Why are space and territory important to social movements and how do they produce them? Despite the always apparent centrality of space and territory, mediated and appropriated by social movements around the world (for example: camps, protests, land occupations, indigenous resistance, occupations of land and buildings in urban areas, neighborhood organization and struggles for environmental issues, for education, health, food and other public policies, women's activism, LGBTQIA+, feminists, students, etc.), there has been a surprising lack of attention to this issue by scholars from various fields of knowledge, for example, English-speaking geographers. This article advances the reflection on the actions of socio-territorial movements as an analytical category whose central objective is to analyze the mediation of space and appropriation of territory. We contrasted the concepts of socio-territorial movement, social movement and sociospatial movement in four axes of analysis. First, how space and territory are produced as a central strategy for the achievement of a movement's objectives. Second, space and territory produce the identities of movements, in their actions, generating new political subjectivities. Third, space and territory are places of political socialization that produce new values and change circumstances. Fourth, through processes of territorialization, deterritorialization and reterritorialization, movements can create new institutions. These axes are subsequently elaborated through the comparative analysis of two case studies: the Movement of Landless Rural Workers, a peasant movement organized in all regions of Brazil, and the Tupac Amaru Neighborhood Organization, an urban movement in northwestern Argentina. The comparison is made as an expansive way of analysis to open up the concept of socio-territorial movement and indicate potential lines of investigation for studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]