Since the mid -1970s, Sahelian countries are involved in energy policies which aim to
substitute traditional energies (wood and charcoal) to modern fuels derived from petroleum.
In Bamako (Mali), as in Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso) or N’Djamena (Chad), in spite of
political incentives by governments in favour of fossil fuels, urban dwellers progress very
slowly on the "energy ladder". Woodfuels are still the most preferred energy sources. This
paper analyses the reasons of this conversion failure in the Malian capital, focusing on the
preferences of the Bamakois, the incentives from the Malian government, and finally the
resistance of the woodfuel market.
Experience with Household Energy Policies in Mali shows that economic realism and
government incentives will not persuade people to accept new fuels or new stoves. It shows
also that woodfuel supply chains are alive and can react very quickly to any attempt of
changes, to remain in force, and to offer urban dwellers a good energy service in terms of
access and prices. Finally the analysis of Bamako’s case shows that the choice of an energy
portfolio is more important than a single efficient, modern and cheap source. In spite of the
equivalent cost for using gas and charcoal, the more well-off people in Bamako continue to
prefer woody fuels. This consumption pattern gives the people of Bamako an energy
independence, which allows them not to be subjected too severely neither to marked rises in
petroleum prices, nor to supply interruption.
The freedom of choice is an amplified demand in urban area where the diversity in the
rhythms of life and the large range of buyable foods involve the diversity of cooking habits.
The request of flexibility is certainly one the reason of the failure of most conversion
programmes.