Floods have a tremendous impact on both our environment and society. The havoc they wreak on cities includes the destruction of drainage systems, resulting in the unfortunate spillover of raw sewage into our precious water bodies. However, amidst this gloom, there is a glimmer of positivity. Floods, in their peculiar way, contribute to the environment by spreading nutrient-rich sediment onto the topsoil, enriching it, and nurturing its fertility (Wikipedia, 2009). The resilient district of Sirajganj in Bangladesh is an area notorious for its perpetual struggle with floods. While the entire district isn't equally vulnerable, certain upazilas hold a more precarious position due to their geographical location. These include Chauhali, Kazipur, Sirajganj Sadar, Belkuchi, Ullahpara, and Shahjadpur, where the impact of floods is felt the strongest. Sirajganj, year after year, braces itself for the onslaught of flooding. Among the notable episodes in its history are the severe floods of 1949, 1956, 1961, 1962, 1966, 1968, 1974, 1979, 1987,1988, 1996, 1998, 2002, 2004, 2007, and 2008, etched into the collective memory (NDP, 2007).

The focus of the study is a village called Hat Pachil, situated in the Kajuri Union of Shahzadpur Upazila, Sirajganj. This union has a population of 54,765 (as per the 2001 census) and is located between 24°6' and 24°12' north latitudes and 89°40' and 89°44' east longitudes. Hat Pachil is one of the twenty villages in the union which is located on the banks of the Jamuna River and is currently facing the dual challenges of flooding and river erosion. Unlike the neighboring villages, Hat Pachil is not protected by the constructed dam. Hence, the selected site experiences both flooding and river erosion, while the other villages only deal with flooding. There has been a newly constructed dam built in 2020 to safeguard the land from erosion and flooding. The dam's elevated height has been determined based on the analysis of flood data from the past 100 years. The village in the case study is vulnerable to natural disasters, putting its residents at risk. The images show the village's location in relation to the dam and the housing patterns within both areas.

Most of the land in these two villages is cultivable and privately owned. The landowners either lived here for most of their lives or migrated here and bought lands to start anew. The main occupation is farming, with other jobs including weaving, fishing, labor, rickshaw pulling, and small business. However, the land is at risk due to natural hazards and a lack of backup plans, leaving people and land unprepared to adapt to the environment. The residents here must either relocate or purchase the higher ground. The rainy period of the year lasts for 8.5 months, from March 1 to November 17, with a sliding 31-day rainfall of at least 0.5 inches (source: weatherspark.com). The month with the most rain in Sirājganj is July, with an average rainfall of 8.1 inches. There are two crop-growing seasons in flood- prone Sirajganj district, Kharif (May-October) and Rabi (November-April). During the Kharif season, rice and maize are the predominant crops cultivated in the region. Conversely, during the Rabi season, potatoes and wheat are the main crops grown in the area. (Md. Nazmul Haque, Kaniz Fatema, and Md. Ashikur Rahman Joy (2022).

Even though there is an increasing chance of losing the land gradually in upcoming years to the river, they constantly choose to come back to the place every year. Insights into their decision-making process to choose the land raised two of the important criteria that are unavoidable and need to be discussed. Therefore, this research aims to introduce only landscape design solutions that meet villagers' main criteria as part of their decision-making process before abandoning their land. The main research question of this study is ‘What are the main reasons for deciding to return the land, and what can be done to support the process?’ The two aspects are economic and social criteria which contribute to the decision-making process.

Most villagers farm their land, but erosion by the river has caused some to lose their land. Those who have lost their land work as tenants in the same community or other fields. During the rainy season, they can work as fishermen, boatmen, or laborers in the main town. Relocating costs their savings, and the same amount of farming land is given to every household in relocation projects, which is very minimal compared to what they had before. Thus, they lose their financial security and identity in the new place. Temporary migration costs them money, time, and strength, instead of saving for a standard of living.

