Early this week, the convention center sitting on the harbor in Hong Kong emptied and with the exodus, the world began to the reap the fruits of what could potentially become the most ambitious framework for international trade within the World Trade Organization (WTO). If you were reading reports from the latest meeting of the WTO, your knees may have hit the underside of the kitchen table.

Last week representatives from the 149 member countries joined to continue negotiations in what has been dubbed the Doha Development Round of negotiations. Initiated several years ago in Doha, Qatar, this round of negotiations has the primary focus of creating opportunity and eliminating trade barriers for all nations involved but particularly those considered developing countries.

If you were reading reports from the latest meeting of the WTO, your knees may have hit the underside of the kitchen table after reading the emphasis on developing countries, but before you knee jerk turns to frustration, take a second look at the possibility for growth rather than demise.

Now, while the WTO is not the United Nations (UN), many have the same attitude towards both bodies and treat them both with a certain amount of disdain. This is true of even a handful of members of Congress. However, what distinguishes the WTO, aside from structural nuances, is that the WTO provides a forum in which the United States stands to gain something. In this stage of negotiations, both increasing international market access and leveling the amount of trade barriers in other countries - including those considered developing - is the focus of discussion.

With those goals in mind, U.S. negotiators, along with Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns had their work cut out for them as they headed to Hong Kong. Despite the well-intended and bold offer that the U.S. submitted to the WTO negotiating body for agriculture, the European Union (EU) showed early and persistent reticence in making any sort of compromise on their vision for the WTO. Demanding unilateral disarmament of the American farm programs and a conversion from commodity-based to cash-only international food aid, the EU gets credit for stalling out any potential for a major breakthrough in negotiations during the meetings in Hong Kong.

Instead of coming up with a true framework for international implementation, negotiators instead settled upon a stepping-stone like agreement for further negotiation in early 2006. The agreement sets 2013 as the date to end agricultural export subsidies. By engaging in parallel elimination of export subsidies, this will ideally provide greater competition between countries that currently use state-funded subsidies to offset the cost of exporting their products. The end date on this program is most certainly a nod to the EU - as their version of the farm bill the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) will be up for reconsideration and reform in 2013.

Another key component of the agreement is DFQF - or duty-free, quota-free access to 97 percent of imports from the least developed countries. Aimed at providing greater market opportunity for those economies with the least development, this provision was supported heavily by the G-20, a group of the 20 larger developing countries in the WTO.

Now if this is starting to sound like our negotiators have given the farm away so to speak - but that's not the case. First this framework is just that - all of these proposals are set in the context of a commitment to further negotiate on the larger issues like market access and trade distorting domestic support (read: decreasing EU farm subsidies). Had success in Hong Kong been measured by the ability to reach a compromise on these two issues, it is more than likely that the meeting would have failed.

However, this was a step in the right direction. From a strategic perspective, the US appears to have made some compromises in Hong Kong, but that puts our negotiators in a position to better press for reciprocal action in other areas. And perhaps more importantly, it allows the EU to save a little face and hopefully will provide a little more momentum towards striking a compromise between the Europeans and the U.S. And hopefully, this will allow the U.S. to rally influence over policies that will have an eventual effect on the drafting of the 2007 farm bill.

So basically, sit tight and stayed tuned as negotiators continue working in the Spring. There is still a long way to go in the WTO - and despite the knee-jerk initial reactions from last week's meeting, there is still hope for good things to come in the new year as the negotiations proceed.