Proposals to set up shared "banking hubs" in smaller, rural communities have been supported by the Scottish Liberal Democrats.
The party said the UK Government should work with all banks on how they can pull together to keep at least one branch open in communities to maintain face-to-face services.
The issue was debated on the second day of the Lib Dems' spring conference in Aviemore as RBS plans to close 52 of its branches across Scotland.
The bank, which is majority-owned by the taxpayer, originally intended to close 62 premises, however 10 rural branches were given a reprieve, allowing them to remain open until the end of 2018, with an independent review on their long-term future.
The Lib Dems also backed calls for UK ministers to use their major shareholding in the bank to halt the remaining closures, and take a more community-orientated approach.
In addition, the party voted in favour of establishing a "rapid-reaction service", to bring together public agencies to explore how community assets such as bank branches can be maintained.
The mechanism, which could be introduced by the Scottish Government, would allow communities, through their local authorities, to activate the service if they felt crucial local services were in jeopardy.
Community groups should also be given a "fair chance" to buy out assets of local value, the Lib Dems said.
The party has launched a petition on the proposals.
Jamie Stone, MP for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, said: "Losing local RBS branches is a major blow to people and businesses across Scotland.
"It's an easy cost-saving strategy for banks but it's devastating for rural communities.
"Our local economies deserve busy high streets and face-to-face reliable banking.
"That's why setting up banking hubs, where banks could pool resources to ensure at least one shop can stay open, is an innovative solution to the daunting programme of closures on the horizon.
"The UK Government must give these proposals serious consideration. There should be a mechanism for people to intervene when services in their towns are threatened."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here