There is a range of different legal regimes applicable to the sex trade that have been implemented around the world. The prevailing debate, though, internationally, concerns whether decriminalization or the Nordic model best addresses the risks associated with involvement in the sex trade.
You already know that decriminalization involves removal of all sex trade-specific laws to enhance and protect sex workers' health and safety, so sex trade-specific regulations may or may not apply in that context. However, the critical feature of this model is that criminal laws don't. New Zealand is the usual example of decriminalization.
The Nordic model, which is also referred to as abolition, the equality model or the end-demand model, seems to reduce the demand for sexual services as much as possible, with a view to ending the sex trade by criminalizing those who create the demand and those who capitalize on it, but not those who provide the services. This is because this approach posits that the sex trade both reflects and perpetuates systemic and structural discrimination against women and girls. Eight countries have implemented the Nordic model to date: Sweden in 1999, Norway and Iceland in 2009, Canada in 2014, Northern Ireland in 2015, France in 2016, the Republic of Ireland in 2017 and Israel in 2020.
There are two other models, and I believe you referenced a couple of them. One is legalization. It involves a regulated sphere in which the sex trade is allowed to take place, with criminal laws applying outside that sphere. Germany and the Netherlands are the usual examples of that model. Finally, there is prohibition, which criminalizes all of the involved parties, both those who purchase and those who provide sexual services, as well as anybody who involves themselves in anyone else's sexual services, including by profiting from them. All the states in the U.S. have implemented this approach, with the exception of Nevada, which has legalized brothels.