1 1Policy, Innovation Systems, and Impact Assessment Program, Africa Rice Center, Kampala, Uganda 2National Crops Resources Research Institute (NaCRRI), Kampala, Uganda 3Makerere University Department of Agribusiness and Natural Resource Economics, Kampala, Uganda 4Policy, Innovation Systems, and Impact Assessment Program, Africa Rice Center, Antananarivo, Madagascar 1.0 Introduction Rice has transitioned from a minor traditional crop to a major staple and cash crop in Uganda over the past three decades, playing a critical role in national food security, poverty alleviation, and economic development (FAO, 2022). This transformation has been driven by rising domestic consumption, favorable government policies, and investments in irrigation infrastructure (MAAIF, 2020). National rice production has seen a significant upward trajectory, with current estimates exceeding 300,000 metric tons annually, cultivated on approximately 120,000 hectares (UBOS, 2021). The sector supports the livelihoods of millions of rice value chain agents, including smallholder farmers, processors, traders, and their dependents across the country's major agro- ecological zones. Rice cultivation is recognized as a strategic lever for accomplishing Uganda’s Vision 2040 goals of transforming Uganda from a peasant to a modern and prosperous nation under Uganda's National Rice Development Plan Strategy II (MAAIF, 2023). However, the sector's continued growth is threatened by a complex interplay of biophysical, socio- economic, and institutional challenges, including variable climatic conditions, prevalent pests and diseases, limited availability of and access to quality inputs such as seed and fertilizer, post-harvest losses, and the recent government ban on rice cultivation in the rainfed lowland ecosystem (Van Oort et al., 2015, Twine, 2023). Addressing some of these challenges requires the development of improved climate- smart rice varieties. The National Agricultural Research Organization, in collaboration with CGIAR, is implementing the concept of Target Product Profiles (TPPs) in its breeding 2025 Trait Priorities in Rice Farming: Integrating gender into target product profiles for Uganda Augustine Oloo1, Irene Bayiyana2, Daisy Kemigisha3, Edgar E. Twine1, Gaudiose Mujawamariya4 2 efforts across several crops. A TPP is defined as a blueprint for the design of a new variety; it lists the traits and characteristics required in a new variety to meet or exceed the requirements of growers, processors, and consumers in a specific seed product market segment (Donovan et al., 2022). To be effective, a TPP must be gender-intentional, in- demand, impactful, and feasible (Mungani et al., 2024). Gender-intentionality simply means that the needs of women, men, and the youth ought to be considered in the design of a TPP. The purpose of this study is to provide information that would make Uganda’s rice TPPs gender-intentional. 1.1 The imperative for gendered TPPs: Why gender matters in trait prioritization A trait considered ideal in a breeding program may be perceived as impractical or undesirable by farmers if it does not align with their gendered realities. Men and women in Ugandan rice farming systems often have divergent roles, responsibilities, access to resources, and decision-making power, leading to distinct preferences and trade-offs (McGuire et al., 2020). Ignoring these differences results in TPPs that are incomplete and inequitable. The rationale for gendered TPPs is built on three interconnected pillars: 1. Divergent roles and responsibilities The division of labor in rice production is highly gendered. Existing literature consistently shows that women are predominantly responsible for the most time-consuming and physically demanding tasks, including transplanting, weeding, harvesting (often using knives), and post-harvest processing (winnowing, drying, and milling) (Mwalyagile et al., 2024; Nabikyu et al., 2023; Bergman et al., 2012). They often manage smaller, sometimes more marginal, household food plots. Men, on the other hand, are more frequently responsible for land preparation (plowing), chemical application, marketing, and decision-making regarding input purchase and sale of surplus (Kinkingninhoun et al., 2020; Achandi et al., 2018). They often manage larger, more commercial plots. Therefore, a trait like reduced lodging is critical for both, but for different reasons. Men may value it to facilitate mechanical harvesting for market-oriented production, while women may prioritize it to ease manual harvesting and reduce grain loss during cutting and bundling. Early maturity is universally valued but may be especially critical for women managing multiple food security crops under time constraints. 