80

In the past few years, variations of “capital” have multiplied, some of which highlight one aspect or another of the spatial dimension: capital is said to be residential, spatial, (socio-)territorial, environmental, international, of mobility, of autochtony… It therefore seems essential to review these propositions, their effects and their relevance. This paper begins by focusing on the notion of spatial capital and its various uses. It shows that the meanings and the typologies associated with it are manifold; some are ephemeral, most are vague, sometimes without any explicit link between each other, or contradictory, and are difficult to articulate with the bourdieusian variations, the latter seen as theoretical references nevertheless. Finally, it is the very relevance of the expression itself that we challenge, as it implies a dualistic framework that considers the “spatial” a reality that is both separable and absent from the rest of the social world.