“1. Spatial practice. The spatial practice of a society secretes that society´s space; it propounds and presupposes is, in a dialectical interaction; it produces it slowly and surely as it masters and appropriates it. From the analytical standpoint, the spatial practice of a society is revealed through the deciphering of its space. […]

2. Representations of Space: conceptualized space, the space of scientists, planners urbanists, technocratic subdividers, and social engineers, as of a certain type of artist with a scientific bent – all of whom identify what is lived and what is perceived with what is conceived. […] This is the dominant space in any society (or mode of production) […]

3. Representational Space: space as directly lived through its associated images and symbols, and hence the space of ‘inhabitants’ and ‘users’, but also of some artists and perhaps of those, such as a few writers and philosophers, who describe and aspire to do no more than describe. This is the dominated – and hence passively experienced – space which the imagination seeks to change and appropriate. It overlays physical space, making symbolic use of its objects. Thus representational spaces may be said, though again with certain exceptions, to tend towards more or less coherent systems of non-verbal symbols and signs”

(Lefebvre, Henri (1995, orig. 1974): The Production of Space. Oxford/Cambridge, p. 38 f.)