2. Differential access to and control over resources Gender inequalities in access to key productive resources shape trait needs. Women often cultivate smaller, less fertile, or more remote plots with poorer water control (Miriti et al., 2023). This makes traits like drought tolerance, performance on poor soils, and weed competitiveness much more important for their productivity and food security. In addition, women's high labor burden in rice and domestic chores makes labor-saving traits (e.g., easy threshing, weed competitiveness) a high priority to reduce drudgery and free up time. In contrast, men typically have greater access to capital for purchased inputs like fertilizer and herbicide. Therefore, women may place a higher premium on varieties that 3 are responsive to organic inputs or possess built-in resistance to reduce dependency on costly chemicals that they cannot access easily. 3. Distinct preferences and end use Men and women often have different priorities for the final product, influenced by their roles in consumption and marketing. Women, who are often charged with family nutrition as well as being primary food preparers, may value traits linked to nutritional content or storage stability to ensure food availability throughout the year and may consistently emphasize traits related to cooking quality, such as aroma, grain elongation, softness, and taste, which are crucial for household consumption and local market sales (Twine et al., 2023; 2022). Conversely, men, who are often more involved in bulk sales to traders, may prioritize grain uniformity, color (whiteness), and high milling recovery to meet buyer specifications and command better prices (Asante et al., 2023; Frimpong et al., 2023; Mujawamariya et al., 2022). Therefore, a gendered TPP is not about creating separate varieties for men and women but about integrating a spectrum of prioritized traits that reflect the needs and preferences of all users. It ensures that breeding programs deliver varieties that are not only agronomically sound but also socially adoptable, enhancing overall productivity, equity, and resilience within rice farming households. The remainder of the article is organized as follows: since a TPP is designed for a specific market segment, the next section describes Uganda’s seed product market segments. This is followed by a detailed description of the methodology designed explicitly to capture the gendered and ecological nuances in trait prioritization. Section 4 presents the results and the conclusion of the gendered TPP analysis. 2.0 Main market segments: Description, ecologies, and size Uganda's rice sector is not monolithic but is distinctly segmented into two primary production systems, each with its own agronomic practices, ecological adaptations, and market implications. These segments are defined by the variety type, cultivation method, and growing environment, which collectively influence yield potential, grain quality, and farmer livelihood strategies. Segment 1: Long, soft, transplanted, rainfed lowland rice (Rice 22 EAF) This segment represents the traditional heartland of Ugandan rice cultivation and accounts for the largest share of national production, estimated at approximately 55% of total area and 65-70% of the total output (Kikuchi et al., 2014; Kikuchi et al., 2016; Lamo et al., 2017; Hong et al., 2021; Dossou-Yovo et al., 2022; Nabikyu et al., 2023; Twine et al., 2024). It is predominantly found in the Eastern and parts of the Northern regions, in lowland valleys and plains with seasonal water accumulation. Cultivation occurs in rainfed lowlands, which are level or gently sloping fields that capture and retain rainfall or runoff. The defining practice is transplanting seedlings from nurseries into puddled fields, a labor-intensive method that requires significant 4 community coordination, often involving women's groups for seedling preparation and transplanting (Nakano & Kajisa, 2016). The dominant varieties in this system are of the long and soft grain type, or similar traditional/improved lines. These varieties are prized for their specific cooking quality, yielding soft, fluffy, and aromatic cooked rice, which aligns perfectly with local consumer preferences (Twine et al., 2023; 2022). Key production ecologies include the Lake Victoria Crescent and the Kyoga Plains, where hydromorphic soils facilitate water retention. This segment is the backbone of domestic supply, feeding local and urban markets. Annual production is estimated at 195,000 - 210,000 metric tons from about 78,000 - 84,000 hectares. It is primarily a smallholder-driven system, with farm sizes typically ranging from 0.5 to 2 hectares. While it faces challenges such as drought risk at the end of the rainy season, weed infestation (especially Oryza longistaminata), and blast disease, its deep cultural entrenchment and consumer demand ensure its continued dominance (Mutiga et al., 2021). Segment 2: Upland, direct-seeded rice (Rice 15 EAF) This segment represents a more recent and expanding frontier of rice cultivation in Uganda, driven by the introduction of adapted varieties and growing demand. It is crucial for food security in regions without access to lowland areas (Twine et al., 2024). Upland rice is cultivated on well-drained, non-puddled soils on hillsides and plateaus, entirely dependent on rainfall. The primary establishment method is direct seeding (broadcasting or drilling), which reduces labor demands compared to transplanting but increases vulnerability to weeds and soil moisture stress (Rodenburg et al., 2019). The varieties grown are