ABSTRACT
What is the proper object of conservation? The category of wilderness is here considered in response to this philosophical question. The historical transition from conservation based on wilderness preservation to conservation framed in terms of the category of biodiversity – a transition that took place in the1980s and 1990s – is also outlined. The failure of both categories to capture the intended object of conservation is analysed. A new category is accordingly proposed. This category references both Indigenous Law and an intentional understanding of the environmentalist’s category of nature in terms of indwelling principles of unfolding, specifically the principles of conativity and accommodation/least resistance. It is concluded that the category of Law itself, or, less abstractly, lands that conform to Law – here styled Lawlands – may better capture what it is that conservationists are seeking to save. Lawlands would be understood as inclusive of local human – usually Indigenous – communities that live in accordance with Law.
