World trade negotiations have significant implications for many scientists. Bio-prospectors rely on international agreements if they are to scour ecosystems for interesting compounds, for example, and antiretroviral drugs will only be made available to those in need through such agreements. The future of agricultural biotechnology also rests, more or less, in the hands of the World Trade Organization.

On the face of it, the acrimonious collapse of trade negotiations in Cancún, Mexico, on 14 September, represents a setback for these efforts. Although the Convention on Biological Diversity has come into effect, as planned, and temporary arrangements are in place for the supply of antiretrovirals and other medicines to poor countries, both activities would benefit from the successful completion of the current round of trade negotiations by its target date of January 2005.

However, the basis of the collapse leaves room for guarded optimism. The talks crashed because a new alliance of developing countries and agricultural exporters, led by India and Brazil, held their ground. They did so even as wealthy nations taunted them by proposing that new areas, such as government contracting, be opened to free competition, while leaving unaddressed the high trade barriers that exclude farmers in poor countries from rich countries' markets.

These barriers — upheld by Japan on behalf of its rice growers, by the United States for its wealthy cotton growers, among others, and by Europe for most of its agricultural sector — remain the chief impediment to free trade between nations. Every country is entitled to protect its own trade interests, but as long as these barriers remain in place, free trade remains a mirage for most of the world's population.

At Cancún, the poor countries finally said that enough is enough. This position carries a short-term cost: poorer nations will always suffer at the hands of richer ones in bilateral trade negotiations, which is why the trade talks must ultimately succeed. But for now there should be a period of silence from Western politicians on the topic of free trade, until they have garnered the courage to address their own protectionism.