predominantly of the shorter and harder grain type. Although these varieties typically mature earlier and are more drought-tolerant than lowland types, they often produce harder and less aromatic grain, which has a negative impact on their market positioning (Kirambia, 2020). Major ecologies include the Western Highlands and the rolling hills of the Mid-North and West Nile. Rice 15 EAF is smaller but growing rapidly, currently estimated to contribute 30-35% of the national area and about 25-30% of production due to generally lower yields per hectare (FAO, 2022). This translates to approximately 36,000 - 42,000 hectares producing 75,000 - 90,000 metric tons annually. This segment is particularly important for households in moisture-stressed regions and offers a critical second-season crop option. Key constraints include severe weed competition, nutrient depletion, high risk of complete crop failure due to erratic rainfall, and bird damage (Ogwuike et al., 2014). Table 1: Key characteristics of the main rice segments in Uganda Characteristic Segment 1: Rainfed lowland (Rice 22 EAF) Segment 2: Upland (Rice 15 EAF) Primary ecology Lowland valleys, plains (Lake Victoria Crescent, Kyoga Plains) Hillsides, plateaus (Western Highlands, Mid- North) Establishment method Transplanting Direct Seeding 5 Grain type Long, Soft Short/Medium, Hard Key variety example Supa, NARORICE (1,2,3,4), Wita 9, Okille, Agoro, K85, K98 NERICA (1,4, 10), Namche (3,4,5), K85 Estimated area share 55% 30-35% Estimated production share 65-70% 25-30% Main consumer preference High (Preferred for aroma & texture) Moderate (Often for blending or specific markets) Major challenges Terminal drought, weeds, blast, labor for transplanting Erratic rainfall, weed prevalence, soil fertility, and bird damage This segmentation underscores the necessity for a differentiated approach to agricultural research and development. A "one-size-fits-all" strategy for varietal improvement is inadequate. The development of Target Product Profiles (TPPs) must explicitly be informed by the unique production challenges, market demands, and socio-economic contexts of each segment (Ceccarelli & Grando, 2020). Furthermore, within these segments, gender roles in labor allocation, decision-making, and benefit control vary significantly, making a gendered approach to TPP development not merely an additive consideration but a fundamental prerequisite for achieving equitable adoption and impact (McGuire et al., 2022). This study, through focused gender-disaggregated analysis, aims to elucidate these segment-specific and gender-differentiated trait preferences to inform the breeding of next-generation rice varieties for Uganda. 3.0 Informing Target Product Profiles The development of effective Target Product Profiles requires a grounded understanding of the specific constraints within each production ecology and, critically, an analysis of how these constraints are experienced differently by men and women who manage, labor in, and benefit from rice cultivation. A gender-blind TPP risks reinforcing inequalities and developing varieties that fail to address the priorities of half the farming population, thereby limiting overall adoption and impact (Farnworth et al., 2018). This section outlines the primary production challenges within Uganda’s two main rice market segments and establishes the imperative for a gendered approach to trait prioritization. 3.0 Method This study employed a qualitative, participatory approach to develop gendered TPPs for rice in Uganda. The method was explicitly designed to capture the distinct priorities, constraints, and lived experiences of male and female rice farmers. The process comprised three interconnected phases: (1) purposive site and participant selection, (2) gender-disaggregated data collection via Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), and (3) a systematic thematic analysis of qualitative data, enriched by quantitative coding to identify patterns and linkages. 3.1 Site selection 6 The study was conducted across four major rice-growing regions of Uganda (Eastern, Northern, Western, and Southwestern), ensuring representation of the key agro- ecological zones and market segments. Sites were purposively selected based on their dominance in either the rainfed lowland or the upland production ecosystems (Table 2). Table 2: Segments, benchmarks, and locations of study Ecosystem Benchmark variety Number of FDGs Location Rainfed lowland K98; WITA 9; K85/ Benenego; NARORICE 3/ MET20 10 i) Lira-Itek ii) Lira-Agali iii) Butalejja-Himuttu iv) Butalejja-Mazzi Masa v) Nwoya-Lungulu Upland NERICA 4; Namche 5; NARORICE 2/ Met 12 10 i) Hoima-Kisukuma ii) Hoima-Kijongo iii) Nwoya-Alero iv) Kasese- Karusandara v) Kasese- Nyamwamba 3.1.2 Participant recruitment and gender-disaggregated FGDs Within each site, participants were identified in collaboration with local agricultural extension officers and farmer group leaders. Selection criteria required that participants be active rice farmers cultivating the dominant variety type for that segment. A critical component of the approach was gender disaggregation, i.e., separate FGDs were held for