Potential benefits and costs of agroforestry practices have been analysed by experts, but few studies have captured farmers’ perspectives on why agroforestry might be adopted on a European scale. This study provides answers to this question, through an analysis of 183 farmer interviews in 14 case study systems in eight European countries. The study systems included high natural and cultural value agroforestry systems, silvoarable systems, high value tree systems, and silvopasture systems, as well as systems where no agroforestry practices were occurring. A mixed method approach combining quantitative and qualitative approaches was taken throughout the interviews. Narrative thematic data analysis was performed. Data collection proceeded until no new themes emerged. Within a given case study, i.e. the different systems in different European regions, this sampling was performed both for farmers who practice agroforestry and farmers who did not. Results point to a great diversity of agroforestry practices, although many of the farmers are not aware of the term or concept of agroforestry, despite implementing the practice in their own farms. While only a few farmers mentioned eligibility for direct payments in the CAP as the main reason to remove trees from their land, to avoid the reduction of the funded area, the tradition in the family or the region, learning from others, and increasing the diversification of products play the most important role in adopting or not agroforestry systems.

Most farm-based agroforestry projects focus on the integration of trees on arable or livestock enterprises. This paper focuses on the integration of understorey crops and/or livestock within high value tree systems (e.g., apple orchards, olive groves, chestnut woodlands, and walnut plantations), and describes the components, structure, ecosystem services and economic value of ten case studies of this type of agroforestry across Europe. Although their ecological and socio-economic contexts vary, the systems share some common characteristics. The primary objective of the farmer is likely to remain the value of tree products like apples, olives, oranges, or nuts, or particularly high value timber. However there can still be production, environmental or economic benefits of integrating agricultural crops such as chickpeas and barley, or grazing an understorey grass crop with livestock. Three of the systems focused on the grazing of apple orchards with sheep in the UK and France. The introduction of sheep to apple orchards can minimise the need for mowing and provide an additional source of revenue. Throughout the Mediterranean, there is a need to improve the financial viability of olive groves. The case studies illustrate the possibility of intercropping traditional olive stands with chickpea in Greece, or the intercropping of wild asparagus in high density olive groves in Italy. Another system studied in Greece involves orange trees intercropped with chickpeas. Stands of chestnut trees in North-west Spain can provide feed for pigs when the fruit falls in November, and provide an excellent habitat for the commercial production of edible mushrooms. In Spain, in the production of high quality walnut trees using rotations of up to 50–60 years, there are options to establish a legume-based mixed pasture understorey and to introduce sheep to provide financial and environmental benefits.