Another important economic consideration is there is a special occupational community in the case study village Haat Pachil who are traditional Taat weavers. This is a family business and an important profession in Shahzadpur Upazila. The weaver house generally has a small workshop beside their home where they make local clothes and sell them in all markets locally and in other cities. Local people work in their workshops. Thus, they contribute to the local and national economy. They are slightly economically improved by the others who are laborers and Labonno/ Environmental Science and Sustainable farmers, and fishermen. But in the rainy season, the workshop needs to be closed for the raised water flooding their yard. For them leaving the land means leaving their identity behind. For those who can manage to buy some land on the closer higher ground their only purpose is to hold on to their family business and not lose economic stability.

The social factors of village life are intertwined with both occupational and relational values among neighbors. Many residents have lived in the same village for generations, surrounded by close friends and relatives. Moving to a new place would mean leaving behind not only a familiar neighborhood but also strong emotional and psychological connections to the land and its people, beyond just economic reasons. Community participation is a major thing in these neighborhoods. The people with no earnings can work in other fields and their workshop or at their home as a helping hand. Starting a new life in a different location can feel like being born anew. So, it is noticeable that when they are moving to another place together as a neighborhood because they are psychologically and financially dependent on each other. The vulnerability among them is only understandable by those who have suffered from disasters.

Living with floods is an inescapable reality of life as they are a natural phenomenon that cannot be completely eradicated. The occurrence of floods leads to the erosion of riverbanks and adjacent land, putting flood-prone areas at risk of eventual land loss. However, despite this, landowners persistently return to their land if it remains for economic and social reasons. This cycle of flooding and gradual land loss forces them into temporary migration, negatively impacting their economic and social well-being. The main objective of the study is to identify the challenges regarding their economic and social consideration and address affordable opportunities, particularly landscape design solutions. It is crucial to keep in mind that the people in the selected village are low-income individuals who are farmers, fishermen, laborers, and weavers who are constantly dealing with disasters. Addressing other flood management may not be their top priority as it requires a considerable number of financial resources. Nonetheless, properly understanding their land would help them manage the timing of land loss due to natural processes. Effective flood management requires identifying flood-prone areas, implementing early warning systems, and minimizing potential damage through proactive measures. However, this requires funding and involvement from authority figures and politicians. On the other hand, landscape design and planning interventions can be done on their land. To successfully attain the objective, it is imperative to take the following steps:

Location and immediate flood-resilient approaches have been important in two developments. The projects focused on different income groups and areas but both solved local flood issues through landscape solutions. In Bangladesh, low-income groups implemented economical and feasible solutions like creating mounds, central ponds, and farming land as buffers. In Seattle, a retention pond, creek, and gradual slope were designed, which is easy to maintain and can be used for other requirements. The two chosen case study shows how small-scale management can affect a housing area and people. Based on the relationship with natural processes, flood control interventions can be classified into three main types, as outlined by Ngai et al. (2017): Resistance to natural processes, Management of natural processes, and working with natural processes. Natural process interventions focus on stabilizing or reinforcing natural processes. They include measures such as assisted recovery and restoring the functioning of natural processes.

In some cases, the emphasis is on allowing natural processes to proceed without interference. In low-lying areas with inadequate flood discharge capacity, extending flood storage and detention areas along rivers has proven to be a feasible, cost-effective, and efficient flood control measure.

In this study, the interventions primarily focus on managing and working with natural forces. Take necessary landscape planning on existing agricultural lands, manage the flood water, store sediment, and use the water thoroughly throughout the year. The next step is to work with the existing built system by raising the land but with proper precaution and buffer, creating necessary land layers, and creating a wetland, and green buffer. By strengthening the land people can live on the land longer and hold on to their socio-economic status.

The study focuses on the village named Haat Pachil in the Kaijuri union of Shahjadpur upazila, which is currently experiencing the destructive impact of natural disasters. The union is located between 24o 6’ and 24o 12’ north latitudes and between 89o 40’ and 89o 44’ east longitudes. The village is now 60 acres and around 3200 people live here with approximately 300 households. The annual precipitation rate in the area is approximately 1300 mm.

45% of the land is agricultural land but only revenue is 3% out of that. Out of the 50 surveyed households in Haat Pachil village, 90% have only one earning member, with an average household income of 12000 BDT in 2021. Most households consist of 4-5 members, while a significant portion lives in thatched or tin-shaded houses. Of the people who are on the land side 20% of people have made their house plinths higher with brick floors.