male and female farmers. This ensured free discussion of preferences, challenges, and impacts in each group without the influence or dominance of the other gender, a practice proven to reveal divergent perspectives (Farnworth et al., 2018). In total, 20 FGDs were conducted (10 per major segment), evenly split between 10 male groups and 10 female groups. Each FGD comprised 8-12 participants. Discussions were guided by a semi-structured questionnaire focused on: i. Trait prioritization: Identification and ranking of preferred agronomic, quality, and biotic/abiotic stress resistance traits. ii. Perceived impacts: Exploration of the expected economic (e.g., on income, costs, market access) and social/gender (e.g., on labor, decision-making, intra- household dynamics) impacts of adopting varieties with these improved traits. iii. Segment-specific challenges: Deep dive into the unique production constraints of lowland vs. upland systems. All FGDs were conducted in local languages, audio-recorded with consent, transcribed, and translated into English. 3.2 Analysis 7 The analysis employed a mixed-methods approach, integrating rigorous qualitative coding with quantitative frequency analysis to derive robust, data-driven TPPs. All transcribed FGD data were imported into ATLAS.ti (Version 25) for systematic analysis. An inductive-deductive coding approach was used. First, an initial codebook was developed based on the FGD guide themes. Through iterative reading of transcripts, this was expanded into a comprehensive hierarchical code system with four primary dimensions: a) Traits: Agronomic, quality, and resistance traits (e.g., Drought tolerance, Aroma, Head Rice Recovery). Economic impacts: Perceived positive and negative consequences of trait improvements on livelihoods (e.g., Higher selling price, Lower prices (excess supply), Risk of theft). b) Gender & social impacts: Perceived effects of trait improvements on household well-being, relationships, and gender dynamics (e.g., Ability to provide for family, Domestic violence, Self-care). c) Explanatory links: Causal and associative relationships (e.g., RESULTS IN, CONTRIBUTES TO, MOTIVATES) are used to build networks. Most codes were backed by one or more relevant quotations. 3.2.1 Quantitative frequency and pattern analysis The coded data were analyzed to generate quantitative insights. Code counts by gender and segment allowed for the direct comparison of priorities. Farmers also described traits that were consolidated and mapped to standardized breeder-friendly metrics. The essential traits for each segment, as jointly and separately identified by men and women, were tabulated. 4.0 Results The analysis of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) revealed a complex landscape of trait priorities for improved rice varieties in Uganda. While men and women farmers share a core set of agronomic demands, significant and meaningful divergence exists when preferences are examined through a gendered lens, reflecting their distinct roles, responsibilities, and end-use goals. The findings are presented below, first by highlighting joint priorities, then by detailing the unique and often divergent requirements of men and women within each production segment. 4.1 Common ground: Core traits jointly prioritized by men and women Across both the rainfed lowland and upland segments, men and women demonstrated strong consensus on a foundational set of traits essential for any new variety (Table 4). This common agenda underscores universal production challenges and shared livelihood goals. High yield potential was the non-negotiable priority for all farmers, directly linked to food security and income. Closely tied to this was the need for drought tolerance at both seeding/vegetative and late reproductive stages, a critical trait for mitigating the pervasive risk of erratic rainfall. Terminal drought and water insecurity, particularly in 8 rainfed lowland systems where reliance on rainfall renders crops highly vulnerable to mid-season dry spells and, more acutely, to drought as rains cease before grain filling is complete, leading to significant yield reductions and poor grain quality (Tippe et al., 2017). Upland rice, conversely, is exceptionally vulnerable to irregular rainfall. Extended dry spells after sowing can cause poor germination and crop establishment, while drought during flowering and grain filling is catastrophic (Rodenburg et al., 2019). Given these realities, the universal importance of drought tolerance traits across both genders is not surprising. Resistance to bird damage was also universally emphasized, as birds are a major cause of pre-harvest loss. Farmers estimated losses ranging from 3% to as high as 30% in the absence of active scaring. Bird damage is a predominant challenge for Ugandan rice farmers, especially those with upland plots. These plots are often isolated and interspersed with natural vegetation, making them particularly susceptible to significant predation during the vulnerable milky and dough stages. Post-harvest and consumer traits were also jointly valued. High head rice recovery (HRR%) and good milling return were seen as essential