceptualise both the rights of asylum-seekers and the international and humanitarian obligations upon those countries from which they seek asylum.