<|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 resettle or not?: Socioeconomic characteristics, livelihoods, and perceptions toward resolving human-tiger conflict in the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve, India."
Abstract:"As pressure from a growing human population increases around the world, greater levels of conflict between people and wildlife over shrinking available land may be inevitable. The conversion of Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary to Mudumalai Tiger Reserve (MTR) in India is a conservation initiative under Project Tiger scheme to facilitate greater habitat connectivity across the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve. We interviewed local people in the MTR landscape to determine their interest and attitude towards resettlement and tiger conservation following MTR's new status designation. We found that non-tribal Mountain Chetties generally had negative attitude towards tiger conservation, Kurumbas were positive toward the idea, and Kattunaickers, and Irula people and other minor ethnic groups were found neutral. We found that literate respondents were less likely to collect firewood and more likely to exhibit positive attitude towards tiger conservation and the establishment of MTh. Households with higher milk production, and people with generally negative attitude towards wildlife conservation, were against the declaration of MTR. People employed in private sectors and those having negative perception towards wildlife conservation were more likely to show negative attitude towards declaration of MTR. Locals desiring resettlement post MTR declaration were literate, and interested in availing better livelihood resources. However, they usually suffered relatively high livestock loss to large carnivores, and high crop damage caused by elephant (Elephas maximus). Most respondents (74.3%) were interested in resettlement provided that basic amenities were available to them. We recommend that conservation authorities facilitate choice-based resettlement options, which account for local people's consent before making decisions on resettlement. This approach will avoid possible conflicts between forest managers and local people.."
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 = [0];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [0];
Q6 = [1].
To resettle or not?: Socioeconomic characteristics, livelihoods, and perceptions toward resolving human-tiger conflict in the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve, India
As pressure from a growing human population increases around the world, greater levels of conflict between people and wildlife over shrinking available land may be inevitable. The conversion of Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary to Mudumalai Tiger Reserve (MTR) in India is a conservation initiative under Project Tiger scheme to facilitate greater habitat connectivity across the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve. We interviewed local people in the MTR landscape to determine their interest and attitude towards resettlement and tiger conservation following MTR's new status designation. We found that non-tribal Mountain Chetties generally had negative attitude towards tiger conservation, Kurumbas were positive toward the idea, and Kattunaickers, and Irula people and other minor ethnic groups were found neutral. We found that literate respondents were less likely to collect firewood and more likely to exhibit positive attitude towards tiger conservation and the establishment of MTh. Households with higher milk production, and people with generally negative attitude towards wildlife conservation, were against the declaration of MTR. People employed in private sectors and those having negative perception towards wildlife conservation were more likely to show negative attitude towards declaration of MTR. Locals desiring resettlement post MTR declaration were literate, and interested in availing better livelihood resources. However, they usually suffered relatively high livestock loss to large carnivores, and high crop damage caused by elephant (Elephas maximus). Most respondents (74.3%) were interested in resettlement provided that basic amenities were available to them. We recommend that conservation authorities facilitate choice-based resettlement options, which account for local people's consent before making decisions on resettlement. This approach will avoid possible conflicts between forest managers and local people.