to maximizing the marketable product from each harvest. Aroma and desirable grain shape/length were prioritized for their direct influence on consumer preference and the ability to command better prices in the local market. Farmers unanimously sought lodging resistance to prevent yield loss and reduce difficulty in harvesting. Early and uniform maturity, measured by days to 50% flowering- was valued for enabling better crop planning, escaping terminal stress, and facilitating multiple cropping cycles where possible. For the direct-seeded upland system, early and uniform emergence combined with drought tolerance were particularly critical. These traits are essential for addressing the common challenges of unreliable rainfall and extreme drought across Uganda's rice-growing ecologies (Rodenburg et al., 2019; Tippe et al., 2017). This set of 21 jointly-identified traits for lowland and 22 for upland systems (Table 3) forms the essential, gender-inclusive foundation for any Target Product Profile (TPP). However, a deeper, gender-disaggregated analysis reveals that this common list is merely the starting point. Table 3: Counts of jointly identified essential traits by gender Ecosystem Similar Trait requirements Applicable traits Rainfed lowland, Men & Women jointly 21 Women Essential 24 Men essential 37 9 Upland, Men & Women jointly 22 Women Essential 26 Men essential 31 Table 4: Essential rice traits for varietal improvement by men and women jointly by market segment Traits Lowland, transplanted, Rice 22 Upland, direct- seeded, Rice 15 Yield potential ֍ ֍ Drought (seeding/vegetative) ֍ ֍ Yield potential under late-stage drought ֍ ֍ Heat tolerance (% spikelet fertility) ֍ Bird damage ֍ ֍ Head Rice Recovery (%) ֍ ֍ Panicle threshability ֍ Lodging (from flowering to maturity stage) ֍ ֍ Leaf blast (SES scale at vegetative stage) ֍ Neck Blast (SES scale at vegetative stage) ֍ RYMV (vegetative to heading stage) ֍ Stem borer (Dead heart % 10 days after flowering) ֍ Green leaf hooper (vegetative to maturity stage) ֍ ֍ Early and uniform emergence (aerobic) ֍ ֍ Submergence ֍ Grain shape ֍ ֍ Cooked grain texture ֍ Aroma ֍ ֍ Milling return ֍ ֍ Grain length ֍ ֍ Swelling capacity ֍ Drought (reproductive stage) ֍ Plant recovery after drought ֍ Flag attitude ֍ Date to 50% flowering ֍ ֍ Maturity ֍ ֍ Stem borer (white panicle) ֍ 4.2. Divergent agendas: Gender-specific trait priorities and their rationale Beyond the shared core, men and women articulated distinct suites of essential traits, clearly mapped in Tables 5 and 6. These differences are not arbitrary but are logically derived from gendered divisions of labor, access to resources, and social roles within the household and community. 4.2.1 Men’s priority traits: Market orientation and managed risk 10 Male farmers, who often have greater control over the sale of surplus produce and larger, more commercial plots, emphasized traits that enhance market competitiveness, reduce financial risk, and optimize production on relatively better-endowed land (Table 5). Men in both ecologies uniquely prioritized resistance to a broader spectrum of biotic stresses. In the uplands, they emphasized resistance to Rice Yellow Mottle Virus (RYMV) and specific resistance to Leaf and Neck Blast at vegetative stages, diseases that can devastate their marketable surplus. In the lowlands, men specifically highlighted Stem Borer (dead heart) resistance. They also exclusively valued traits like Sheath Blight and Brown Spot resistance, which protect yield quantity and quality, ensuring a reliable product for the market. Reflecting a focus on farm expansion and intensification, men uniquely prioritized heat tolerance (% spikelet fertility), a growing concern with climate variability, and stagnant flooding tolerance, allowing them to utilize more marginal, water-logged areas within lowland systems. Their specific call for anaerobic germination tolerance in upland rice indicates an interest in exploring alternative water management or utilizing lower-lying parcels. Men further exhibited a more detailed interest in specific grain quality parameters that influence price. They uniquely demanded improvements in chalkiness, gel consistency, swelling capacity, and taste. These traits are critical for meeting the stringent quality standards of higher-value market channels, including competition with imports, which can allow them to attract a premium. Table 5: Essential rice traits exclusively identified by men for varietal improvement Traits Lowland, transplanted, Rice 22 Upland, direct seeded, Rice 15 Heat tolerance (% spikelet fertility) ֍ Plant height ֍ Leaf blast (SES scale at vegetative stage) ֍ Neck Blast (SES scale at vegetative stage) ֍ Brown spot (% leaf area diseased, vegetative- reproductive stage) ֍ ֍ Sheath blight (lesion height, reproductive- dough stage) ֍ ֍ RYMV (vegetative to heading stage) ֍ Stem borer (Dead heart % 10 days after flowering) ֍ Early vigor ֍ ֍ Canopy cover ֍ ֍ Salinity/alkalinity/(seeding) ֍ Iron toxicity (vegetative to reproductive stage) ֍ Stagnant flooding ֍ ֍ Anaerobic germination ֍ Chalkiness (% of kernel area) ֍ ֍ 11 Gel consistency ֍ Swelling capacity ֍ Taste ֍ 