Every definition I have seen of algebraic spaces starts with the category of schemes (usually of $S$-schemes), and defines algebraic spaces as certain sheaves on this category, with respect to étale or fppf topology (depending on the definition), which is "close to being representable by a scheme".
But I have heard several people defend the idea that algebraic spaces are arguably more natural than (or at least as natural as) schemes as the "basic objects" of algebraic geometry. That makes me wonder if one could skip the middleman, and directly give a workable definition of algebraic spaces with no reference to schemes, and retrieve schemes as a suitable subcategory as an afterthought.
The most logical way to do that would be to define algebraic spaces as certain presheaves on $\mathbf{CRing^{op}}$, similar to the functor-of-points definition of schemes (where schemes are Zariski sheaves on $\mathbf{CRing^{op}}$ which are locally representable). I guess the first question is whether an algebraic space is characterized by its functor of points restricted to affine schemes (ie to rings).