Final answer:
Freudenberg believes risk assessment is easier when risks are familiar and predictable. The process becomes more complex with the lack of trust, consensus, or inherent uncertainty, and it requires careful management and acknowledgment of potential impacts. Effective risk management often relies on existing expertise, public discussion, and careful consideration of all involved risks and benefits.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question pertains to Freudenberg's approach to risk assessment. In his view, risk assessment is fairly easy when risks are familiar and predictable because it means that there is existing knowledge and experience in dealing with them. Assessment becomes challenging when there is a lack of public trust, scientific consensus, or when uncertainty is inherent, as this complicates the decision-making process and the mitigation of potential risks. For example, when the effects of a human activity are poorly understood, the precautionary principle suggests we must assume some harm may exist to the environment and proceed cautiously.
Moreover, experts often use their initial understanding as a baseline to identify any potential mistakes and ensure a more thorough analysis of the risks involved. In addition, acknowledging and discussing risks openly can improve chances of effectively addressing them. Within the criminal justice system, for instance, risk assessments are used controversially to predict reoffending chances, which can help in reducing biases in sentencing and parole but might also perpetuate racial disparities if not implemented with care.
It is important to recognize and outline all risks and benefits, especially when determining if a drug is safe for human administration or when informing study participants to obtain consent. Overall, while individuals may not be able to quantitatively evaluate impacts, certain guidelines and frameworks can assist in making more informed decisions regarding risk management.