4.2.2 Women’s priority traits: Labor reduction, food security, and manageability Women farmers, bearing the primary responsibility for labor-intensive tasks (transplanting, weeding, harvesting, processing) and household food security, prioritized traits that reduce drudgery, guarantee family food supply, and perform well on the often smaller or more marginal land they manage (Table 6). A paramount concern for women was reducing their physical burden. This is evident in their exclusive prioritization of flag leaf attitude (for easier harvesting access) and shattering resistance in lowland rice, which minimizes grain loss during manual harvesting, a task predominantly performed by women. In the uplands, their specific need for plant height and flag attitude adjustments is directly linked to easing the arduous task of manual harvesting, reducing back pain, and chasing after birds. While men focused on market-oriented diseases, women uniquely emphasized resistance to bacterial leaf blight (in both systems) and bacterial leaf streak (in uplands). These diseases, while also impacting yield, are particularly threatening to the household food plot, which women often manage. Their focus is on ensuring a harvest at all, even if not a maximal commercial surplus. Women exclusively highlighted resistance to brown plant hopper in the lowlands. This pest not only damages crops but also transmits viruses, posing a direct threat to the food security of the household. Their prioritization could reflect a risk-averse strategy centered on protecting the family's staple food source from collapse. The exclusive emphasis by upland women on drought tolerance at the reproductive stage and plant recovery after drought underscores their often-greater vulnerability. They are frequently relegated to cultivating more drought-prone, marginal fields where reliable flowering and grain fill are the difference between having food and having none. Table 6: Essential rice traits exclusively identified by women for varietal improvement Traits Lowland, transplanted, Rice 22 Upland, direct seeded, Rice 15 Plant height ֍ Bacterial leaf blight (%leaf area diseased at vegetative-reproductive stage) ֍ ֍ Bacterial leaf streak (% leaf area diseased at vegetative stage) ֍ Brown plant hopper (vegetative to maturity stage) ֍ Flag attitude ֍ Shattering ֍ 12 The trait matrices reveal a clear pattern: men’s essential trait lists are longer (37 in lowland, 31 in upland) and skewed towards production intensification and market precision. Women’s lists, while slightly shorter (24 in lowland, 26 in upland), are intensely focused on risk mitigation, labor reduction, and food security assurance. This divergence creates what can be termed a "gendered trait deficit." A variety bred only to the joint priorities would meet baseline needs but fail to address the specific constraints that limit women's productivity and increase their drudgery. Conversely, a variety incorporating only men's priorities might be high-yielding and marketable but could be rejected by women if it is too difficult to harvest or process. The most adoptable and equitable TPP, therefore, must integrate this full spectrum of demands, recognizing that "essential" traits are not universal but are fundamentally shaped by gender. 5.0 Conclusion This study has systematically elucidated the gendered and segment-specific trait preferences that must inform the development of Target Product Profiles (TPPs) for rice in Uganda. By employing a rigorous, gender-disaggregated methodology across the country's two dominant rice ecologies, the research moves beyond generic wish lists to uncover the nuanced and often divergent priorities of male and female farmers. The findings conclusively demonstrate that a gender-blind approach to varietal development is not only inequitable but also strategically flawed, as it overlooks critical constraints and preferences that determine ultimate adoption and impact. The starkly different production challenges and market orientations of the rainfed lowland and upland systems necessitate distinct breeding roadmaps. Furthermore, within each segment, men and women prioritize different traits. A one-size-fits-all variety will fail to address the unique vulnerabilities of each system or the specific labor burdens and food security imperatives that disproportionately affect women farmers. The core set of 21-22 traits jointly valued by men and women, centered on high yield, drought tolerance, bird resistance, and key quality parameters, provides an essential common foundation. However, this represents only the baseline. The additional 24-37 gender-specific essential traits identified reveal a substantial gendered trait deficit that must be filled to achieve equitable benefits. Men's priorities are oriented towards market competitiveness and production intensification. Their demand for resistance to a broader array of diseases (e.g., RYMV, sheath blight, brown spot) and refined grain quality traits (e.g., chalkiness, gel consistency) is driven by their role in managing surplus for sale and navigating commercial markets. Conversely, women's priorities are focused on risk mitigation, labor