The present paper aims to critically engage with the explanatory framework of demand as it is employed in various debates and to shed light on main demand-side arguments put forward in the context of various forms of trafficking in human beings. This paper delivers mainly a positive analysis, in the sense that it seeks to clarify ‘what is there’ – which arguments are used in which debates –, rather than to identify what action should be taken – which would subscribe to a normative analysis (Robert & Zeckhauser 2011). It is a stocktacking exercise of main demand-side arguments in debates on various types of trafficking in human beings. The paper critically engages with the normative side of demand-side arguments only in as much as this is required to reconstruct the arguments for a better understanding of policy measures proposed. The general argument identified in debates is that there is a demand that fosters exploitation related to trafficking in human beings. The paper aims to retrace the arguments used in debates on demand in particular areas of trafficking in human beings – for sexual exploitation, for labour exploitation, for the exploitation of begging, for illegal adoption, trafficking for forced and servile marriages and trafficking for the removal of organs – in order to better understand the assumptions behind demand-side arguments, the way demand is understood and contextualised and how it is considered relevant in addressing various types of trafficking in human beings. One of the main findings is that although ‘demand’ is mostly referred to in its economic understanding – the willingness and ability to purchase a good or a service – the way in which the notion of demand is being employed varies and is often inconsistent.