<|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:"Populating regional Australia: What are the impacts of non-resident labour force practices on demographic growth in resource regions?."
Abstract:"Resource-based activity provides a strong stimulus to local economies, largely through the high incomes paid to employees in the resources sector, plus the large levels of expenditure through supporting business chains. However, the role that resource development plays in driving regional population dynamics remains poorly understood, particularly with respect to the rising use of non-resident labour force practices. Supply of labour via fly-in, fly-out (FIFO) and drive-in, drive-out (DIDO) options creates a range of direct and indirect pressures on host communities. These are predominantly linked with difficulties in counting the non-resident population, and hence planning for, and investing in, the social infrastructure required to meet the new demand. Non-residency also represents a distinct 'opportunity cost' for regions, because local population growth is a powerful business case for public and private investment in infrastructure and services. The dual effect of FIFO/DIDO is thus not only to introduce new demand for infrastructure and services, but also to deny regions the chance for baseline population growth, and with it, the likelihood of improving living standards. This paper presents a case study illustrating the value of resource activity in stimulating local population growth in Central Queensland, and how the strength of this stimulus varies with patterns of resident and non-resident workforce mixes. Demographic modelling prepared using the economic multiplier approach suggest that in excess of up to 180,000 additional people could move into the region by 2018 in direct response to resource sector growth, if the workforce was fully resident. However, the extent of population in-migration-and consequent economic growth-reduces as the proportion of non-resident workforce increases. Under predominantly DIDO or predominantly FIFO scenario, the regional population boost is decreased by up to 23% or 44%, respectively. Populating regional Australia will be an essential part of the national growth strategy going forward. However, without a change in policy to re-emphasise the importance of supplying labour locally, the role that resource regions will play in this growth, and the positive impacts associated with local population increases, will not be maximised.."
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:
Q1 = [1];
Q2 = [3];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [0];
Q5 = [1];
Q6 = [1].
Populating regional Australia: What are the impacts of non-resident labour force practices on demographic growth in resource regions?
Resource-based activity provides a strong stimulus to local economies, largely through the high incomes paid to employees in the resources sector, plus the large levels of expenditure through supporting business chains. However, the role that resource development plays in driving regional population dynamics remains poorly understood, particularly with respect to the rising use of non-resident labour force practices. Supply of labour via fly-in, fly-out (FIFO) and drive-in, drive-out (DIDO) options creates a range of direct and indirect pressures on host communities. These are predominantly linked with difficulties in counting the non-resident population, and hence planning for, and investing in, the social infrastructure required to meet the new demand. Non-residency also represents a distinct 'opportunity cost' for regions, because local population growth is a powerful business case for public and private investment in infrastructure and services. The dual effect of FIFO/DIDO is thus not only to introduce new demand for infrastructure and services, but also to deny regions the chance for baseline population growth, and with it, the likelihood of improving living standards. This paper presents a case study illustrating the value of resource activity in stimulating local population growth in Central Queensland, and how the strength of this stimulus varies with patterns of resident and non-resident workforce mixes. Demographic modelling prepared using the economic multiplier approach suggest that in excess of up to 180,000 additional people could move into the region by 2018 in direct response to resource sector growth, if the workforce was fully resident. However, the extent of population in-migration-and consequent economic growth-reduces as the proportion of non-resident workforce increases. Under predominantly DIDO or predominantly FIFO scenario, the regional population boost is decreased by up to 23% or 44%, respectively. Populating regional Australia will be an essential part of the national growth strategy going forward. However, without a change in policy to re-emphasise the importance of supplying labour locally, the role that resource regions will play in this growth, and the positive impacts associated with local population increases, will not be maximised.