For example, cross-sectional instruments are less likely to conflict with monetary policy than with the cyclical dimension of macroprudential policy. And instruments aimed at a narrow range of financial institutions or agents will be easier to focus on financial behaviour rather than macroeconomic factors. In general, it is desirable to use instruments with a narrower focus to address specific problems, as they can be better tailored to the problem and will have fewer unintended consequences on the real economy and on other policy objectives. However, there will be times when instruments with a broader scope will be desirable – for example, when there is a danger that developments in the financial system will enable agents to circumvent more narrowly focused instruments. The ability to circumvent instruments forms one of the challenges for macroprudential policy. The effectiveness of macroprudential policy could be strained when the build-up of risks (for example, an asset price bubble) in the financial system justifies significant policy intervention to contain the risks but the prevailing macroeconomic conditions do not justify a similarly aggressive monetary policy. While the macroprudential agency may tighten policy substantially to increase market interest rates (to dampen the asset price bubble), doing so will increase the incentive to circumvent the intervention (for example by borrowing from institutions outside the scope of macroprudential policy, such as foreign lenders). This implies that the effectiveness of time-varying macroprudential instruments will vary depending on the arbitrage opportunities available to borrowers and lenders in the economy.

In Q2 this year, there are around 8.7 and 3.2 million agreements in Internet and mobile banking, respectively, of which 43 and 24 million transactions in volume that cost approximately 5,000 and 306 billion baths. Some banks, therefore, strategically reduce the role of branches, intentionally pay attention to Virtual Banking Concept, to efficiently reciprocate the target customers and to facilitate international businesses that tend to grow due to trends of globalization and economic integrations. The growth of IT investments and sophisticated products as well as advanced services in banking industry comes with a concern on “security ”, which is the challenging key to propel the sustainability of such a growth. In our role as central bank, we put “security” as our first priority align with standard setting to promote advancement of banking services. ii. The role of central bank (BOT)  What is our role? We have aimed at setting standards to create domestic and international banking networks as well as to promote banking and payment system stabilities by developing access to financial services including financial infrastructure for cross-border payment and IT systems or other innovations aligned with security. In terms of cross-border innovation, the Bank of Thailand in association with the ASEAN central banks established the Working Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems:  2  BIS central bankers’ speeches  WC-PSS in 2010 to study payment and settlement system environments in member countries and to present regional strategic plans in order to serve economic integration in 2015.