Many families, particularly those with low incomes, have faced multiple temporary migrations due to flooding and river erosion. The riverside household is forced to leave the house during a disaster and these lower-income families settle in temporary squatters established on government land acquired for embankment construction. Higher-income households typically buy land away from the riverbank for resettlement.

Due to frequent temporary migrations, most of the population has shifted to working as laborers in others' agricultural fields. This occupational shift is driven by continuous land loss and poverty. The locals primarily rely on individual efforts and community participation for adaptation. Landowners in the agricultural sector often rent land from others for cultivation. Approximately 25% of the respondents have experienced a shift in their profession, but 12% have not incurred any loss of income during their migration. Although the construction of embankments around 2010 provided a sense of security for higher-income households, financial constraints have hindered their completion. It is important to note that embankments alone cannot effectively protect riverbanks unless additional landscape measures are

implemented. Most affected families have not received assistance from NGOs or organizations and primarily rely on individual adaptation strategies. The impact of migration on the livelihoods of lower-income individuals is substantial. Some landowners have transitioned to alternative sources of income without experiencing a decline in earnings. Erosion-affected families have faced significant losses in agricultural land, and limited efforts have been made to provide financial support or implement protective measures due to budgetary limitations.

The villagers participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews. Although the participants had different occupation and income groups, their response was proportionately positioned with similar challenges, principles, and decision-making criteria for their developments.

Due to the growing population, living space is scarce. Most households have 5-6 members and there is an economic disparity between them. Families with better financial conditions live on higher ground and have more courtyard space and space for their livestock. Some families share a courtyard, and those living by the riverside have scattered houses with no planning.

The land currently has scattered water bodies that are not utilized effectively. In the new landscape design, these ponds and water bodies will be connected and integrated into a cohesive system. During the dry season, some of these areas can be used for agriculture purposes, while during the rainy season, they can serve as floating gardens and water storage areas. The addition of layers of land will help regulate surface runoff and maintain water levels. People can benefit from these wetlands by engaging in activities such as fishing and using the wetlands as water pathways for boats.

The plan is to use agricultural land as a buffer and riverside land will have multiple layers of green barriers with a water creek between them. This aims to slow down the flow of surface runoff water. The green buffer protects the soil and regulates the movement of water. Layers in agricultural land will impede surface water, retaining it in wetlands or water creeks for year-round use. Floodwater is stored in flooded adjustment fields, with green barriers slowing down water runoff, while the water creek between them functions as a wetland.

The design proposed idea is mainly based on the economic consideration of the people who participated in the decision-making. The proposed landscape solution is decided through a constructive questionnaire, face-to-face surveys, and site visits. The main purpose of the study is to introduce a cost-effective landscape solution for lowincome vulnerable people. The macro-level flood management requires funding, authority approval, manpower, and supervision for a certain period. However, working with the natural processes allows the community to engage in decision making how to solve the problem. The main concern was that people were constantly losing their monthly and yearly savings to move to a newer place. But with the new landscape approaches require community participation. It is a work-and-learn process. The necessity of the land to change and the necessity to protect the land is only acquired when the community participates with their knowledge. Through community participation, they will save labor costs. The three landscape designs are only chosen because they are already in practice. But with effective measurement and purposes, the land can fight better against flood and erosion. Choosing previous practices effectively will require awareness and community participation but no extra investment and no training cost.

Cost-effective and feasible landscape practices will buy time for their land against flooding. The main social concern is to start afresh at a new place with a new identity. An average expected crop will be returned with better land. That will create more opportunities for jobs, for building infrastructure which will strengthen the community. To ensure a sustainable cost-effective resilient community there is a need to shift the focus from the economic focus of developments towards the rejuvenation of their landscape practices. The villagers here have an extra emotional connection but they have minimal effort to increase the land benefits. They were dependent on the resources but took minimal steps to achieve them at the next level. They were looking for available funding which is only for some tubewell construction or toilet construction. The authority did not think through how landscape practices in a better way can minimize surface run water. Choosing the right practices will allow the villagers to have their economic and social benefits.

Not applicable.

The authors declare that there is no competing interest.