Peace agreements are not always structured in the same way. Sometimes it is just a document made up of different chapters or discrete components. In other cases, any essential element may be part of a comprehensive agreement or be a separate agreement negotiated separately and at different times in a peace process. The content of an agreement also differs from conflict to conflict. The nature of war, the contentious issues and how to end the war are factors that will change the structure and content of a peace agreement. Civil or national wars are usually caused by a failure of governance. Peace agreements that end these conflicts often focus on rebuilding governance mechanisms. Disputed issues in intergovernmental wars are normally related to security or territory. Peace agreements that end intergovernmental conflicts focus primarily on agreements to improve security and clarify territorial issues.  Thus, in each of these cases, the content of the peace agreements will obviously be different. How to end a war also has an impact on the content of an agreement. Violent conflicts, whether internal or interpersonal, usually end in one of three ways: an agreement on the terms of surrender, a partial agreement or a comprehensive peace agreement.  Role reversal is one of the key techniques of participatory theatre.
The reversible role refers to the reversal of roles in the drama. It is a matter of honestly exchanging roles within the drama and imagining what the other must go through through through his own actions. The importance of role reversal is that it fosters empathy skills and the idea of what the other person might go through. This is essential to re-establish and rebuild new relationships. The uniqueness of this technique in peace-building is to offer participants the opportunity to deconstruct and reverse the conflict by analysing it, considering it and experiencing it from a very different perspective. In Rwanda, the Umuhanzi w`u Rwanda Cultural Association used a version of role reversal in which former enemies could hear each other`s story by recounting how genocide impacted their survival after the conflict. Before joining the same theatrical ensemble, both the victims and the perpetrators reported feelings of loneliness, depression and isolation as well as the effects of genocide. Although they did not exchange roles of the victim who told the story of the offender and vice versa, they exchanged experiences and feelings and had an idea of how each was influenced by the other during the genocide. This is why the history of the community provides an aesthetic framework for learning about oneself, to reflect its needs and aspirations, and to interpret the importance of one`s own experiences (Chinyova 2008).