reduction, and household food security. Their emphasis on traits like flag attitude, shattering resistance, bacterial disease resistance, and reproductive-stage drought tolerance stems from their roles as primary laborers and managers of the household food supply. References 13 Achandi, E. L., Mujawamariya, G., Agboh-Noameshie, A. R., Gebremariam, S., Rahalivavololona, N., & Rodenburg, J. (2018). Women's access to agricultural technologies in rice production and processing hubs: A comparative analysis of Ethiopia, Madagascar, and Tanzania. Journal of Rural Studies, 60, 188-198. Asante, B. O., Frimpong, B. N., Asante, M. D., Prah, S., Ayeh, S. J., Sakyiamah, B., ... & Tufan, H. A. (2023). Exploring gender differences in the role of trait preferences among stakeholders in the rice value chain in Ghana. Sustainability, 15(7), 6026. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15076026 Mujawamariya, G., Zenna, N., Leonard, L., Tefy Andrianina, I., & Ramiaramanana, D. (2022). A gendered outlook into the adoption of improved rice varieties in Madagascar. Gender, Technology and Development, 26(1), 1- 27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2022.2034095 Bergman Lodin, J., Paulson, S., & Mugenyi, M. S. (2012). New seeds, gender norms, and labor dynamics in Hoima District, Uganda. Journal of Eastern African Studies, 6(3), 405- 422. https://doi.org/10.1080/17531055.2012.696889 Ceccarelli, S., & Grando, S. (2020). Participatory plant breeding: Who did it, who does it and where? Experimental Agriculture, 56(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479719000127 Donovan, J. A., Coaldrake, P., Rutsaert, P., Banziger, M., Mbugua-Gitonga, A., Naziri, D., ... & Demont, M. (2022). Market intelligence for informing crop-breeding decisions by CGIAR and NARES. Dossou-Yovo, E. R., Devkota, K. P., Akpoti, K., Danvi, A., Duku, C., & Zwart, S. J. (2022). Thirty years of water management research for rice in sub-Saharan Africa: Achievement and perspectives. Field Crops Research, 283, 108548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2022.108548 FAO. (2022). FAOSTAT Statistical Database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Farnworth, C. R., López, D. E., Badstue, L., Hailemariam, M., & Abeyo, B. G. (2018). Gender and agricultural innovation in Oromia region, Ethiopia: from innovator to tempered radical. Gender, Technology and Development, 22(3), 222-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2018.1557315 Frimpong, B. N., Asante, B. O., Asante, M. D., Ayeh, S. J., Sakyiamah, B., Nchanji, E., ... & Tufan, H. (2023). Identification of gendered trait preferences among Rice producers using the G+ breeding tools: implications for Rice improvement in Ghana. Sustainability, 15(11), 8462. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118462 Hong, S., Hwang, S., Lamo, J., Nampamya, D., & Park, T. (2021). The Current Status of Opportunities for Rice Cultivation in Uganda. Korean Soc. Int. Agric., 33(1), 67–74. https://doi.org/10.12719/KSIA.2021.33.1.67 https://doi.org/10.3390/su15076026 https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2022.2034095 https://doi.org/10.1080/17531055.2012.696889 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479719000127 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2022.108548 https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2018.1557315 https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118462 https://doi.org/10.12719/KSIA.2021.33.1.67 14 Kikuchi, M., Haneishi, Y., Tokida, K., Maruyama, A., Asea, G., & Tsuboi, T. (2016). The structure of indigenous food crop markets in sub-Saharan Africa: The rice market in Uganda. The Journal of Development Studies, 52(5), 646-664. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2015.1098629 Kikuchi, M., Kijima, Y., Haneishi, Y. & Tsuboi, T. (2014). A brief appraisal of rice production statistics in Uganda. Trop. Agr. Develop., 58(2), 78–84. https://doi.org/10.11248/jsta.58.78 Kinkingninhoun Medagbe, F. M., Komatsu, S., Mujawamariya, G., & Saito, K. (2020). Men and women in rice farming in Africa: a cross-country investigation of labor and its determinants. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 4, 117. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00117 Kirambia, R. K. (2020). Effects of Watering Regimes, Fertilizer Levels on Nutrients Uptake, Growth and Yield of Upland Rice in Mwea, Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, KeMU). http://41.89.31.5/handle/123456789/875 Lamo, J., Tongoona, P., Sie, M., Semon, M., Onaga, G., & Okori, P. (2017). Upland rice breeding in Uganda: Initiatives and progress. Advances in International Rice Research, 11, 215-246. https://doi.org/10.5772/66826 MAAIF. (2020). Uganda National Rice Development Strategy II (UNRDS II) 2021-2030. Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries. https://www.jica.go.jp/Resource/english/our_work/thematic_issues/agricultural/pdf/ug anda_en.pdf McGuire, E., Rietveld, A. M., Crump, A., & Leeuwis, C. (2022). Anticipating gender impacts in scaling innovations for agriculture: Insights from the literature. World Development Perspectives, 25, 100386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2021.100386 Miriti, P., Otieno, D. J., Chimoita, E., Bikketi, E., Njuguna, E., & Ojiewo, C. O. (2023). Gender gaps in sorghum productivity: evidence from male-and female-managed plots in Uganda. Development in Practice, 33(4), 375-386. