Despite the inherent focus of IB on the behavior of the firm across spatial boundaries, what constitutes space seems to be taken for granted or treated as common sense. It is surprising that, to date, a discussion of space and its ontological and epistemological assumptions in IB is absent - an absence that we believe is unjustified. We draw from a problematization approach and develop a typology of space in IB that combines objective vs. subjective and geographical vs. historical assumptions. In doing so, we uncover the dominant and alternative assumptions about space in IB and show the multiplicity of approaches to space spanning beyond location and distance and to a historically-embedded view of space. We turn to spatial history and the work of Lefebvre and argue for the importance of viewing space in IB as a social product which simultaneously combines geography, history and experience.