<|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:"Citizen Satisfaction and Continuing Intentions Regarding Support and Compensation Prescribed by the Chernobyl Act: A Case Study of the Russian Central Federal District."
Abstract:"Using the case study of the Russian Central Federal District, this paper analyzes the degrees of satisfaction among citizens regarding the support and compensation as prescribed by the Chernobyl Act, and their desire for this support to continue. After the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, the Chernobyl Act named the State as being responsible for compensation of damages and provided that liquidators and refugees could receive support. Using a questionnaire survey, citizens' levels of satisfaction concerning this support, as well as the speed of response to the nuclear accident, the information provided by the government, the decontamination of heavily polluted forests, and the compensation for liquidators were evaluated. The results found that support measures regarded as necessary for the reconstruction of affected areas and development of society and economy were the continued observations of the health status of the affected people, and continued pollution control. The degree of satisfaction among women and those with children, who are given preferential treatment under the Chernobyl Act, was high in regard to the Russian government's response to the accident. Conversely, there are many who feel negatively about the provision of company housing and housing to citizens as prescribed under the law. Overall, 80% of the respondents wanted to continue support for the victims, particularly those with children, and desired to continue support such as migration rights, the early receipt of pensions, and the provision of free medicines, but many did not want preferential treatment regarding rent subsidies. Citizen satisfaction was generally high concerning the support and compensation as defined by the Chernobyl Act. However, there were also negative opinions regarding the preferential treatments prescribed by law, and it is necessary to consider these measures when formulating laws to protect victims in the future.."
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 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [0];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [1].
Citizen Satisfaction and Continuing Intentions Regarding Support and Compensation Prescribed by the Chernobyl Act: A Case Study of the Russian Central Federal District
Using the case study of the Russian Central Federal District, this paper analyzes the degrees of satisfaction among citizens regarding the support and compensation as prescribed by the Chernobyl Act, and their desire for this support to continue. After the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, the Chernobyl Act named the State as being responsible for compensation of damages and provided that liquidators and refugees could receive support. Using a questionnaire survey, citizens' levels of satisfaction concerning this support, as well as the speed of response to the nuclear accident, the information provided by the government, the decontamination of heavily polluted forests, and the compensation for liquidators were evaluated. The results found that support measures regarded as necessary for the reconstruction of affected areas and development of society and economy were the continued observations of the health status of the affected people, and continued pollution control. The degree of satisfaction among women and those with children, who are given preferential treatment under the Chernobyl Act, was high in regard to the Russian government's response to the accident. Conversely, there are many who feel negatively about the provision of company housing and housing to citizens as prescribed under the law. Overall, 80% of the respondents wanted to continue support for the victims, particularly those with children, and desired to continue support such as migration rights, the early receipt of pensions, and the provision of free medicines, but many did not want preferential treatment regarding rent subsidies. Citizen satisfaction was generally high concerning the support and compensation as defined by the Chernobyl Act. However, there were also negative opinions regarding the preferential treatments prescribed by law, and it is necessary to consider these measures when formulating laws to protect victims in the future.