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2022.2069228 Mutiga, S. K., Rotich, F., Were, V. M., Kimani, J. M., Mwongera, D. T., Mgonja, E., ... & Talbot, N. J. (2021). Integrated strategies for durable rice blast resistance in sub-Saharan Africa. Plant Disease, 105(10), 2749-2770. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-03-21-0593-FE Muungani, D., Banda, V. R., Coaldrake, P., Connor, M., Najjar, D., Yadav, S., ... & Banzinger, M. (2024). Developing impactful, in-demand, gender-intentional, and feasible target product profiles (TPPs). Seed, 176750, 70. Mwalyagile, N., Jeckoniah, J. N., & Salanga, R. J. (2024). Gender differences in rice production participation among smallholder farmers in small-scale irrigation schemes in Mbarali District, Tanzania. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 18, 101390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101390 https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2015.1098629 https://doi.org/10.11248/jsta.58.78 https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00117 http://41.89.31.5/handle/123456789/875 https://doi.org/10.5772/66826 https://www.jica.go.jp/Resource/english/our_work/thematic_issues/agricultural/pdf/uganda_en.pdf https://www.jica.go.jp/Resource/english/our_work/thematic_issues/agricultural/pdf/uganda_en.pdf https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2021.100386 https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2022.2069228 https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-03-21-0593-FE https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101390 15 Nabikyu, J., Twine, E. E., & Dossou-Yovo, E. R. (2023). Ban on Rice Cultivation in Uganda’s Wetlands: Implications for Household Income, Food Security, Gender Equity and Social Safety Nets in the Rainfed Lowland Areas of Amuria, Soroti and Katakwi Districts. Nabikyu, J., Twine, E. E., & Dossou-Yovo, E. R. (2023). Ban on Rice Cultivation in Uganda’s Wetlands: Implications for Household Income, Food Security, Gender Equity and Social Safety Nets in the Rainfed Lowland Areas of Amuria, Soroti and Katakwi Districts. Nakano, Y., & Kajisa, K. (2016). The determinants of technology adoption: The case of the rice sector in Tanzania. https://doi.org/10.18884/00000661 NDP III. (2020). Third National Development Plan (NDP III) 2020/21-2024/25. National Planning Authority, Uganda. Ogwuike, P., Rodenburg, J., Diagne, A., Agboh-Noameshie, A. R., & Amovin-Assagba, E. (2014). Weed management in upland rice in sub-Saharan Africa: impact on labor and crop productivity. Food Security, 6(3), 327-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-014- 0351-7 Rodenburg, J., Johnson, J. M., Dieng, I., Senthilkumar, K., Vandamme, E., Akakpo, C., ... & Saito, K. (2019). Status quo of chemical weed control in rice in sub-Saharan Africa. Food Security, 11(1), 69-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-018-0878-0 Tippe, D. E., Rodenburg, J., Schut, M., van Ast, A., Kayeke, J., & Bastiaans, L. (2017). Farmers’ knowledge, use, and preferences of parasitic weed management strategies in rain-fed rice production systems. Crop Protection, 99, 93-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2017.05.007 Twine, E. E. (2023). Implications of the ban on rice cultivation in Uganda’s wetlands for breeding and seed systems programming. Twine, E. E., Connor, M., Malabayabas, A. J., & Oloo, A. (2024). Enhancing target product profiles to meet rice processor needs for capacity utilization in Uganda’s seed product market segments. Twine, E. E., Ndindeng, S. A., Mujawamariya, G., & Futakuchi, K. (2022). Pricing rice quality attributes and returns to quality upgrading in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 54(1), 175-196. https://doi.org/10.1017/aae.2022.3 Twine, E. E., Ndindeng, S. A., Mujawamariya, G., Adur-Okello, S. E., & Kilongosi, C. (2023). Consumer preferences for rice in East Africa. British Food Journal, 125(13), 316-329. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-08-2022-0698 UBOS. (2021). Uganda Census of Agriculture 2019/2020: Crop Area and Production Report. Uganda Bureau of Statistics. Van Oort, P. A. J., Saito, K., Tanaka, A., Amovin-Assagba, E., Van Bussel, L. G. J., Van Wart, J., ... & Wopereis, M. C. S. (2015). Assessment of rice self-sufficiency in 2025 in eight https://doi.org/10.18884/00000661 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-014-0351-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-014-0351-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-018-0878-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2017.05.007 https://doi.org/10.1017/aae.2022.3 https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-08-2022-0698 16 African countries. Global Food Security, 5, 39-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2015.01.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2015.01.002